DUKE 
 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
 LIBRARY 
 

 
 
 
 
 
A. POPULAR 
 
 P 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL, 
 
 ANTIQUARIAN, TOPOGRAPHICAL, AND 
 DESCRIPTIVE, 
 
 Jfront % dEarliwt Renoir to tjje |Jratttt ffime, 
 
 WITH 
 
 BIOGRAPHICAL NOTICES OF EMINENT NATIVES 
 AND RESIDENTS, 
 
 IMPAIITIALLY WRITTEN. 
 
 BY 
 
 GEORGE PRYCE, F.S.A., 
 
 AUTHOR OP 
 
 “‘NOTES ON THE ECCLESIASTICAL AND MONUMENTAL ARCHITECTURE AND SCULPTURE OF THE 
 MIDDLE AGES IN BRISTOL;” “MEMORIALS OP THE CANYNGES* FAMILY AND THEIR TIMES; 
 WESTBURY COLLEGE, REDCLIFFE CHURCH, AND CHATTERTON “FACT versus FICTION—A 
 DESCENT AMONG WRITERS ON BRISTOL HISTORY AND BIOGRAPHY,” ETC., ETC. 
 
 BRISTOL : 
 
 PUBLISHED BY W. MACK, BOOKSELLER, STATIONER, & PRINTER, 
 52, WINE STREET. 
 
 1861. 
 
Bristol: Printed by W. Mack, 52, Wine Street. 
 
94&.4I 
 
 TS73 T 
 
 TO THE 
 
 CITIZENS OF BRISTOL, 
 
 OF ALL CLASSES, 
 
 THIS WORK 
 
 IS RESPECTFULLY DEDICATED, 
 by 
 
 THEIR OBEDIENT SERVANT, 
 
 THE AUTHOR. 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2018 with funding from 
 Duke University Libraries 
 
 https://archive.org/details/popularhistoryof01pryc 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 In introducing a former work to the public, I stated that “the 
 History of Bristol was yet to be written; ” but I had not then 
 the remotest idea of writing it, although repeatedly urged to do 
 so, both in public and private, and by men of all parties— 
 religious and political. My chief reason for declining the under¬ 
 taking has been, that the small amount of patronage such works 
 generally receive at the hands of the public is seldom sufficient 
 to cover necessary expenses; leaving nothing whatever to re¬ 
 munerate the writer for his toil and trouble in producing them.* 
 It is admitted on all hands that such a work is greatly 
 needed, and it has been thought that “a Popular History of 
 Bristol ” might be ventured on without danger of incurring 1 
 much risk in its publication; and which, whilst written for, 
 and adapted to, all classes of readers, might yet be referred to 
 as an authority. Believing this, I have undertaken the pleasing 
 task, and “come to the labour without prejudice ; thrown aside 
 the idle gossip of my predecessors; cast off the myths of the 
 Middle Ages for stern realities, and the fictions of monkery 
 for facts resulting from investigation;” feeling convinced that 
 “ whatever is written of Bristol notv must be the record of truth, 
 or it were better not to be written at all.”f 
 
 * “Every attempt of an History of Bristol has hitherto been frustrated, 
 either through the death of the undertaker, want of encouragement, or of mate¬ 
 rials not to be collected without much difficulty and expense; the toilsome 
 study of one man being scarcely sufficient to make the necessary collections.”— 
 Bristol Memorialist, p. 77. 
 
 t Preface to “ Fact versus Fiction.” 
 
VI. 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 Many of the statements in the ensuing pages may be new to 
 the reader, who has probably been acquainted with the volumes 
 of Barrett, Seyer, and Cony, only—all of whom have written 
 what has purported to be “ a History of Bristol but on neither 
 of them, it is to be regretted, can the reader place depen¬ 
 dence. To such an extent, indeed, has this want of confidence 
 in their statements been felt, that he has been led to doubt 
 even that which they have asserted in all truthfulness. Barrett 
 has so interlarded his “ wretched history” * with the fictions of 
 Chatterton and the fables of Rowley, that not only is it a “dry 
 uninteresting book, but it abounds with useless, and often un¬ 
 intelligible, documents besides which it is, “ as a book of 
 reference, somewhat dangerous to rely upon.” -f- Seyer too, lias 
 so availed himself of the use of manuscript calendars, which he 
 admits were most of them “ written within the last 200 years— 
 transcribed by various hands— enlarged, contracted, and altered, 
 according to the fancy of each transcriber" \ —that he has rendered 
 his work (to which the corporation “by vote contributed 200 
 guineas”) § almost useless as an authority upon many points 
 of history, on which he has expended considerable labour. Of 
 course such documents cannot be relied on as truly relating 
 any circumstance that occurred before the age of the copyist. 
 Of Cony’s book, which a recent writer designates “ a trumpery 
 History of Bristol,” || nothing further need be stated. The works 
 of the above gentlemen I have seldom quoted except for the 
 purpose of making the present volume as impartial as possible. 
 
 * Southey’s Life and Correspondence, vol. i., p. 86. 
 
 + Nightingale’s Somersetshire, ]>. 708. “Barrett, credulously trusting to 
 Chattel-ton’s compositions, inserted them as genuine historical documents. Hence 
 his judgment was impeached, and his volume depreciated.’’—John Britton. 
 
 7 Memoirs of Bristol, vol. i., p. x. § livid, p. xx. 
 
 || Notes and Queries, Oct. 6. ’60 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 Vll. 
 
 It is not presumed that the work now presented to the public 
 is faultless, but it is believed that it approaches nearer the truth 
 than any previous publication on our local history. The 
 quotations contained in it may be implicitly confided in ; and 
 as they are made from works in the writer’s own custody as 
 librarian of the city, and to which the public have access for 
 reference, they can be readily consulted should any statement it 
 contains appear to be doubtful. Few errors of importance, how¬ 
 ever, it is believed, will be found in these pages, as the volume 
 is the result of upwards of thirty years’ careful study of the 
 subjects of which it treats. It has been written with strict im¬ 
 partiality, independent of all religious or political bias, and is 
 with confidence submitted to the discriminating candour of the 
 reader. Errors in judgment it may contain, and trifling omissions 
 may be discovered in the volume, but what has been a great 
 failing with others,—perversions of truth to support a favourite 
 theory, or wilful misrepresentations—none. 
 
 GEOEGE PEYCE. 
 
 City Library, 
 
 Bristol, May , 1861. 
 
 c 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
INDEX. 
 
 Abbey of St. Augustine : its situation, 
 30; for Canons Regular, 31; by 
 whom founded, 31; its dedication, 
 32; donations made to it, 39-41; 
 dissolution, 38-39; its remains, 42; 
 entrance gateway, 31; sanctuary, 
 42; cloisters, 48-49; chapter-house 
 and vestibule, 48. 
 
 -Arms of the.109 
 
 Abbots, Notices of: Asshe, 36, 102; 
 Barry, 35, 102; Bradestan, 33; 
 Burton, 38; Cerney, 37, 102; Cooke, 
 
 36, 102; Daubeny, 37; David, 33, 
 101; Dodington, 35, 102; Elyott, 
 38; Gwilliam, 38, 102; Hunt, 37; 
 John or Joseph, 33; Knowle, 35, 
 101; Long, 34, 102; Malmesbury, 
 34; Marina, 34, 102; Newbury, 37, 
 102; Newlandor Nailheart, 37, 101; 
 Philip, 32; Richard, 32; Shellingford, 
 
 37, 102; Somerset, 38; Snow, 36. 
 
 -Arms of the.109, 110 
 
 -Palace, Stables, Barton, 
 
 &c. 43-51 
 
 Abone . 2, 6, 8 
 
 Acts, Conventicle ... 413-414, 603 
 
 ,, Corporation . 603 
 
 ., Five-Mile . 413-414, 603 
 
 Ad Abonam, Ad Antonam, 
 
 Ad Sabrinam . 7 
 
 Almshouses: All Saints, 295; Bar- 
 staple’s, 62, 206-207; Blanchard’s, 
 or the Baptist, 385; de Burton’s, 
 66, 297; Canynges’, 371; Chester’s, 
 194; Colston’s, 173-174; Foster’s, 
 63-64, 173; Fry’s House of Mercy, 
 272; St. James’s, 194; St. John the 
 Baptist, or Strange’s, 250; St. 
 Mary Redcliffe, 371-372; Merchant 
 Tailor’s, 194; Merchant Venturers, 
 266; St. Nicholas, 278; Ridley’s, 
 385; Roger Magdalen’s, of Nonney, 
 Temple Gate, 62, 372; Spencer’s, 
 64; Stevens’s, 207, 308; Unitarian, 
 384; Weavers’, 65; White’s, 67, 308, 
 309; Almys House, High Street, 283. 
 
 Anabaptists .411 
 
 Aquae Sulis . 7 
 
 Arch, Origin of the Pointed, 
 
 discussed .176-178 
 
 Arms of the Bishopric.113 
 
 -Bishops of Bristol 113, 114 
 
 - Barker, 254; Basset of Uleigh, 
 
 109 ; Beauchamp, 109; Berkeley, 
 108; Bristol, Digby, Earl of, 467; 
 Hervey, Marquis of, 467; Canynges, 
 347; Colston, 285; Cookson, 115; 
 Cradock, 124; De Bohun, 10S; De 
 Clare, 108; De la Mare, 109; De la 
 Riviere, 109; De Spencer, 108; 
 Elton, 123; Fitzalan, 109; Frampton, 
 246; Gaunt, 145; Gloucester, Earl 
 of, 180; Gourney, 145; Inyn, 355; 
 Kemys, 578 ; King Edward III., 
 108; Knapp, 588; Knights Templars, 
 298; Mathew, 587; Maze, 114; Mede, 
 257; Montacute, 109; Newton, 124; 
 Penn, 358; Porter, 116; Rowley, 
 248; Southey, 137; Stone, 124;Thorn 
 582; Vaughan, 134; Warren, 108; 
 Wylington, 109. 
 
 Arviragus, an early British King 9 
 
 Assembly Rooms.266 
 
 Asylum for the Blind.172 
 
 Athenaeum . 279-280 
 
 Avon. See Rivers 
 
 St. Augustine said to have preached in 
 
 College Green . 31 
 
 Augustine Eremites. See Religious 
 Houses. 
 
 Augustine Monks. Ditto 
 
 Baddon, or, nant Baddon ... 1, 3 
 
 Bailiffs . 24, 476-483 
 
 Baptist Mills.210 
 
 Barton Regis, Manor of .210 
 
 Bathurst’s Basin.375 
 
 Benedictines. 27 
 
 Berkeley, the Lords. See Monuments, 
 
 t ic. 
 
 Berkeley Tomb in the Cathedral 103-5 
 Berry Hill . 7 
 
X. 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Biography, Great fault of .591 
 
 Bishopric of Bristol . 81 
 
 Bishops, Account of: Allen, 91; Bagot, 
 91; Baring, 91, 114; Boulter, 88, 
 114; Bradshaw, 88, 110, 114; Bush, 
 81, 82, 110, 113; Bullington, 113; 
 Butler, 89, 111, 114; Carle ton, 86, 
 113; Cecil, 88, 114; Cheyney, 83, 
 113; Coke, 84, 113; Conybeare, 89, 
 112; Cornwall, 90; Courtenay, 90, 
 114; Felton, 84, 113; Fletcher, 83, 
 113; Gooch, 89, 114; Goulston, 8G, 
 113; Gray, 91, 112, 114, 566; Hall, 
 87, 113; Holyman, 83, 113; Howell, 
 85, 110, 113, 563, 564; Hume, 89, 
 114; Ironside, sen., 86, 113; Iron¬ 
 side, jun., 87; Kaye, 90; Lake, 113; 
 Luxmore, 90; Madan, 90; Mansel, 
 90, 114; Monk, 91; Newton, 90; 
 Pelham, 90, 114; Robinson, 87, 88, 
 113; Searchfiekl, 84, 110, 113; 
 
 Seeker, 89, 114; Skinner, 85, 113; 
 Smalridge, 88, 113; Thornborough, 
 S3, 561-562; Trelawney, 87, 113; 
 Westfield, 85, 110, 113, 562-563; 
 Wilson, 90, 114; Wright, 84, 113; 
 Yonge, 89. 
 
 Blanket, its Origin .258 
 
 Brandon Hill. 155 
 
 ,, ,, Fort.167 
 
 Brass Eagles or Lecterns 230, 338, 580 
 
 -First made in England ... 4)8 
 
 - Pillars at the Exchange 291-293 
 
 Bretidon, St. 30 
 
 rennus and Belinus ... 2, 5, 7, 249 
 
 tidewell . 251 
 
 ridges: Aylward’s, 17; Bridewell, or 
 Monken, 17, 251; Bristol, 8, 17, 18, 
 19, 295; Castle, 17; Elle, 17, 227; 
 Froom, 17, 199; St. Giles’s, 17, 166; 
 St. John's, 199; St. Leonard’s, 17; 
 Mill, 17, 228; Weir, 17. 
 
 Bristol: its situation, 1, 11; name and 
 origin, discussed, 1-6; Ptolemy’s 
 testimony to its antiquity, 7; its 
 walls, gates, &c., 10-13; made a 
 borough, 20, 391; besieged by Prince 
 Rupert, 403; ditto by General 
 Fairfax, 405; its castle, 73-79; 
 channel, 391; churches of, at the 
 Reformation, 73; made a city, 391, 
 397; a county, 390-391; a bishopric, 
 81, 391; an earldom, 467; high 
 stewards of, 467; recorders, 469; 
 town clerks, 473; chamberlains and 
 treasurers, 473-474; mayors, prepo- 
 
 sitors, seneschals, &c., 474-493; 
 members of Parliament, 493-498; 
 population, 391; port of, 19, 228, 551. 
 Bristol: under the Anglo-Saxons, 10, 
 13, 14, 20, 21, 24. 
 
 — under the Anglo-Normans... 14, 20 
 
 -Plantagenets. 15 
 
 — Institution.166 
 
 British Remains, Camps, Fortifica¬ 
 tions, &c. 1, 4, 7, 8 
 
 Broadmead, why so called.198 
 
 Burgesses, what they were 20, 21 
 Burial Grounds : Christ Church, Duck 
 Lane, 237; Infirmary, 174; St. John 
 Baptist, 250 ; St. Nicholas, 277; 
 Baptist and Tabernacle, 206; Uni¬ 
 tarian, 385. 
 
 Caer Brito. 2, 3, 5, 6 
 
 -Oder or Odre . 1, 3, 4, 5 
 
 Canynges’ House . 373, 374 
 
 Carleton, Bishop, a Persecutor 415, 
 416, 417, 606 
 
 Carmelites. See Religious Houses. 
 Carving in Wood by Grinling 
 
 Gibbon . 271-272 
 
 Castle Bank. 288, 591 
 
 - Precincts .210—214 
 
 Civic High Cross. 558-559 
 
 Cathedral: Elder Lady Chapel, 91; 
 choirs, aisles, &c., built by Abbot 
 Knowle, 92; described, 93-94; the 
 Virgin Chapel, 94; Newton Chapel, 
 94; Early Perpendicular English 
 window, 95; transepts and tower, 95, 
 96; altar, screen, stalls, bishop’s 
 throne, &c., 93-97; nave and aisles, 
 by whom destroyed, 98-101; Monu¬ 
 ments, 101; chapterhouse, 48, 555; 
 deanery, 49; fresco’s, 49-51; Resto¬ 
 ration of the, 564-565. 
 
 Cellars, Ancient. 16, 229 
 
 Chamberlains of Bristol 24, 473-474 
 Chapels, Ancient; Bristol Bridge, 19, 
 277, 551 ; St. Giles’s, 167; High 
 Street “Almys House,” 282; St. 
 John’s, 242, 277 ; St. Jordan’s, 
 note, 31; Virgin Tavern Lane, 267; 
 Weavers’, 301-302. 
 
 Chapels, Dissenting, and Meeting 
 Houses:— 
 
 - Baptist: Broadmead, 186-190; 
 
 Callowhill Street, 282; Coopers’ 
 Hall, 278; Counterslip, 307; Old 
 King Street, 381; Pithay, 237-238; 
 Thrissell Street, 210. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 XI. 
 
 Chapels:— Brethren: Bethesda, Great 
 George Street, 158; Salem, St. Au¬ 
 gustine’s Place, 158. 
 
 - Friends: Rosemary Street... .£83 
 
 —— Independent : Anvil Street, 210; 
 Arley, 381; Bridge Street, 231 ; 
 Brunswick, 3S0-381; Castle Green, 
 211; Gideon, 380; Highbury, 171-2; 
 Kingsland, Dings, 210; Lodge Street, 
 159; Tabernacle, 380; Wycliffe, 371. 
 
 - Moravian: or, United 
 
 Brethren . 193 
 
 - Presbyterian: . 185-186 
 
 - Roman Catholic: St. Joseph, 
 
 Trenchard Street, 171; St. Mary’s, 
 on St. Augustine’s Back, 158; St. 
 Nicholas, Pennywell Road, 210 
 
 - Unitarian: Lewin’s Mead ... 191 
 
 - Welsh: Calvinistic Methodist, 
 
 Lower Castle Street, 190-191; In¬ 
 dependent, Lower Castle Street, 214; 
 Baptist, Upper Maudlin Street, note, 
 193. 
 
 - Wesleyan: Baptist Mills, 210; 
 
 Castle Green, 214; Ebenezer, Old 
 King Street, 191; Milk Street, 383; 
 New Town, 209; St. Philip’s, Old 
 Market Street, 206; Portland Street, 
 Kingsdown, 199-201 
 Chapels, Dissenting, number built 
 during the present century in 
 
 Bristol.383 
 
 Charles I., his character, despot¬ 
 ism, &c. 600-601 
 
 Charters: Henry III., 24; Edward III. 
 390-391; Elizabeth, 392; Charles I., 
 392; Charles II., 392; Anne, 418; 
 Seized by Charles II., 417 
 Churches, Episcopal Chapels, Chan¬ 
 tries, and Parishes:—All Saints, 
 281-288; St. Andrew’s, Montpelier, 
 379; St. Andrew’s, Wine Street, 
 288-291; St. Augustine’s, 156-158; 
 St. Barnabas, 379; St. Clement’s, 
 379; Christ Church, 234-237; St. 
 Ewen’s, 242-243; St. George’s, 
 Brandon Hill, 158; St. George’s, 
 Kingswood, 8, 208; St. Giles’s, 23; 
 Holy Trinity, West Street, 208; 
 Infirmary Chapel, 196; St. James’, 
 176-185; St. John Baptist, 243-249; 
 St. Jude’s, Pointz-pool, 209; St. 
 Lawrence, 250; St. Leonard’s, 267- 
 268; St. Luke’s, Barton Hill, 209; 
 St. Mark’s, 141-154; St. Matthew’s, 
 199-200; St. Matthias, 3S0; St. 
 
 Mary-le-Port, 229-231; St. Mary 
 Redcliffe, 310-375,594;St. Michael’s, 
 167-170, 573; St. Nicholas, 272-277; 
 St. Paul’s, 376-379; Penitentiary 
 Chapel, 194; St. Peter’s, 214-224; 
 St. Philip and Jacob, 201-206; St. 
 Simon’s, Baptist Mills, 210; St. 
 Stephen’s, 255-264, 583; Temple, or 
 Holy Cross, 298-307; St. Thomas 
 the Martyr, 296-297; St. Werburgh’s, 
 251-254. 
 
 Churches built in the present 
 
 century .380 
 
 Christianity in Britain. 4-9, 10 
 
 Cider House Passage .241 
 
 Civil War—its causes and conse¬ 
 quences . 392-399 
 
 City Library. 269-272 
 
 --of the Chasm . 3-4, 7 
 
 Clerical Habit worn by Indepen¬ 
 dents, and why.607 
 
 Clifton mentioned... 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9 
 Cloth and Cloth Workers ... 25-26 
 
 Clubmen, what they were ... 602-603 
 
 Coal Basins near Bristol .419 
 
 College Green .166 
 
 Colston’s Mount and Fort 
 
 House. 199-201 
 
 Colston, Societies instituted 
 
 to his honour .617 
 
 Commerce . 25, 418-419 
 
 Commercial Rooms . ... 254 
 
 Conduits, Fountains, &c. 67-69, 309,594 
 
 Corn Market.238 
 
 Corporation Officers . 467-493 
 
 Cotton Works .418 
 
 Council held at Bristol.554 
 
 - House .243 
 
 Crosses of Stone, Ancient 72, 73, 391 
 Custom House .228, 229, 281 
 
 Denny (The).291 
 
 Dissenters, 411, see also Nonconformists 
 
 Distilleries .419 
 
 Disturbances. See Riots. 
 
 Docks, and Plans for their extension 
 
 (The) .615, 616 
 
 Domestic Architecture. 14, 17 
 
 Dominicans. See Religions Houses. 
 
 Drawbridge .267 
 
 Drawings, Fresco’s, at the Deanery 49 
 
 Duboni (The). 6 
 
 Duck Hunting .375 
 
 Ducking Stool (The) . 227,228 
 
 Dun Cow’s rib (The) . 370,595 
 
 Dyfnwall Moelmyd .2, 3 
 
 d 
 
xn. 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Ejected Ministers.412 
 
 Eleutherius, Pope. 9 
 
 Eminent Natives and Residents... 49S 
 
 Episcopacy Restored .412 
 
 Episcopalians and Ordination ... 412 
 Epitaphs. See Monuments. 
 
 Exchange (The) .291 
 
 Executions in Bristol. 570, 571 
 
 Faggot, Bearing a. Note . 79 
 
 Fairs .421,616 
 
 Franciscans. See Religious Houses. 
 
 Fountains, Street.594 
 
 Fresco Drawings at the Deanery 49 
 Freeholders . 21 
 
 Gaols . 225,580 
 
 Gas Works . 420 
 
 Gates: Ancient one in Peter Street, 
 226, 227; Guard-House Gate, 230; 
 St. John’s, 243, 249; Lawford’s, 207; 
 Tower Gateway, 249; Redcliffe, 375; 
 Temple, 375. 
 
 Glastonbury. 9 
 
 Great Britain Steam Ship (The) .. 614 
 
 - Western ,, (The)... 613 
 
 Guildhall, (The) . 250-251 
 
 Guilds and Fraternities noticed, 20, 
 21, 52, 69, 194, 242, 267 
 Guilds and Fraternities: their Halls, 
 22; Back (The) 277; Coopers’, 278; 
 Merchant Venturers’, 266-267; Point 
 Makers’, or Whitawers’, 65; Spicer’s 
 277-278; Merchant Tailors’, 251; 
 Weavers’, 65 
 
 Hanham Mills .391 
 
 Harold, Ring, sails from Bristol 19 
 
 Hellier, John, a persecutor.606 
 
 Holmes, Flat and Steep .391 
 
 Hospitals, Ancient. See Religious 
 Houses. 
 
 Hospital, General (The) ... 372, 373 
 
 Hostelries. See Inns. 
 
 How Rocks (The).391 
 
 Ilchester. 6 
 
 Independents.411 
 
 Infirmary, The Royal . 195-196 
 
 Inns : Abyngdon's 293 ; Angel, 281; 
 Cat and Wheel, 214; Dolphin, 22S; 
 George, 374; Guiilows, or, Gilders, 
 294-295; King David, 60, 281; 
 Montague, 201; Nag’s Head, 240; 
 New, or, Jonas, 293; Plume of 
 
 Feathers, 240; Queen Bess. 279; 
 Red Lion, 374 ; Rummer, 282, 283, 
 294 ; Saracen’s Head, 374 ; Swan, 
 226 ; Talbot, or Pelican, 298 ; Three 
 Tims, 240; White Hart, 240; White 
 Lion, 239. 
 
 Institution for the Advancement 
 of Science Art, &c. (The Bristol) 166 
 Ironside, Bishop, a persecutor ... 414 
 
 Jacobites (The) What they were 616 
 
 Jacob’s W ells. 22 
 
 James’s Back St.196 
 
 Jews in Bristol, and their Perse¬ 
 cutions. 22-24 
 
 Jews’ Synagogue. 23, 307 
 
 Joseph of Arimathea . 9 
 
 Kalendaries (The)... 69-71, 290, 619 
 
 Kingsdown .199 
 
 Kingswood (St. George’s) .208 
 
 Knight, Sir John, a persecutor ... 604 
 Knights Templars. See Religious 
 Houses. 
 
 Libraries: Bristol Library Society, 
 172, 269; City, (The), 269-272, 584, 
 585, 586 (Note); Law, 280; Medi¬ 
 cal, 172. 
 
 Licence to Preach, Copy of a 581 
 Litany in English, (The) First 
 
 sung in Bristol.235 
 
 Lucius, King of Britain .9, 10 
 
 Manufactories, various .419 
 
 Markets: Corn, 238; Exchange, 291; 
 St. James’s, 185; Meal, 238; New, 
 241. 
 
 Marsh (The) ... ... 17, 18, 280, 281 
 
 Martyrs burnt in Bristol . 81 
 
 Mayors of Bristol - .. 24, 474-493 
 
 Members of Parliament ... 493-498 
 Memorials. See Monuments, dc. 
 Mendicant Orders of Friars. See 
 Religious Houses. 
 
 Merchant Tailors, Guild of.242 
 
 - Venturers, Society 
 
 of. 265-266 
 
 Mineral Fields of Bristol ... 612, 613 
 
 Mint (The) .225 
 
 Monkish Writers, noticed. 51 
 
 Monumental Brasses, unin¬ 
 scribed, . 304, 353 
 
 Monuments, Biographical Notices, 
 Epitaphs, &c.; 
 
 Abbots of St. Augustine. See A bbots 
 
INDEX. 
 
 xiii. 
 
 Monuments, Biographical Notices, 
 
 Epitaphs, &c. — (continued.) 
 
 Abyngdon, Henry .592 
 
 Aldworth, Family of 153, 217, 219 
 
 Armstrong, William .381 
 
 Ashburton, John Dunning, 
 
 Baron .472 
 
 Atkyns, Sir Robert.471 
 
 Bangley, John. 199-200 
 
 Barbour, Jeffrey .479 
 
 Barker, John .254 
 
 Barrett & Wife .William 204,362-363 
 
 Barrington, Dailies .472 
 
 Baynton, Lady Maria .153 
 
 Beaufort, Somerset, Dukes of 468 
 
 Bedloe, William .154 
 
 Bengough, Henry .151 
 
 Berkeley, James, Earl of ... 468 
 
 -—- the Lords; 2nd Maurice, 
 
 103; 3rd Maurice, 105; 4th 
 Maurice, 106; Richard, 148; 2nd 
 Robert, 106,343-346; 1st Thomas, 
 102; 2nd Thomas, 105; 3rd 
 Thomas, 106; 5th Thomas, 106 
 
 - Sir James.106 
 
 - Sir Thomas de.146 
 
 Be van, Elway.521 
 
 Bibert.504 
 
 Biddulph, Rev. Thomas 
 
 Tregenna . 181-183 
 
 Bird, Edward . 139-140 
 
 - William .151 
 
 Blanchard, Elizabeth ... ... 385 
 
 Blanket, Edward . 257-258 
 
 Blecker, John .353 
 
 Booth, Rev. Dean .127 
 
 Botoner, or Wyrcestre, 
 
 William. _. ... 196-198 
 
 Boucher, George .601 
 
 Bowdich, Thomas Edward 536-538 
 Bridges, Rev. Dr. Nathaniel 276, 361 
 
 Brickdale, Matthew.305 
 
 Breilliat, John.420 
 
 Brook and Lady, Sir John 353-354 
 
 Brook, Sir David . 354, 469 
 
 Brown, Hugh .280 
 
 Broughton, Rev. Thomas ... 360 
 
 Buck, Rev. Charles. 262-263 
 
 Bullock, Anna.378 
 
 Burdock, Mary Ann. 157, 569 
 
 Burke, Richard.472 
 
 Burleigh, Cecil, Lord .467 
 
 Burton, John ... 66-67, 296, 364 
 Burton, Simon de ... 66-67,312, 
 
 313, 315, 317 
 
 Butler, Margaret .140 
 
 Monuments, Biographical Notices, 
 Epitaphs, &c.— (continued.) 
 
 Bury and Wife, Rev. Samuel 184-185 
 Cabot, Sebastian ... 25, 552-553 
 
 Callowhill. Thomas . 282 
 
 Cantilupe, Nicholas . 507 
 
 Canynges, William, sen. 26, 318-323 
 Canynges, William, jun. ... 325-328, 
 332, 346-352, 371-372 
 Canynges, William, jun., 
 
 servants of . 352-353 
 
 Carpenter, Rev. Dr. Lant 191-193 
 Carleton, Bishop Guy . . .211, 415, 
 
 416-417 
 
 Carr, John . 148, 162 
 
 Castle, Michael.390 
 
 Catcott, Rev. Alexander 
 
 Stopford. 262, 306, 583-584 
 
 Chatterton Family (The) 367, 595 
 
 Chatterton, John .368 
 
 Chatterton, Thomas ... 365-366, 594 
 
 Chatterton’s Sister . 595 
 
 Child, Dr. William. 521-522 
 
 Churchill, Sir John.471 
 
 Clark, Thomas.153 
 
 Cockburn, Sir Alexander J. E. 473 
 Codrington, Lord Robert ... 135 
 
 Coke, Richard.353 
 
 Coke, William . 353 
 
 Coleford, William de .469 
 
 Colas, William.353 
 
 C'ollings, Daniel Stratton ... 120 
 
 Colston. Edward . 285-288, 
 
 424. 589-591, 617 
 
 Colston, Thomas .284 
 
 Colston, William ... 201, 283-285 
 
 Cookson, Elizabeth.115 
 
 Copley, Sir John .472 
 
 Coster, Thomas . 134-135 
 
 Cottle, Amos, John, and 
 
 Joseph . 546-547 
 
 Cradock, Sir Richard .107 
 
 Cradock, Tomb of Judge... 107-108 
 Cromwell, Oliver 99-101, 468, 619 
 Crowder, Richard Budden ... 473 
 
 Crystyns, William .253 
 
 Dallaway, Rev. James ... 542-544 
 
 Daubeny, George . 183-184 
 
 Davies, Rev. James . 232-233 
 
 Day, Rev. William. 205-206 
 
 Doddridge, John . 471 
 
 Dorset, Thomas Sackville, Earl 
 
 of Dorset.468 
 
 Draper, Elizabeth .119 
 
 Draper, Mabel and Richard . .. 273 
 Draper, Sir William ... 525-526 
 
XIV. 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Monuments, Biographical Notices, 
 Epitaphs, &c.— (continued.) 
 Duddlestone and Lady, Sir 
 
 William. 283 
 
 Eagles, Rev. John .118 
 
 Easterbrook, Rev. Joseph ... 304, 
 305, 593. 
 
 Eaton, Joseph. 595-596 
 
 Eden, Rev. John . 276-277 
 
 Edwards, Capt. William... 122 
 Elbridge, John 195-196, 217-219, 237 
 Elton, Sir Charles Abraham 545-546 
 
 Elton, Captain Jacob .123 
 
 Elwyn, William Brame, and 
 
 Maria .127 
 
 Elwyn, Caecilia, and Cascilia 
 
 Eleanor. 305-306 
 
 Essex, Cromwell, Earl of ... 469 
 Essex, Devereaux, Earl of ... 468 
 
 Estertield, John .578 
 
 Estlin, John Bishop. 388-3S9 
 
 Estlin, Rev. Dr. John Prior 386-3S7 
 Evans, Rev. Dr. Caleb ... 186-188 
 Evans, Rev. Hugh Caleb 186-187 
 
 Evans, John .618 
 
 Eyre, Sir Robert .*... 471 
 
 Farmer, Thomas .235 
 
 Finzel, Conrad. 607-612 
 
 Fitzharding, Robert—24, 29, 30-32, 
 60, 103, 106 
 
 Fitz-James, Sir John .469 
 
 Foot, Rev. William. 382-383 
 
 Foskett, Rev. Bernard ... 186-187 
 
 Foster, Rev. John . 544-545 
 
 Foster, John . 556-558, 578 
 
 Foster, Rev. Nathaniel 129, 566-567 
 
 Foster, Sir Michael.471 
 
 Fowler, John . 517-518 
 
 Frampton, Walter . 243-246 
 
 Freus, or Freas, John .508 
 
 Freeling, Sir Francis ... 363-364 
 
 Fydell, Elizabeth Anne .133 
 
 Gaunt, Sir Henry de .145 
 
 Geoffrey, Bishop of Coutance... 20 
 Gibbes, James Alban ... 519-521 
 
 Gibbon, Grinling 271-272, 587-588 
 
 Gibbs, James .149 
 
 Gibbs, Sir Yicary .472 
 
 Gifford, Robert, Lord .472 
 
 Glanville, Sir John.470 
 
 Gloucester, Robert, Earl of ..6,24, 
 27, 28, 30, 179, 180, 553, 554' 
 Gloucester, William, Earl of ... 581 
 Goodere, Sir JohnDineley, The 
 
 Murder of .569 
 
 Gore, Colonel William .128 
 
 Monuments, Biographical Notices, 
 Epitaphs, &c. — (continued.) 
 
 Gourney, Robert de.145 
 
 Gray, The Children of Bishop 123 
 Grenville, William Wyndliam, 
 
 Baron .468 
 
 Grinfield, Rev. Thomas.206 
 
 Grocyn, William . 513-516 
 
 Guy, John.620 
 
 Gylbert de Sante Leonfardoe, 
 
 Byshope of Chychestre.594 
 
 Haberfield, Sir John Kerle ... 150 
 Hall, Rev. Robert 187, 189-190 
 
 Hall, William ... 
 Hannam, Thomas 
 
 Harding . 
 
 342-343 
 470 
 20, 24, 552 
 
 Hardwicke, Philip Yorke, 
 
 Earl of .468 
 
 Harrington, George.219 
 
 Hellier, John .606 
 
 Henderson, Anthony Augustus 129 
 
 Herbert, Sir William .467 
 
 Hertford, Edward, Earl of ... 467 
 
 Heylin, John .269 
 
 Heywood, William. 522-523 
 
 Hilsey, John ... 53 
 
 Hobson, Henry. 294-295 
 
 Hobson, Thomas .193 
 
 Holmes, John . 378-379 
 
 Hooke, Andrew .183 
 
 Hooper, John . 516-517 
 
 Hulett, Susanna ... . . ... 297 
 
 Hyde, Sir Nicholas.470 
 
 Inyn, Sir John. 355, 469 
 
 Ironside, sen., Bishop Gilbert 414 
 
 James, Family of .152 
 
 Jay and Wife, John. 354-355 
 
 Kater, Jolm Herman .297 
 
 Kemys, Family of .578 
 
 Kentish, Dr. Edward .389 
 
 Kitchen, Robert 241, 259, 292 
 
 Knapp, Thomas .588 
 
 Knight, Sir John .416, 604 
 
 Lamb, The Children of Dean... 123 
 
 Lamyngton, John .340 
 
 Latimer, Bishop . 80 
 
 Lavingham, Richard ... 505-507 
 Lawrence, Sir Thomas ... 53S-540 
 
 Layard, Rev. Dean . 136, 230 
 
 Leicester, Robert Dudley, 
 
 Earl of . 467, 619 
 
 Lends, Rev. John . 523-525 
 
 Little, Fortune.360 
 
 Loude, Robert. 216 
 
 Love, Rev. Samuel. 125-126 
 
 Lowder and Wife, Samuel ... 169 
 
INDEX. 
 
 XV. 
 
 Monuments, Biographical Notices, 
 Epitaphs, &c. — (continued.) 
 
 Lowell, Rev. Samuel ... 233-234 
 
 Lucas, Samuel.341 
 
 Lukins, George. 304, 593 
 
 Lyltir and Wife, John .205 
 
 Lyndhurst, John Copley, Baron 472 
 
 Mason, Mary . 131-132 
 
 Mathew and Wife, Tobias, 
 
 Archbishop of York 269,585-587 
 Matthew, an eminent 
 
 Teacher. 499-500 
 
 Maze, Peter . 114-115 
 
 Mede, Philip, and Sir 
 
 Thomas. 356-357 
 
 Middleton, Harriet Isabella ... 136 
 Military Train, Officers, &c., of 
 
 the.120 
 
 Milverton, John . 509-511 
 
 More, Hannah ... 540-542, 620-622 
 Miiller, Rev. George .. 571-573 
 
 Naylor, James. 408-411 
 
 Newton, Family of.124 
 
 Newton, Sir Richard ... 124, 469 
 
 Noble, John .183 
 
 North, The Honourable Roger 471 
 Northall, Henry and John ... 220 
 Norton, Family of 224, 578-579 
 
 Noy, William .470 
 
 O’Brien, Patrick Cotter. 171 
 
 Olliffe, Ralph .606 
 
 Oliver, Simon ... „ 469 
 
 O’Neill, Hugh .263 
 
 Ormond, James Butler, Duke 
 
 of . 468, 619 
 
 Peloquin, Family of.262 
 
 Pembroke, Herbert, Earls of 468,619 
 Penn, Admiral Sir William 357-359 
 
 Penn, William.596 
 
 Phillips, Harriet .138 
 
 Phillips, William . 120-121 
 
 Pinney, William .156 
 
 Popham, Sir John .470 
 
 Porter, Family of . 115-117 
 
 Portland, Cavendish, Dukes of 468 
 Portland, Weston, Earl of ... 468 
 
 Powell, William . 138, 342 
 
 Prettyman, Henry George ... 130 
 
 Pringe, Martin.261 
 
 Pugsley, Dame. 576-578 
 
 Pytley, Thomas .205 
 
 Ralph, of Bristol .505 
 
 Ramsey, Lady Mary . 518-519 
 Redwood, Robert 148, 269, 584-585 
 
 Reynolds, Richard . 530-536 
 
 Ricaut, Robert. 4, 473, 619 
 
 Monuments, Biographical Notices, 
 Epitaphs, &c.— (continued.) 
 
 Ridley, Thomas and Sarah .. 385 
 Roberts, Rev. Thomas ... 381-382 
 Roberts, William Isaac ... 169-170, 
 575-576 
 
 Robinson, Mary . 526-529 
 
 Rogers and Wife, George ... 122 
 
 Itomsey, John.267 
 
 Rowley and Wife, Thomas ... 247 
 
 Rowley, Thomas . 511-513 
 
 Roy, The Rajah Ram Mohun 598-599 
 Ruscombe and Servant, The 
 Murder of Mrs. Frances ... 569 
 
 Russell, Sir James . 181 
 
 Ryland, Rev. Dr. John ... 187-189 
 
 Salisbury, Cecil, Earl of.468 
 
 Salley, Miles, Bishop of Llandaff 147 
 
 Savage, Richard . 223-224 
 
 Schimmelpenninck, Mary 
 
 Anne . 119-120 
 
 Scrope, John .471 
 
 Seyer, Lieut. Col. Richard 
 
 Twine .169 
 
 Seyer, Rev. Samuel 311, 573-575 
 
 Sharp, John .370 
 
 Sheriffs of Bristol . 478-493 
 
 Shiercliff, Edward .157 
 
 Simmons, John. 368-370 
 
 Smith, Clara Ann, The Murder 
 
 of . 157, 568-569 
 
 Smith, Richard. 306-307 
 
 Smith, Thomas. 230-231 
 
 Smyth, A Lady of the Family 
 
 of . 219 
 
 Snygge, Sir George. 260, 470 
 
 Somerset, Edward Seymour, 
 
 Duke of.479 
 
 Somerset, Lord John Thomas 
 
 Henry .131 
 
 Somerset, Rev. Lord William 
 
 George Henry . 131 
 
 Somerset, Sir Charles ... ISO-181 
 Southey, Robert ... 136-137, 595 
 
 Spicer, Family of . 5S8-589 
 
 Spine, John .509 
 
 Spry, Rev. Benjamin . 342 
 
 Standfast, Rev. Richard ... 230, 
 231, 235-237 
 
 Stanhope, Elizabeth Charlotte 124 
 Stear, Capt. Richard and 
 
 Eugene. 220 
 
 Stock, Dr. J. Edmonds . 390 
 
 Stokes, John . 296 
 
 Strange, Robert . 250 
 
 Summers, Rev. Samuel ... 187,190 
 
 e 
 
xvi. 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 Monuments, Biographical Notices, 
 Epitaphs, &c. — (continued.) 
 
 Surtees, Rev. John.121 
 
 Thomas, Dr. William, Bishop 
 
 of Worcester.523 
 
 Thorn, Family of 252-253, 581-583 
 Thorp, Rev. William .. 212-214 
 Thompson, Rev. John 211, 415-416 
 Towgood, Rev. Richard 139, 567-568 
 
 Tremayle, Thomas.469 
 
 Turgot. 500-504 
 
 Turner, Thomas .122 
 
 Turtle, Roger .620 
 
 Twynyho, John.469 
 
 Tyddestille, or, Tyddeley, 
 
 Walter .253 
 
 Tyndale, William ... 80, 596-598 
 
 Tyson, William.263 
 
 Upton, George.152 
 
 Vane, Sir Harry . 468, 619 
 
 Vassall, Colonel Spencer 
 
 Thomas. 377-378 
 
 Vaughan, Sir Charles . 134 
 
 Walwyn, Children of R. 120 
 
 Warford, William .519 
 
 Wasbrough, Matthew ... 220-223 
 
 Wasbrough, Rice .124 
 
 Wastfield, Elizabeth .133 
 
 Way, Rev. Benjamin .211 
 
 Webb, Lieutenant Thomas 200-201 
 Weeks, Rev. John ... 231-232, 581 
 
 Welsh, or Walshe, John.470 
 
 Wesley, Charles .542 
 
 Wetherell, Sir Charles ... 472-473 
 
 Whish, Martin ..128 
 
 Whish, Rev. Martin Richard... 361 
 
 White, George .293 
 
 White, Dr. Thomas. 293, 308 
 
 Whitelock, Bulstrode .470 
 
 Whitson, John. 164, 274-276 
 
 Willis, John . 474, 619-620 
 
 W organ, John Dawes .193 
 
 Wright, Rev. Dr. John .385 
 
 Wright, Thomas .386 
 
 Wycliffe, John. 79 
 
 Wyld, Family of . 341, 362 
 
 Wyrcestre, or Botoner 
 
 William. 196-198 
 
 Yate, Family of . 238-239 
 
 Yearsley, Ann 529-530, 620-622 
 
 Yeoman and Boucher ... 238-240, 
 298, 400-403 
 
 Young and Lady, Sir John ... 130 
 Young, Thomas.469 
 
 Murders in Bristol . 158, 568 
 
 Nennius mentioned .5, 7 
 
 Neptune, Conduit, (The) ... 309-310 
 New Cut for the River Avon ... 419 
 Newfoundland colonized by 
 
 John Guy.620 
 
 Newgate. 225, 226 
 
 New Market.241 
 
 -Quay or Trench .551 
 
 -- Town .208 
 
 Nicholas of the Tower (The) ... 613 
 Nonconforming Church Ministers 
 
 ejected .412 
 
 Nonconformists Persecuted, 606. See 
 Persecutions, <fcc. 
 
 Nonjurors, what they were ... 617 
 
 Old Buildings, 196, 226, 236, 241, 254, 
 255, 266, 281, 282, 295. 
 
 -Custom House .228 
 
 -- Jewry . 2.3 
 
 Orphan House, Ashley Down ... 571- 
 573, 609-612 
 
 Painted Glass. 108-109, 341-342 
 
 Palace, Pyle Street, (The).375 
 
 Parish of St. James divided ... 199 
 
 -St. Philip do. ... 207 
 
 Parishes. See Churches. 
 
 Patent Shot Works .419 
 
 Penitentiary.191 
 
 Penn Street, &c., why so named 596 
 
 Persecuting Clergymen .603 
 
 Persecutions and Persecutors: at the 
 
 Reformation, 79; of Jews, 23-24; of 
 Nonconformists, 211-212, 232, 412- 
 417, 604, 605, 606, 607; of Quakers, 
 
 408, 411, 605 
 
 Peter’s Pump, St . 225 
 
 Piepoudre Court .207 
 
 Pipes, Water. See Conduits. 
 
 Pithay, (The) . 239 
 
 Plague in Bristol . 185, 294 
 
 Pointed Arch, its early use in 
 
 England . 178 
 
 Police Station, The Central ... 251 
 
 Popery Restored in Bristol . 80 
 
 Population . 391 
 
 Port of Bristol . 19, 228, 551 
 
 Potteries . 419, 613 
 
 Praepositus, (The) .. 20, 24, 474-475 
 
 Presbyterians . 411 
 
 Prior’s Hill Redoubt, Nine Tree 
 
 Hill . 577 
 
 Ptolemy’s Testimony to the Anti¬ 
 quity of Bristol . 6-7 
 
 Pugsley’s Field, Dame . 199 
 
INDEX. 
 
 xvii. 
 
 Pumps, Public . 225-226 
 
 Quakers. 51, 408-411, 416, 596 
 
 Quay, New, made.555 
 
 Queen Mary re-establishes Popery 80 
 Queen Square. 30,280, 281 
 
 Rackhay.281 
 
 Reading, Surrender of ... 601-602 
 Recorders of Bristol, (The) 24, 469 
 Redoubt on Nine Tree Hill ... 577 
 Reformation begun in Bristol (The) 79 
 
 Religious Dissensions.408 
 
 - Fraternities: Bonhommes, or 
 
 Good Men, 57; Holy Ghost, 69; St. 
 John Baptist, 69; Kalendaries, 69- 
 71, 290; Knights of St. John, 67, 
 309, 594; Knights Templars, 67, 
 298, 309, 592-593 
 
 - Houses, 30 ; Friaries: Au¬ 
 gustine Eremites, 54, 55, 309; Car¬ 
 melites, 53, 54; Dominicans, 22, 
 51-53, 185, 383; Franciscans, 53, 
 65, 185. 
 
 -Hospitals: St. Bartholomew, 
 
 58; 174-175; St. Catherine, 61, 345, 
 346; Gaunts, or, Bonhommes, 56-58; 
 St. John Baptist, 59; St. Lawrence, 
 62, 210; Temple Gate, 62 
 
 - Nunnery: St. Mary 
 
 Magdalen. 60 
 
 - Priory: St. James, or, 
 
 the Benedictines ... 27-29, 554 
 
 -Sects .411 
 
 Richard of Cirencester . 7 
 
 Ringers, Society of, St. 
 
 Stephen’s . 264-265 
 
 Riots: in 1709, 617; in 1714, 422-438; 
 in 1749, 438; in 1753, 438-442; in 
 1793, 442-451; in 1831, 451-467, 618 
 Rivers: Avon, 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 11, 
 12, 17, 18; Froorn, 11, 12, 13, 17; 
 
 Severn, 7 
 
 Roman Camps, Roads, 
 
 &c . 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9 
 
 Roman Coins . 4, 7 
 
 Rownham Hill . 1, 2, 3, 7 
 
 Royal Fort . 167, 392 
 
 Sariconium . 7 
 
 Schools and other Educational Esta¬ 
 
 blishments: — 
 
 St. Andrew’s, Montpelier ... 379 
 
 Asylum for the Blind . 172 
 
 Baptist College .384 
 
 Benevolent, St. James’ Barton 194 
 
 Bishop’s College .172 
 
 British, Maudlin Street.173 
 
 - Redcross Street .206 
 
 Cathedral . 141 
 
 City Grammar. 159-162 
 
 Colston’s Hospital . 165-166 
 
 -, Temple Street... 307-308 
 
 Deaf and Dumb Institution ... 173 
 Elbridge’s, Fort Lane ... 173-195 
 Friends’, Merchant Street 51-52, 383 
 
 Hannah More’s.209 
 
 St. Mary Redcliffe National ... 371 
 St. Michael’s National and 
 
 Infant .173 
 
 Sts. Nicholas and Leonard ... 281 
 Orphan Asylum, Hook’s Mills 384 
 
 - Houses, Ashley 
 
 Down . 571-573 
 
 St. Peter’s National.214 
 
 Pyle Street, St. Mary Redcliffe 371 
 Queen Elizabeth’s Hospital 162-164 
 
 Red Lodge Reformatory.166 
 
 -Maids’ Hospital ... 164-165 
 
 Roman Catholic, Dighton Street 185 
 
 Tabernacle, Penn Street.384 
 
 Temple Street (Colston’s) 307-308 
 
 Temple, Infant.308 
 
 Trade and Mining .250 
 
 Unitarian, Stokes’ Croft.384 
 
 Wesleyan, Back Fields.384 
 
 Sea Mills . 7, 8, 9 
 
 Sepulchral Memorials in the 
 
 Cathedral, Number of . 140 
 
 Shambles, or Flesh Market (The) 229 
 Shipbuilding, Great Western, 
 
 &c..419, 614 
 
 Slave Trade in Bristol ... 26-27 
 
 Society of Friends. See Quakers. 
 
 -Merchant Venturers 265-266 
 
 -St. Stephen’s Ringers 264-265 
 
 Squares: King’s, 199; Queen’s, 280-281; 
 Portland, 376. 
 
 Spicer’s, or Back Hall. 277-278 
 
 Streets, New: Queen, 175; Rupert,174; 
 see also 199, 228, 229, 281; pitched 
 and paved, 176, 234 
 Storm in 1703 (The Great) ... 97, 583 
 Subterranean Passages 44, 45, 227 
 
 Sugar Refineries. 419, 608-611 
 
 Taverns. See Inns 
 
 Tailors, Merchant, Society of 194, 242 
 
 Theatres . 279, 289 
 
 Thornborough, Bishop, his Dispute 
 with the Corporation ... 561-562 
 Tolzey (The) . 292-293 
 
INDEX. 
 
 XV1U. 
 
 Tombs, U nkn own, 145, 216, 230, 248, 
 249, 257, 258,304, 339, 343, 352, 353 
 
 Town Clerks . 24, 473 
 
 Trade and Commerce ... 25, 418, 419 
 
 Trajectus of Antonine (The) ... 7, 8 
 Treachery of Yeomans and 
 
 Boucher . 400-403 
 
 Trench (The) . 12, 551 
 
 Tyndale’s New Testament ... 596-598 
 -Park . 167 
 
 Venta Bulgarmn of Ptolemy ... 6 
 
 Viell’s Tower. 12 
 
 Virgin Tower Lane .267 
 
 Water Works .419, 594 
 
 Well of St. Edith (The) .225 
 
 Whitson’s, Alderman, Chapel ... 280 
 
 Yeoman and Boucher’s Plot, 
 
 &c., 400-403 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 BRISTOL, a city and county in itself, is situated on the south side 
 of the channel which is called by its name, and is surrounded by the 
 counties of Gloucester and Somerset,—modern Bristol standing 
 principally in that of the former. Primarily it was of British formation, 
 the whole of the West of England being, in early times, a territory or 
 district belonging to the Cambro-British people; and it is highly 
 probable that on the summit of St. Vincent’s rocks, and on the opposite 
 hill at Rownham, as well as lower down the river Avon, some relics of 
 the fortified camps of that ancient people still exist, though subsequently 
 adopted by the Romans: if so, at each of the places indicated above, 
 would be raised a fortified out-post—Caer Odre, the Welsh name of 
 Bristol, expressly denoting the border or frontier fortress, or fortified 
 'placed' 
 
 Although contending that Bristol originated on the hill at Clifton, 
 the author of the “Memoirs of Bristol,” as if to prove it, t quotes the 
 Cambro-British name of Bristol —Caer Odre, with the addition of nant 
 Baddon, which shews that it was, in reality, situated in a valley—nant 
 Baddon meaning the vale of Bath. The word Baddon was probably the 
 ancient name of the river Avon, which flows between the Clifton and 
 Rownham rocks; for Afon, in Cambro-British, merely denotes a river 
 in general—this word not being used at any time to specify any 
 particular river by name. It is probable, also, that the city of Bath 
 
 * “Urbs, Caer Briton, Bristol, sive Bristold, Britannis dicta est Odera, vel 
 Caer Oder, sive Civitas Limitis." Baxter’s Glossary in Voce. See also Gale. 
 
 t Scyer, vol. i., p. 58. 
 
 B 
 
2 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 was so called from tliis stream (the Bathon or Avon which runs 
 through it), for in the time of the Anglo-Normans it was designated 
 Bathon (as Baddon is pronounced) by several writers of that era, 
 which was subsequently contracted into Bath ; by which name, Henry 
 of Huntingdon, who wrote in the reign of Henry II., has mentioned 
 that city. 
 
 Tradition ascribes the construction of a military post at an early 
 period, on the spot where, subsequently, an Anglo-Norman castle was 
 erected by Robert, Earl of Gloucester; and that for the purpose of 
 effecting a communication between the two counties already mentioned, 
 a ford or passage was established, crossing the stream at what is now 
 the termination of High Street towards the bridge. This military post 
 we are told, too, was raised by Brynne or Bren (Latinized into 
 Brennus), who, with his brother Beli (a name evidently derived from 
 the Bel or Baal of antiquity), better known as Belinus, succeeded 
 their father, Dyfnwal Moelmyd, in his kingdom. “These are the same 
 brothers who are said, in all the chronicles, to have crossed over to the 
 Continent, and led an army of Britons and Gauls into Italy, and to 
 have taken and burnt Rome in the year B.C. 391; which nearly ascertains 
 the time when, according to these chronicles, Bristol was founded;” * 
 for then was established (say these doubtful authorities), the ancient 
 town, with the prefix of Caer, which denotes a city or a, fortress-, thus 
 forming Caer-Bwr-ryd, partially Latinized into Caer-Brito by monkish 
 writers of subsequent times. To the founders thus settled it would 
 naturally be of prime importance that roads of communication should 
 be formed between different parts of their territories, in order to 
 facilitate their intercourse with each other; hence the origin of the 
 Bristol, and also the Clifton and Rownham-hill fortified posts, 
 established to command the fords at those places, is ascertained, if the 
 above remarks are based upon truth; and a clue is thereby afforded to 
 the probable ancient names of the Clifton and the Rownham-hill 
 fortresses, yet surviving with slight corruptions—the former in the 
 modern appellation of the neighbouring Down, and the latter in that 
 of the fortified post itself. 
 
 Air. Barrett, who appears to have considered the Roman military 
 station, termed by Antonine, ABONE, to have designated, collectively, 
 
 Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. i., p. 55. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL 
 
 3 
 
 the camps or posts at Clifton and Eownham Hills, together with all 
 others in the neiglibouihood, or on the banks of the Avon, has 
 conjectured that the name Caer-Brito denoted “the British City',' by 
 way of distinction from the Roman military settlements just named; 
 but all persons conversant with the Latin tongue know very well that 
 the word Brito will by no means bear the construction of Bristol. 
 Mr. Barrett, seems, moreover, to have lost sight of the fact, that the 
 fortified posts at Clifton and on the opposite hills were, in their 
 original formation and establishment, Cambro-British, and not Roman; 
 although the latter power subsequently occupied them. In fine, 
 neither Barrett nor Seyer appear to have had any reasonable conception 
 as to the probable cause of the primary establishment of these fortified 
 posts; or, indeed, to have considered the subject as deserving inquiry; 
 they have both, in fact, done little towards elucidating the history of 
 Bristol during the early ages. 
 
 It is not possible to determine when the fortified camp on Clifton- 
 hill was first known by the name of Caer-Odre, but it must have been 
 several centuries before the Christian era. To this hill-fortress at 
 Clifton, Mr. Seyer attributes the origin of Bristol; yet in doing so, he 
 expressly contradicts the testimony of the Cambro-British authorities 
 adduced by himself in support of this opinion; as it must necessarily 
 follow, that the words Caer Odre I' Rant (or the border fortress in the 
 valley), either with or without the addition of Baddon, can never, by 
 possibility, have been applicable to a place- situated on the summit of a 
 lofty hill, as Clifton is."' On the very same page, that writer asserts 
 that “ Caer-Odre, the city of the chasm, (was) translated, by the Saxons, 
 into Clifton, that is, the Cliff-town.” It should be observed here, that 
 in the language of that people, the termination ton denotes, in one 
 sense, a toivn or place of residence; and in another, a fence, enclosure, or 
 fortified or protected place. There being, accordingly, no reasonable 
 cause for the presumption that such was any other than a fortified post 
 or station at the period of the Saxon conquest of Britain, it follows, 
 that the literal meaning of the word Clifton must necessarily be, the 
 rock enclosure or fortification. “Thus was founded,” says Mr. Seyer, “a 
 British town on Clifton Hill; the original settlement from which Bristol 
 was derived ;”+ and which he ascribes to Dyfnwall Moelmyd, or one of 
 
 Memoirs of Bristol, vol. i., p. 58. 
 t Ibid, p. 25S. 
 
4 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 liis sons: yet lie subsequently (at p. 59), on ground comparatively 
 sligi wholly contradicts this statement, and pronounces the old town 
 to be of Homan origin; and this opinion lie deliberately repeats in his 
 summary at +he close of liis second chapter. 
 
 But Mr. r has another hypothesis upon this subject, which is, 
 that the founding of Bristol is connected with the establishment of 
 Christianity in Britain. With regard to the previous opinions noticed, 
 it may be briefly remarked, in reply, that the discovery in Bristol of 
 Homan remains, affords no ground whatever for concluding that it was, 
 therefore, founded by that people; it being an established fact, that the 
 town, whatever may have been its character, and wherever seated, was 
 in possession of the Romans during their occupation of Britain; and the 
 sure inference drawn by Mr. Seyer, that the original founders of Bristol 
 were Christians, from his supposing that the corners of the four central 
 streets (surrounding the High Cross), were once occupied by as many 
 churches, and these, as he believed, coeval with these four streets, is 
 about as good in truth; for there never was this number of churches in 
 the position indicated, as we shall see. In the plan of old Bristol, by 
 Robert Ricaut, Town Clerk in the fifteenth century, one of these 
 structures only appear centrally situated, which from its position is 
 evidently that of St. Ewen. 
 
 The origin of primitive Bristol was not then, I conceive, on the 
 summit of Clifton rock, where stood the British camp or fortification; 
 but rather at its base, where it was protected by the fortification which 
 towered above it. Here was situated the “city of the chasm,”—a 
 name derived from the opening formed between the rocks on either 
 hand, at a very remote period of the world’s history. Mr. Seyer is, I 
 think, very inaccurate when he says that “Clifton camp is unquestion¬ 
 ably the immediate parent of Bristol, the Caeroder: because it lies on 
 the same side of the river, and because from it we can still trace the 
 regular progress of population; first, down the hill, by means of Roman 
 coins there dug up; and then by the old houses on the river side; till 
 the expansion of the valley brought the settlers to the site of modern 
 Bristol.”'' 4 ' The progress of the old town was rather, I imagine, from 
 the “city of the chasm” than from the heights of Clifton, and this, 
 too, at a period long prior to the arrival of the Romans in this island, 
 
 Memoirs of Bristol, vol. i., p. GG. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 5 
 
 although Camden rather favours the opinion that it arose no earlier 
 than the decline of the Saxon Government; probably meaning that it 
 did not attain any Importance before that period; and Mr. Barrett 
 laments that “some writers will not allow us to boast of its antiquity, 
 through prejudice or too superficial enquiry.” * / venture, however, to 
 
 hazard an opinion that it may “justly lay claim to a very early origin.” 
 
 The growth of the town of Bristol was evidently very gradual. If 
 we inquire by whom it was founded, tradition assures us (as we have 
 seen) that it was Brennus and Belinus who commenced it; but if we 
 soberly investigate the subject, we shall find, that to no particular 
 individuals or people is that honour due, unless it be to the ancient 
 Britons. If Camden regards this event as occurring so late as the 
 time of the Saxons, it is because, as he seems to think, of the want of 
 positive evidence that it was not founded at an earlier period. Our 
 historians, in centuries that are past, are generally silent about such 
 matters, and no marvel, since they were monks, and cared little about 
 recording things that did not, in some way or other, concern the 
 Church ; but consult their writings about some silly legend, and you 
 find every particular relating to it elaborately detailed. Bristol was 
 neither the seat of royalty, the see of a bishop, the site of an abbey,t 
 nor a place of congress or of council. Of it, in those early times, 
 nothing memorable has been recorded; and in it nothing remarkable 
 had then occurred; and whilst sanguinary strife had raged around it, 
 no warlike encounter is chronicled in which Bristol was at all concerned. 
 Yet it is clear, from the fact that it is enumerated by Nennius, who was 
 abbot of Bangor in G30, as among ancient British cities then existing, 
 that it must have been somewhat notable at the era in which he 
 flourished; and we may be sure, as intimated above, that it did not 
 attain such importance but by progressive steps, and not until, 
 probably, ages had passed over it. 
 
 A little before the time of Nennuis, the name of the town seems to 
 have been changed from Caer Odre to Caer Brito, for it is so designated 
 by that writer in his catalogue of British towns. Mr. Barrett says, % 
 
 * History of Bristol, p. 2. 
 
 t The earliest foundation of this kind in Bristol, is that of St. James’s 
 Priory, in the twelfth century. 
 
 X History of Bristol, p. 6. 
 
6 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 that “it may have received the name of Caer Brito, the British city, 
 separated as it was from, and so called in distinction to, the Roman 
 city or station, Abone, near it: Brit , in the old British, signifying 
 separated ; and Britain, the separated place or isle.” In this opinion 
 Dr. Borlase seems to agree, for he says, * “ It were rational to believe 
 that the word rather signified some circumstance relating to natural 
 situation, than to any thing so variable as custom or manner.” Dr. 
 Whittaker thinks t that it applied to the inhabitants rather than to the 
 region; and therefore could not have signified, as Mr. Barrett further 
 says, “the painted or embellished city.” 
 
 The last of the ancient names by which Bristol seems to have been 
 known, is the Venta Belgarum of Ptolemy—a name which has been 
 adopted or applied to it by most, if not all, our English antiquaries up 
 to the time of Camden; who, however, says, J “they who have 
 affirmed it (Bristol) to be the Venta Belgarum, have imposed both 
 upon themselves and the world: ” and this statement is made without 
 giving a single proof in corroboration of it! Ptolemy’s own words are,§ 
 “Dobunis vero subjacent Belgae et urbs Ischalis, Aquae calide, Venta;” 
 that is, “under the Dobuni lie the Belgae, and the cities Ilchester, 
 Bath, and Venta,” or Bristol, as commonly interpreted. Leland, who 
 so regards it, says, || that “ Venta was formerly that city which the 
 Saxons afterwards called Brightstowe” (Bristol); and “ Venta Belgarum, 
 in the beginning, was not large; it was augmented by the Saxons. 
 Afterwards Redcliffe, situated on the left bank of the Avon, was united 
 to it by a bridge, and encompassed with a strong wall, by the father of 
 the great Robert, Earl of Gloucester, at the time he was set over that 
 province, and made governor of its capital.” Camden says, that 
 Winchester was the Venta of Ptolemy, and he has been followed, 
 without examination, by several modern writers; without, as before 
 remarked, adducing a single proof in its favour. It does not answer 
 to one of the requirements which the old antiquary states as necessary 
 to make it so; for it is not seated under the Dobuni, but many miles 
 away from any part of the country inhabited by that people, as well a3 
 from the cities mentioned in connection with it. 
 
 * History of Cornwall, vol. i. + History of Manchester, p. 11. 
 
 t Britannia, vuL i., p. 94. § Lib. ii., tab. ii., Euro. fol. 15. 
 
 11 Cygneam Cantionem. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 The testimony of Ptolemy to the antiquity of Bristol is important, 
 for it shows that it was a capital city of the Belgae when he wrote, as 
 early as the year of Christ 120; and as it must have taken a long 
 period to have arrived at that distinction, the probability is, that it was 
 founded long before even the age of Brennus and Belinus; because 
 Nennuis is spoken of as only the translator of an ancient history , written 
 in the old British language, by another person of the same name, wdio 
 lived eighty years before the Christian era. Mr. Barrett need not then 
 have been particularly uneasy because some persons might not admit 
 the great antiquity of Bristol, of which he could have easily satisfied 
 himself and his readers, if he had exercised a little patience in the 
 inquiry; and had Mr. Seyer done the same, he might not so readily 
 have adopted Camden’s opinion, expressed without proof. 
 
 Bristol, then, appears to be of greater antiquity than we have been 
 hitherto led to suppose; and we have seen that, in all probability, the 
 fortifications at Rownham and Clifton .hills were primarily the work of 
 the Ancient Britons; but as they were subsequently occupied by the 
 Romans, their construction is ascribed to that people, who, it is known, 
 possessed others on the banks of the Avon and of the Severn. In the 
 Itinerary of Richard, of Cirencester, mention is made of the Roman 
 stations, “Ad Abonam,” Billon ; “Ad Sabrinam,” Sea Mills 4 , and “Statio 
 Trajectus,” Severn Side: “Aquae Sulis,” Bath ; “Sariconium,” Berry 
 Hill 4 , and “Ad Antonam,” on the Avon. All these stations were, as 
 the term implies, fixed camps, and were used for the permanent 
 quartering of detachments of the Roman forces. Most of those just 
 mentioned were peculiarly appropriated to troops only, and were 
 entirely distinct in character from those near which was situated the 
 Roman town: of which it is probable that Aquae Sulis was the only 
 example amongst those I have named; unless we suppose that Ad 
 Antonam, from its situation on the Avon, was the city of the chasm, 
 beneath the rocks at Clifton: if so, the Roman, as well as the British, 
 origin of Bristol, was at that place; the town on the margin of the 
 river, and in the immediate vicinity of the fortress above it, having 
 been gradually formed by buildings raised for the purpose of traffic and 
 residence, as well as for security. 
 
 The camps or fortifications of the Britons were generally irregular in 
 shape, which the more scientific Romans preserved when they took 
 
8 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 possession of them. The fact of the latter people occupying the 
 fortresses of the Britons, “is abundantly shewn by the British names of 
 the stations in the Roman Itineraries; nearly three-fourths of the 
 stations bearing British names, and thereby evincing themselves to be 
 erected upon the site of British fortresses. The latter were generally 
 planted upon such ground as an intimate knowledge of the country 
 recommended; and such, therefore, as the policy of the Romans could 
 approve.”* The camps originally formed by the Romans themselves 
 were almost invariably square or oblong; the angles being sometimes 
 rounded off to accommodate them to the position in which they are 
 found. Such was that at the Sea Mills, which, according to Mr. Seyer,f 
 is the station Abone of the Romans; and that, also, at Clifton, is square 
 within the ditch or embankment, which followed the outline of the hill. 
 The same writer places the Trajectus of Antonine at Bristol, and he 
 remarks that “the existence of a ferry at or near the place where 
 Bristol Bridge now stands, is a certainty; and nothing is more probable 
 than that the houses were so far multiplied when Antonine’s Itinerary 
 was made, that the Trajectus was a small town by the river side, 
 containing only High Street and the narrow streets on each side of it, 
 but of sufficient note to obtain a place in a military route;” X that is on 
 the Roman road between Bath and Caerleon. This road, Mr. Seyer 
 thinks, was constructed on the north side of the river Avon, “in a 
 tolerably straight course from Bath, about ten miles, as far as St. 
 George’s Church;” and he says that “seventy or eighty years ago 
 there was a causeway all through the parish of Hanham, which the old 
 inhabitants then called the Roman road; and (he adds) certainly they 
 called it right.” He subsequently observes, that from St. George’s 
 Church it continued on to Bristol, “and passed in a straight line 
 through Castle Street, St. Peter Street, and St. Mary-le-port Street, 
 into the middle of the station in High Street. From thence (he 
 supposes) it went down Broad Street, and having ascended through 
 Host Street, up St. Michael’s Hill, passed by the Gallows, and went 
 down Redland Lane, until it came to the short lane leading up to 
 
 * Whittaker, Hist, of Mane., vol. i., p. 114. 
 
 + Memoirs of Bristol, vol. i., p. 141. 
 
 J Memoirs of Bristol, vol. i., p. 144. The situation of the Trajectus has 
 been much disputed, and is not likely ever to be accurately determined. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 9 
 
 Durdham Down;” it then, as he shows, went on to the adjacent camps 
 at Clifton and Sea Mills, at both of which places the remains of Roman 
 camps are still considerable, and where, also, numerous other relics of 
 the occupancy of that people have been discovered in coins and the 
 foundations of buildings, some portions of the latter of which are said 
 to be older than the Roman period, and are, therefore, to be ascribed to 
 the Britons; Mr. Seyer believing it probable, with myself, that the 
 Romans availed themselves of the erections of the aboriginal inhabitants, 
 and “used the old British stations, with which the country abounded.” 
 
 The writer just named, having already ascribed to it (Bristol) a 
 Roman origin, says, “The era of the foundation of Bristol is connected 
 with that of (as before stated) the establishment of Christianity in this 
 Island;” which, he subsequently remarks, was introduced by “some 
 one or more of the twelve Apostles.”* Some say that Joseph, of 
 Arimathea, was the favoured individual who first preached the Gospel 
 in Britain, and that at Glastonbury he erected the first Christian 
 Church that was raised in this Island; but the authors of such tales 
 were monies, and their testimony is to be regarded with suspicion. 
 They make Arviragus, a British king, Joseph’s patron, who, we are 
 told, presented him with twelve hides of land, whereon to build his 
 church; it is, however, rather unfortunate for these writers that the word 
 hide, as applied to land, at least, was not heard of for hundreds of years 
 afterwards. Moreover, Joseph died in the reign of the emperor 
 Caligula, who assumed the imperial purple A.D. 37; whilst Arviragus 
 flourished in that of Domitian, which did not commence until forty 
 years subsequent to it! Other monkish writers, equally veracious, 
 assert that Lucius was the first Christian king of Britain, and that in 
 his reign, previous to his so-called conversion, Christianity was introduced 
 into the island; yet they express upwards of twenty different opinions 
 as to the time when this event took place, and covering a period of 
 from fifty to ninety years subsequent to the era of Arviragus! They 
 make King Lucius, too, the writer of a letter to Pope Eleutherius, at a 
 time when Lucius was not a king in Britain, nor Eleutherius Pope of 
 Rome; in fact, when no such titled head of the Church had existence, 
 the letter itself, also, in its incorrect dates, as well as in the use of 
 words then not known, bearing evidence of its being concocted many 
 
 Memoirs of Bristol, vol. i., p, 210. 
 
10 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 centuries afterwards! * Lastly, on this point: whilst in their zeal for 
 the antiquity of their Church, these same writers, in one place, make 
 Lucius the first Christian king of Britain, they as easily, when it suits 
 their purpose, rob him, in another place, of that honour, by forging a 
 medal, having impressed on it the representation of a crowned head, 
 with a cross and a siring of heads or pearls, which they, in their case, 
 insist are the effigies of Arviragos, a much earlier kingly professor of 
 the Christian faith. 
 
 In another place, Mr. Beyer says that the zeal of “the Christian 
 founders of Bristol induced them to erect a singularly large number of 
 religious edifices, in proportion to the size of their new town; and 
 having the support of a Christian government, they ostentatiously 
 placed them in the best and most conspicuous situations. Nothing of 
 this (he continues) could have been done until the Government became 
 Christian, which may be dated from the edict of Constantine in 312;” 
 and he finishes this imaginary picture of Old Bristol at the early period 
 referred to, by stating, that “in the reign of Constantine the Great the 
 Homan Government thought fit to surround with a wall and gates the 
 area now occupied by High Street, Broad Street, Corn Street, Wine 
 Street; which then became a town,” Ac.; f if so, it must have been a 
 town of some importance, or it would not have been so environed : yet 
 his subsequent remarks are singularly contradictory, for he says, that 
 “in the reign of Athelstan, Bristol must have been a town of little 
 notoriety, (for) in this reign we have the first historical proof of its 
 actual existence.” % 
 
 Bristol is several times mentioned during the Anglo-Saxon period, 
 but with rare exceptions the authorities quoted are mostly of a 
 suspicious or interested character. It is clear that both Barrett and 
 Seyer were anxious to establish the fact of its great antiquity, but they 
 rested too much on fictitious documents and monkish writers, to 
 succeed in the attempt. Without sufficiently comparing these so as to 
 detect their errors and mis-statements, they have failed to present us 
 
 * “ With evident marks of imposture,”—Camden’s Britannia, vol. i., p. 77. 
 “ It is very hard to believe the monkish traditions concerning King Lucius,”— 
 Bp. Stillingfleet’s Origines Brittannicoe, p. G3. All that is related of this 
 monarch rests upon the testimony of these writers, which more modern Catholic 
 authors, such as Baronius and Bale have endorsed, but with little consistency. 
 
 t Memoirs of Bristol, vol. i., p. 214. + Ibid., p. 243. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 11 
 
 with a fair and satisfactory history of that era; hence their account of 
 Bristol in the time of the Anglo-Saxons is a mass of fable, conjecture, 
 and hypothesis. Even Leland’s testimony is so brief, that of the town 
 itself we learn nothing—a notice of a few coins struck at Bristol during 
 this period being the chief evidence of the existence of the town at all. 
 With such an amount of incertitude before us, therefore, it were useless 
 further to dispute to whom the old town was indebted for its existence, 
 as it is not likely, at this distance of time, that success will follow more 
 extended enquiries. 
 
 It will be admitted, that whoever were the founders of Bristol, its 
 situation was well chosen between the rivers Avon and the Froorn, by 
 which streams it is environed on three sides—the fourth, laying 
 eastward, being open to the country. Towards these rivers the ground 
 everywhere slopes; thus adding to its salubrity by allowing the refuse, 
 which would otherwise accumulate, to be washed from its streets into 
 the tide by every descending shower of rain. Its foundation completed, 
 it remained to lay out streets, and encircle them with walls. These 
 walls followed the margin of the rivers just named, on the south, west, 
 and north sides; the castle being subsequently built between them. A 
 second wall commenced at Froom or Watergate, situated at the end of 
 Christmas Street, and extended to Pitliay Gate—thence to Newgate 
 and the Castle. The town was thus defended on this side by two walls. 
 When the first wall was built is by no means clear; but it certainly 
 was constructed before the Norman Conquest. 
 
 The inner wall, with its gates thus erected and embattled, inclosed a 
 space not exceeding a mile in circumference; and its course from 
 St. Nicholas’ Gate, which stood across the bottom of High Street, was 
 by the north side of the church, which was built upon it; thence along 
 St. Nicholas’ Street, on the left hand of the pedestrian, across Corn 
 Street, where was erected St. Leonard’s Gate and Church, through 
 St. Leonard’s Lane, to the bottom of Small Street, where stood St. 
 Giles’s Gate and Chapel over it; onward through Bell Lane, Tower 
 Lane, the Pithay, and the back of Wine Street, on the north side, to 
 Defence Lane (now Dolphin Street), Narrow Wine Street and Chequer 
 Lane, to St. Peter’s Church; thence nearly parallel to the river Avon, 
 it followed the south side of a narrow lane called the Shambles, on part 
 of which Bridge Street now stands, and thence continued to the bottom 
 
1 2 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 of High Street, to St. Nicholas’ gate, from whence we started; having 
 made the circuit of the walls of the ancient town of Brightstowe, the 
 name by which it was known in the time of the Anglo-Saxons. 
 
 The second, or outer wall, as already stated, commenced on the banks 
 of the Froom, from the gate of that name, north of St. John’s gate ; 
 and extended to Aylward’s gate at the bottom of the Pithay, across the 
 centre of what is now Union Street, which was formed in 1775; to the 
 back of Narrow Wine Street, thence to Newgate, which stood at its 
 eastern extremity, to the Castle. This appears to have been the extent 
 of the town walls at the close of the Anglo-Saxon era, but subsequent 
 to the Norman Conquest they were not only greatly strengthened, but 
 when in the year 1247 the trench was dug for the purpose of diverting 
 the course of the river Froom, the present quay was formed for mooring 
 and unlading vessels, the second or exterior wall was extended from 
 Froom gate, westward to the bottom of Clare Street, then not built. 
 At this spot was a tower, called the Great or Viell’s tower, which stood 
 directly opposite the present Drawbridge. From Viell’s tower the wall 
 continued to a gate at the southern extremity of Marsh Street, the 
 lower portion of which, with a groove for a portcullis, was discovered 
 when new culverts were constructed in 1849, for the purpose of carrying 
 off the refuse soil in that locality; the ground around having been raised 
 many feet above its original level, by depositing the earth derived from 
 various excavations in the city, particularly that of the trench just 
 mentioned. From Marsh Street the wall was carried along King Street, 
 to a gate at the bottom of Back Street, near which it terminated at the 
 Welsh Back, on the river Avon. Soon after the year 1247,-the parishes 
 of St. Mary Redcliffe, St. Thomas and Temple, on the Somersetshire 
 side of the Avon, were encircled with walls and gates; and from that 
 time the parts so enclosed on both sides the river, were incorporated 
 under the general name of Bristol.* 
 
 * It is not known with certainty that any portion of the old walls are now 
 in existence, although it is not improbable that fragments of them may be 
 referred to with some degree of confidence, immediately contiguous to the 
 gates of the old town still remaining; as, for instance, when in May and June, 
 1857, on removing the ancient houses on the south side of St. Nicholas Street, 
 an outlet to the river, which formerly ran through Baldwin Street below, was 
 discovered ; and there can be no doubt whatever that this doorway was made 
 in the old town wall. On the Somersetshire side, however, the wall has totally 
 disappeared ; a part of it, formerly standing on the south side of Freshford Lane, 
 not far from Redcliffe Back, having been removed in 1858, to make that 
 thoroughfare wider for the accommodation of an increased traffic in the 
 neighbourhood. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 13 
 
 When the old walls were built, the river Froom (before the quay was 
 constructed), flowed from Baptist Mills, on three sides of the Castle, 
 into the Avon ; but the main stream pursued its course along the Weir 
 to the Pithay, thence to Froom gate, Christmas Street, on to St. Giles’s 
 gate at the bottom of Small Street, the foot of which it washed. It 
 then proceeded through St. Stephen’s Street, (at that time the Fish 
 Market), into Baldwin Street, both of which thoroughfares then formed 
 its channel, and along the bed of which it flowed freely; driving, in the 
 latter Street, Baldwin’s Cross Mill (near St. Nicholas steps), for the use 
 of the townsmen; and ultimately discharging itself into the Avon near 
 the church of St. Nicholas. When the course of the Froom was turned 
 by the formation of the Quay, Baldwin and St. Stephen Streets were 
 filled up, and the present permanent carriage ways were formed. Such 
 was the circumference of Old Bristol on the Gloucestershire side of the 
 Avon; that on the Somersetshire side of the same river was then 
 reached by means of a ferry. 
 
 Within the circuit of the walls and gates already described, the old 
 town of Bristol was laid out in four principal streets, which branched 
 off from the centre towards the cardinal points. These streets still bear 
 their original names, with the exception of Wine Street, which is a 
 corruption of Wynch Street, so called from its leading out of the town 
 to the Abbey of Wynchcombe, in Gloucestershire, where “ was the 
 beste town of the countrie.” Their appearance however is by no means 
 the same as in the early and middle ages, when the houses on either 
 side were crowned with picturesque gables, and the streets themselves 
 were unpaved. Before Bristol had extended its limits, and become a 
 large mercantile town, the houses of her people, low and scattered, were 
 in the Anglo-Saxon times, built of stone rough as from the quarry, and 
 upon which no workman’s tool had been used to square and trim it. 
 The roofs were of straw; and the windows, composed of thin pieces of 
 horn, or but scantily furnished with glass, shed a dim light into the 
 apartments to which they belonged. The churches, too, were then of 
 a very rude and original character. No delicate arches supported 
 aspiring turrets; nor did the richly battlemented tower reflect dignity on 
 the newly founded town around it. Coarse, unwrought materials 
 composed the walls, which, with a lower arch of entrance and a wooden 
 steeple, made up the primitive temple of the worshipper in the time of 
 
14 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 the Anglo-Saxon. Where, too, in after years the unwieldy carrack, or 
 the highdecked galley of the proud Norman, held on its way, the osier 
 bound shallop ferried passengers across her waters ; whilst beyond the 
 embrace of waters and of walls, a wild uncultivated waste spread out 
 before the eye; where, in the almost primeval solitude of the wilderness, 
 animals wild and fierce dwelt in peaceful security; the red deer in 
 tameless freedom in the forest subsequently known as Kingswood’s 
 royal chase ; and there, too, the boar and the unyoked ox sought refuge 
 from the spear of the hunter. 
 
 The dwelling of the Anglo-Saxon thane or noble in these early times 
 was but a simple wooden hut, thatched with straw, reeds, or rushes, and 
 but little better than the out-liouses which serve to shelter cattle in the 
 homesteads of modern times. The interior arrangements merely 
 supplied one large apartment, which was adapted in the day-time to the 
 purposes of hospitality, and formed at night a sleeping room for the 
 servants—that of the master or lord of the mansion, a small room 
 adjoining, being scarcely superior. Similar, too, were the houses within 
 walled towns; and they so continued to be until the close of the Anglo- 
 Saxon period of our history. Nor does there appear to have been 
 much improvement in the habitations of the masses, even after the 
 Norman Conquest, until the new comers had securely established 
 themselves in the country, erected castles for its defence, and founded 
 religious institutions for the idle professors of monachism. Then, 
 indeed, the abode of royalty was raised with a view to grandeur as 
 well as utility, serving as a model to the noble, whose dwelling in its 
 turn became a pattern for the mansion of the merchant, and the 
 residence of the citizen. Thus was some degree of comfort realised by 
 all classes, although the domicile of the trader and the handicraftsman 
 was still built of wood, and thatched with straw, yet was it greatly 
 improved in external appearance, and the disposition of its internal 
 arrangements. 
 
 Although the majority of the houses erected even by the Anglo- 
 Normans were of wood, there can be no doubt that at an early period 
 of their sway over the vanquished Saxons, mansions of stone were 
 erected for the nobles, at least; yet we have no direct testimony that 
 such structures were then raised in walled towns. The “ great stone 
 house,’’ of Kobert Fitzharding in Baldwin Street, on the banks of the 
 
HISTORY OY BRISTOL. 
 
 15 
 
 river Froora, and then just outside the boundaries of old Bristol, 
 appears to have been regarded as a marvellous building at the time it 
 was erected, as we may infer from its designation, which evidently 
 implies that such structures were not then usual. But that stone 
 dwellings were built for the wealthy, and had even become somewhat 
 general in the reign of Stephen, we have sufficient evidence in various 
 documents still existing, in which agreements are specified at length ; 
 the height and thickness of the walls given, with gutters mentioned to 
 carry off the water into the street. The general height of the walls was 
 sixteen feet, and their thickness three feet; upon these a roof of tiles or 
 shingles was raised, which together formed a compact residence of one 
 storey high; or it may be the building was composed of two stories; 
 the elevation of the rooms being rather low, and somewhat confined 
 when so divided. Towards the close of the Anglo-Norman period, a few 
 structures still more imposing than these two-storied houses were 
 erected in the streets of some walled towns ; as we know, not only from 
 discoveries which have been made in various places, but also from 
 examples still existing, and which are believed to have been raised at 
 the time referred to. 
 
 With the accession to the throne of England of the Plantagenets, a 
 new era in domestic architecture commenced, and houses built of wood 
 became greatly more ornamented as the twelfth century drew to a close; 
 and at the beginning of that which followed, much taste and elegance 
 were displayed in the adorning the dwellings of the wealthy. Even 
 during the long reign of Henry III., which was clouded by sanguinary 
 civil contests, and unfavourable to the cultivation of many useful arts, 
 the taste for architectural embellishment continued to increase, and was 
 communicated to every class of society; so that mansions were erected 
 by the nobles on their manors, which in their arrangement closely 
 resembled the palace of the sovereign: being furnished with lofty halls, 
 a chapel, and apartments of considerable magnificence. These adjuncts 
 came to be considered ever afterwards throughout the middle .ages as 
 necessary appendages to every baronial or other domestic structure of 
 importance throughout the country. 
 
 Many improvements in domestic architecture were introduced during 
 the thirteenth century, and much embellishment was used both by the 
 carpenter and the painter; but the great era of such decorations was in 
 
16 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 that which succeeded. Then large barge boards, which previous to that 
 time had been but sparingly used on the abodes of the affluent, were 
 now raised in every instance on the gables of mansions. These were 
 richly carved and painted in various colours; and the fronts of the 
 houses of all ranks of persons began to be similarly ornamented. In 
 the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries Bristol was embellished with 
 “hygh tymbered houses” in great variety, and these were very 
 elaborately carved and ornamented.'”" Large stone mansions were also 
 more profusely erected than heretofore by our wealthy townsmen ; and 
 these, towards the close of the period just named, continued on the 
 increase, especially among rich merchants. The apartments in these 
 stone houses were constructed with a greater attention to the 
 requirements of an improving age, and gained much in accommodation 
 upon the narrow and confined limits which characterized the wooden 
 dwellings of an earlier era. Houses, both in town and country, had 
 glazed windows in the thirteenth century, but the price of this article 
 confined its use chiefly to the wealthy, to any extent. The principal 
 marts for this useful commodity were Flanders and Norway, both of 
 which countries were then in close alliance with England; and they 
 supplied it plentifully, and at what may appear at first sight a trifling 
 expense; that is to say, at threepence-halfpenny per square foot, which 
 included the cost of glazing, and was equal, in amount, to about four 
 shillings and fourpence, present currency. 
 
 In the fifteenth century, and much earlier, the principal streets of 
 Bristol were inhabited by merchants of note, beneath whose houses were 
 constructed large cellars, both arched and flat roofed, for the purpose of 
 depositing their heavy goods therein. Of the latter kind examples 
 remain under the houses numbered respectively 32, 33, and 34, on the 
 west side of High Street, and are the only relics of such apartments in 
 which timber is the chief material used in their construction. Here 
 massy lozenge-shaped pillars of solid oak, moulded after the fashion of 
 the time, and standing on plinths of stone, sustain large transverse 
 
 * There are very few examples left in Bristol of the timber houses referred 
 to; and these are chiefly confined to the old gabled structures in High Street, 
 on the west tide, where the upper stoiies overhanged those beneath them. Of 
 pierced barge boards those attached to the three most eastern gables at St. 
 Peter’s Hospital, and one over the end of St. Mary-le-Port Street, belonging to 
 the Swan Inn, are good examples of the period. Those at St. Peter’s Hospital, 
 attached to the gables of the main building, are of a later date, and much 
 inferior in beauty. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 IT 
 
 beams upon which rests the floor of the apartment above. On the east 
 side of the same street, under the houses numbered 22, 23, 24, and 25, 
 these ancient cellars are constructed with stone; the ribs or groins 
 which support the entire vaulting being composed of the same material. 
 
 The rivers Avon and Froom were crossed by several bridges at an 
 early date, but chiefly erected after the Norman Conquest, viz: —St. 
 Leonard’s Bridge, by which Corn Street was entered from the Marsh; 
 this must have been a drawbridge of wood beneath the gate of the same 
 name. St. Giles’s Bridge at the foot of Small Street is mentioned as 
 early as 1314; Froom Bridge at the end of Christmas Street, the 
 arches of which were exposed in 1858, on forming a new street named 
 Rupert Street, leading from St. Augustine’s Back to Lewin’s Mead; 
 Monken Bridge, so called, because by it the monks of the priory of 
 St. James’ gained access to the old town; * it was defended by gates 
 which were destroyed by rioters in 1831; next to this was Aylward’s 
 Bridge, at the bottom of the Pithay, which was then Aylward Street, 
 probably so named from Richard Aylward, who was mayor of Bristol 
 in 1247, when Bristol stone bridge was commenced. Near St. Peter’s 
 Church was a bridge which crossed the castle moat at the west end of 
 Castle Street, and at the east end of the same thoroughfare was another. 
 Close to Newgate, at the bottom of the hill, towards the Weir, was the 
 Mill Bridge, where also stood the castle mill. At the bottom of Queen 
 Street was another bridge, wdiich led to the king’s orchard. File 
 Bridge, said to have been so called after Elle or Ella, a powerful Saxon 
 chieftain (who is presumed to have been lord of Bristol castle in 920, 
 many years before it was built), stood, as Leland says, “harde by the 
 northe easte parte of the castle of Bristowe, (where) there brekythe an 
 arm out of Froom, a but shot above Were Bridge, and reuithe thrwthe 
 a stone brydge of one great arch, and there at Newgate, the other parte 
 of Froom rennige from Were Bridge cummithe under another stone 
 brydge, and serving the mill harde without Newgate, Methed, with the 
 other arm.” Over the Froom, also close by, was a bridge leading into 
 Marshall, now Merchant Street, by means of which the garrison in the 
 Castle marched to the neighbouring downs to exercise. 
 
 * This bridge, also, was built of wood, and constructed for foot passengers 
 only; in 17C5, however, a stone structure was erected in its stead, when its 
 name was changed to Bridewell Bridge. 
 
18 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 The Gloucestershire side of Bristol, of which as yet we have chiefly 
 spoken, formed, at one time, a manor belonging to the lords of the 
 honour of Gloucester; the Somersetshire side was then reached by 
 means of a ferry from the bottom of High Street, from whence it was 
 at length resolved to throw a bridge across the river Avon, and thus 
 unite the two counties. When the first bridge was erected on this spot 
 is uncertain, but Mr. Barrett says,* “that there was a wooden bridge 
 there before the year 1247, the year in which all the manuscripts he 
 had seen agree the stone bridge was erected, there is no sort of doubt;” 
 in proof of which he quotes a charter, said to be of Henry II., and 
 which he informs us is without date: yet at page G63 of his work, he 
 not only copies this document at length, but assigns the year 1173 as 
 that in which it was granted. He also records another, given by 
 Robert Fitzharding, which, however, like that of his royal master, is 
 without date. In both these writings, “the Marsh, near the bridge of 
 Bristow,” is distinctly mentioned; yet as neither of them are included 
 by Mr. Seyer amongst the accredited Charters of Bristol, which he 
 translated, it is to be feared that we must regard them as spurious, f 
 If there had been a bridge across the Avon before 1247, there would 
 surely have been some mention made of it, when it was’ about to be 
 succeeded by one composed of more durable materials; instead of which, 
 Mr. Barrett, at page 7 5, quoting a dubious manuscript, and therefore 
 unworthy of credit, refers to the erection of a bridge in 1247, in such a 
 way as to lead to the belief that there had not been one of any kind 
 across the river before, for he says—“1247. This year the mayor and 
 commonalty concluded to build a bridge over the river Avon, with the 
 consent of Redclifft and the governors of Temple fee.” Why “ conclude 
 to build a bridge” if there had been one there before? Would it not 
 rather be said, if one of wood was already existing, that the authorities 
 
 * History of Bristol, p. 73. 
 
 t In his “ Memoirs of Bristol,” vol. ii., p. 29, Mr. Seyer commences an 
 enquiry into this subject, which he continues through several pages; but as he 
 makes a great deal to rely upon a doubtful passage in William Wyrcestre—the 
 charters referred to—and certain vague statements made by Mr. Barrett, his 
 deductions are to me anything but satisfactory; and certainly do not “un¬ 
 deniably prove the existence of a wooden bridge before 1247.” He speaks of 
 the “positive evidence ” of William Wyrcestre, and yet immediately afterwards 
 questions its correctness, by saying, “ If it could be relied on with assurance, the 
 question would be determined. ” 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 19 
 
 “concluded to build a bridge” of stone in place of it ? But as if to show 
 that no such structure really stood upon this spot before the year 
 1247, the last-named document adds, “for they (the inhabitants of 
 Redcliffe, &c.) passed by bote (boat) from St. Thomas stepp, unto 
 St. Mary-le-Port to come to Brightstowe! ” 
 
 The bridge erected over the river Avon in 1247 was certainly of 
 stone, and consisted of four pointed arches of Early English character, 
 each supported by very large and wide piers. Upon it was a street of 
 houses, with a thoroughfare for passengers and vehicles in the centre. 
 Over this thoroughfare, and crossing the middle of the bridge, was a 
 chapel, which, says William Wyrcestre, was dedicated on the fourth day 
 of February, 13G1. Mr. Dallaway asserts* that it was “built by Elyas 
 Spelley, mayor in the reign of Edward III. ; ” but as the old local 
 topographer just mentioned simply states that the figures of Spelley and 
 other Bristol magnates, who were benefactors to the chapel, with those 
 of their wives, were represented in the windows of the building, without 
 saying a word about the founder of it, the truth of Mr. Dallaway’s 
 statement may justly be questioned. Mr. Barrett, on the contrary, 
 says,t that it “was erected and founded by Edward III. and his Queen 
 Philippa, and called the Chapel of the Assumption of the Blessed 
 Virgin Mary, as appears p. 85 of the great Red Book of Bristol;” but 
 that record merely mentions a license granted for the founding of a 
 perpetual chantry in the chapel, in which prayer was to be offered for 
 the king’s health : Barrett, therefore, is in error also. 
 
 The port of Bristol, as it existed in the middle ages, was confined 
 chiefly to that part of the river Avon which lay above the present 
 bridge. It was situated in the parish of “Our Lady her Assumption;” 
 for the old town was early laid out in parishes, probably b) r the Anglo- 
 Saxons themselves, and so they remain to this day. | 
 
 But the first important historical notice of Bristol is said to relate to 
 the year 10G3, when Harold sailed thence to invade Wales; and it is 
 upon this statement that Camden thinks the town was not built before 
 the decline of the Saxon dominion in this island. How far such an 
 opinion may be credited the reader will perhaps be able to judge from 
 the preceding pages: certain it is, that Bristol must have been of some 
 
 * Antiquities of Bristol, p. 73. 
 
 t History of Bristol, p. 78. Appendix 1. I Appendix II. 
 
 C 2 
 
20 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 importance even earlier, for a coin minted here by Canute is mentioned 
 in Ruding’s “Annals of the Coinage of Britain.” In Doomsday Book 
 we find that “Bristow, with Barton, an adjoining farm, paid to the king 
 one hundred and ten silver marks; and the Burgesses returned, that 
 Bishop G. * had thirty-three marks, and one of gold.” Bristol was 
 therefore a borough before the Norman Conquest; that is, under the 
 Saxons it was a town governed by its own magistrate, whose inhabitants 
 elected him because they were free burgesses,t having a right so to do. 
 This magistrate is called, in Doomsday Book, Prcepositus, and is 
 equivalent to that of mayor in modern times. Of these dignitaries, 
 Mr. Barrett says, that “ Harding, the ancestor of the Berkeley family, 
 (who) is said to have accompanied the Norman William into England, 
 is the first magistrate of Bristol we have any account of.” J 
 
 The Conquest of England by William, of Normandy, exercised over 
 every section of its history, for many succeeding generations, a beneficial 
 influence, whether regarded in its relation to the civil, military, or 
 religious operations of the people. It imparted a degree of politeness 
 to the upper classes, before unknown or contemned; and it infused 
 habits of thought and piety, to the growth of which, the sanguinary 
 commotions of former ages were peculiarly unfavourable. Throughout 
 the middle ages the people advanced, by degrees, from comparative 
 barbarism to civilization and intelligence; arts and science flourished in 
 the cloister, where it was chiefly confined and cultivated; whilst trade 
 and commerce created a class of merchant princes iu the land, whose 
 influence for good has extended to the present time. It was then that 
 Guilds and Fraternities of free burgesses were incorporated in all the 
 chief towns in the kingdom. The privileges enjoyed by these were the 
 right of buying and selling without being taxed, or made to pay toll 
 
 * Probably Geoffrey, Bishop of Coutanee, Constable of the Castle. 
 
 t A name derived from the Saxon Beorghan , to fence, keep in safety, &c., 
 the place in which they dwelt being a walled town, secured by lofty battlements 
 and entered only by well defended gates. The people dwelling in such a place, 
 however, were burgesses, whether living in a fortified town or not, provided it 
 was contained within limited boundaries, and claiming by prescriptive right to 
 choose its own magistrates for the purposes of justice, or its own governors for 
 the better regulation of its commerce, and subject to the protection of him to 
 whom the rents of the fee were annually paid, and certain dues and customs 
 were rendered. 
 
 J History of Bristol, p. 661. Appendix III. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 21 
 
 and other duties for such advantages; and for which privileges, and 
 many others of a similar character, the people were greatly indebted to 
 the wise policy of William the Conqueror. As time progressed, 
 however, the benefits thus enjoyed were almost wholly confined to the 
 Guilds and Fraternities of associated craftsmen , and did not extend, by 
 common right, to the inhabitants of a town at large; hence, these 
 societies had many favours granted them above their fellow townsmen. 
 
 The term burgess or burgher was, at an early period of our history, 
 synonymous with that of citizen, and seems to imply that such persons 
 were the freemen before described. During the Anglo-Saxon dominion 
 in Britain, and in the broad acceptation of the term, all the inhabitants 
 of a borough or town, enclosed within walls, whether male or female, 
 women or children, housekeepers or not, freemen or serfs, seem to have 
 had the term applied to them in general; but this only, when all aided 
 in the defence of the town when besieged. In its more limited sense, 
 or in the legal application of the phrase, it could only be used in 
 reference to the immediate tenants of the noble on whose lands the 
 town was situated, and under whose protection it gradually rose and 
 flourished—the licence and pleasure of such lords being paramount, and 
 their grant or permission necessary to the well-being of the community 
 dwelling within the town which had been thus established upon their 
 domain. Hence Mr. Seyer says, * “ I conclude that the original 
 burgesses of Bristol were the lord’s immediate tenants; and since by 
 gradual amelioration these burgess tenures are for the most part changed 
 into modern freeholds, it follows that the modern freeholders are the 
 genuine successors of the original burgesses; and that the modern 
 burgesses, who derive their right from inheritance, servitude, &c., are 
 such by innovation, although a very ancient one ; probably by special 
 grant from the Corporation, so generally conceded, that it came to be 
 demanded as a right.” The serf who remained a year and a day 
 within the privileged walls of a town according to ancient usage, and 
 thus cast off his yoke of thraldom, was by degrees not only emancipated, 
 but he became, in the strict sense of the word, a “freeman,” or as 
 such persons are now designated, a “free burgess.” 
 
 The secular Guilds or associated Fraternities of free burgesses, were 
 incorporated by royal authority, having a form of government 
 
 Memoirs of Bristol, vol. i., p. 509. 
 
22 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 peculiarly their own; subject, however, to certain restrictions enforced 
 by the State. They derived their name from the Saxon verb gildan , to 
 pay or contribute, and were akin to legal corporations. These voluntary 
 associations of craftsmen obtained by degrees various privileges which 
 they claimed for themselves in addition to those enjoyed by the free 
 inhabitants of a free borough; such as a right to possess property in 
 the towns or cities in which they resided, and a kind of internal elective 
 government which ultimately operated prejudicially, in that it gave 
 rise to a spirit of monopoly in traders organised under such exclusive 
 regulations. The ordinances by which every guild or trade was governed 
 were held inviolate during the several centuries in which they flourished; 
 and each guild had its own separate hall in which to meet for purposes 
 connected with the business of the fraternity. Unfortunately we 
 cannot now refer to an entire example of these structures remaining in 
 Bristol; portions only of some of them being all that is left standing : 
 these are relics of the Point Makers’ Hall, late the Adam and Eve 
 Tavern, Lewin’s Mead; the Weavers’ Hall, Temple Street; and an 
 apartment over the south side of the cloisters of the Dominican 
 Monastery at the back of Merchant Street, called the Bakers’ Hall; 
 the dormitory of which convent was once occupied by the Guild of 
 Cutlers, but certainly not until after the dissolution of the religious 
 house. 
 
 Amongst the inhabitants of Bristol during the early and middle ages, 
 there must have been a number of that interesting people the Jews, who 
 probably settled here as early as the reign of William the Conqueror. 
 By some writers that monarch is said to have introduced them into 
 England, but this is certainly a mistake, for we read of them in the 
 Canons of York, as early as the year A.D. 740, where their feasts are 
 distinctly spoken of. In A.D. 833, a charter was granted to the monks 
 of Croyland, in which the donations of Jews as well as those of Christians 
 are referred to ; for, to escape persecution, this injured people are known 
 to have given of their substance to institutions they did not approve: 
 again, in the reign of Edward the Confessor, “the Jews and all they 
 possessed (are said to) belong to the King;” and the same was laid 
 down as the law in the fourth year of the reign of William the 
 Conqueror. 
 
 The time of their settling in Bristol then is uncertain, but Jacob’s 
 Wells, a populous suburb, seems to point to the locality in which some 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 23 
 
 of them, at least, resided; whilst others were permitted, probably, to 
 dwell just without the walls of the town at a place now known as 
 Quay Street, but which went formerly by the name of the Old Jewry, 
 at the end of which next Small Street, says William Wyrcestre, was the 
 “Temple Judseorum,” or ancient Synagogue. Dallaway tells us* “this 
 room was in a vault beneath St. Giles’s Church, where the Jews 
 assembled to worship, previously to the reign of King John.” At 
 Jacob’s Wells are baths, which it is believed, by some persons, 
 originally belonged to that people; and close by is the “Jews Acre,” or 
 burial ground, where now stands Queen Elizabeth’s Hospital, on 
 digging the foundation for which, a few years ago, a number of grave¬ 
 stones were found, with inscriptions in Hebrew characters; they were, 
 however, thoughtlessly used in the building, and thus, probably, some 
 interesting discoveries in our local history were lost for ever to the 
 antiquary. Until the reign of William Rufus, the Jews were allowed 
 but one burial ground in all England, and this was in London, where, 
 says Stowt was “of old time (a spot) called the Jewes Garden, as 
 being the onely place appointed them in England, wherin to bury their 
 dead; (it was not) until the yeere 1177, the 24. of Henry the Second, 
 that it was permitted them, after long suit to the King and Parliament 
 at Oxford, to have a speciall place assigned them in every quarter 
 where they dwelled. This plot of ground remained to the said Jewes, 
 till the time of their finall banishment out of England.” Jewin Street, 
 in London, is said still to point to the locality of their burial ground, 
 as Old Jewry does to where they lived. So greatly were the Jews 
 persecuted, the same writer tells us, J that every one of them “had one 
 eye, at the least, plucked out” by King John, in the eleventh year of 
 his reign, “amongst whom was one of Bristol, which being tormented 
 many wayes, would not ransome himselfe, till the king had caused (every 
 day) one of his great teeth to be plucked out, by the space of seven 
 daies, and then he gave the king tenne thousand markes of silver, to 
 the end they should pull out no more.” § About four years afterwards 
 some of them being rather tardy in paying the sums of money demanded 
 of them by the same inhuman monarch, were imprisoned in Bristol 
 Castle. After many years of persecution inflicted on them for purposes 
 
 * Antiquities of Bristow, p. 137. + Survey of London, p. 318. 
 
 Ibid., p. 288. § Matthew Paris, History of English Affairs, p. 100. 
 
24 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 of extortion, the Jews were banished the kingdom in the eighteenth 
 year of the reign of Edward I., for ever. From that time until the 
 Commonwealth, nothing is known of that people in England; but we 
 are assured by Bishop Burnet, that their return to this country was 
 permitted by Oliver Cromwell, who himself brought a company of them 
 from the Continent, and allowed them to build a synagogue. 
 
 In the year 1216, shortly after his coronation, King Henry III. 
 enacted by charter, that Bristol should be governed by a mayor, to be 
 chosen in the same manner as was done in London, with two “grave, 
 sad, worshipful men,” who were called prepositors. It has been already 
 remarked that Harding, the Dane, according to Mr. Barrett, was the 
 first person who bore the title of prepositor, or mayor of Bristol; or to 
 use that writer’s own words, “ He is the first magistrate of Bristol we 
 have any account of, though it may be supposed he acted under the 
 authority of the governor of the castle, before whom the city officers 
 were to be allowed and sworn.” * Mr. Seyer says that such an officer 
 - or chief magistrate existed in the time of the Saxons, and that this 
 Harding was probably appointed in the reign of Edward the Confessor, 
 and other persons seem to have held the office before him. t To him 
 succeeded his son Robert Fitzliarding, who was appointed by Robert, 
 Earl of Gloucester, and the office of prepositor continued until the time 
 of Henry III., when, as above mentioned, the name was changed to that 
 of mayor, the selecting of whom then passing into the hands of the 
 burgesses, who were to choose from among themselves a chief magistrate 
 to be so called. 
 
 Besides the mayor, the officers of the city in the middle ages were—a 
 Recorder, whose name occurs in the eighteenth year of Edward III.; + 
 a Town Clerk first mentioned in 1463 ; a Chamberlain, which office 
 was first filled by the prepositors, or “ two grave, sad, worshipful men,” 
 elected with the Mayor, and after them by the seneschalls and bailiffs 
 successively, until the “ 20th Feb. 9th Edward 4th, when one (person) 
 only was instituted to the office, to whom it ^belonged by special 
 appointment to receive all rents and other profits of the city chamber,” 
 
 * History of Bristol, p. 661. + Memoirs of Bristol, vol. i., p. 274. 
 
 J In 1345 a code of municipal laws was drawn up by the Recorder, William 
 de Coleford, which the Corporation agreeing to, were confirmed by charter 
 granted by Edward III., who had already constituted Bristol a county in itself. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 25 
 
 &c., which office was more fully settled by charter in the reign of Henry 
 VII. A sheriff was created by Edward III, when the office was vested 
 in one person only, until by charter Henry VII. appointed two persons 
 to officiate. These officers, with the aldermen and common council, 
 constituted the body corporate of Bristol; which also sent two burgesses 
 to Parliament as early as the reign of Edward I., 1295. 
 
 The commerce of Bristol was considerable even at an early period of 
 its history. In the reign of Stephen it received merchandize from 
 foreign ports, when it was accounted a rich and flourishing town; many 
 of its merchants being eminent traders with other countries. To this 
 commercial prosperity a great addition was made in 1497, when 
 Sebastian Cabot* discovered Newfoundland. Before this, however, the 
 trade of the town and port was extensive with Genoa, Spain, France, 
 Flanders, and Norway. During the reigns that intervened between 
 that of Stephen and Edward III., wool, with grain and tin, formed the 
 chief articles of commerce. The first-mentioned of these was a great 
 staple commodity in the hands of English merchants; it was a source of 
 much profit to them, and they became a rich and powerful class, both in 
 and out of Parliament. So much was their influence felt by the titled 
 of the land, that at a meeting of the Great Council of the nation held at 
 Oxford, in 1261, they passed a law which prohibited the export of wool, 
 either raw or manufactured. Yet this unjust measure, with many other 
 enactments of a restrictive kind, either were not carried out, or entirely 
 failed to accomplish the end intended; and their burgher brethren rose 
 in importance as the free trade measures of Edward III. were adopted. 
 In this reign cloth workers from Flanders began first to settle in 
 England, and from that time the manufacture of cloth may be said to 
 have been established in this country. It is probable that to Edward’s 
 Queen may be ascribed the origin of so wise a measure, for the King 
 resolved, if possible, to bring the trade of Flanders, from whence she 
 came, to her adopted home, where only as yet the best cloths worn were 
 no better than friezes, which were coarse because the natives were not 
 skilful enough to make fine cloth.f This accomplished, English wool 
 
 * At page 92 of my “ Fact verms Fiction,” by the omission of “ it. is said,” 
 Sebastian Cabot appears to have been bom at Bristol, whereas elsewhere I have 
 shewn that he was probably born at Venice. The error was not discovered till 
 too late to be rectified. Appendix IV. 
 
 + Fuller’s Church History, p. 110. 
 
26 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 passed through many hands, until the Duke of Alva, driving the 
 makers of fine cloth into England, brought its manufacture to the 
 highest perfection, which has continued to the present day. A guild 
 of weavers was established in Bristol, probably as early as the reign of 
 Henry II., and it is also equally probable that they were the earliest 
 incorporated society in the old town, of which we have any mention. 
 They chiefly resided in the parishes of Temple and St. Thomas; in the 
 former was their hall, and their chapel is still to be seen in the parish 
 church,* which continues to be called by their name. In Tucker Street, 
 St. Thomas, William Canynges did largely in the cloth trade, as did 
 many others in the neighbourhood, whose names occur among the 
 merchant princes of Bristol. 
 
 It were well had the commerce of Bristol always been of the innocent 
 character just described; in the matter of the Slave trade, it was more 
 culpably engaged than other places, yet it appears to have been carried 
 on -with great energy all over England, both before and subsequent to 
 the Norman Conquest. Bristol was a mart to which slaves were sent, 
 and in its markets they were exposed for sale, with “ circumstances of 
 unnatural barbarity.” Giraldus Cambrensis tells us that “the people of 
 England, by the common wickedness of the nation, used to expose their 
 children in the public market, and to sell their own sons and relations 
 into Ireland; ” which is confirmed by another writer, f who says, 
 “ Directly opposite the Irish coast, there is a sea-port town called 
 Bristol, the inhabitants of which frequently sail into Ireland, to sell, 
 there, people whom they had bought up throughout England. They 
 exposed to sale single young women in a state of pregnancy, with whom 
 they made a sort of mock marriages. There you might see with grief, 
 fastened together by ropes, whole rows of wretched beings, of both 
 sexes, of elegant forms, and in the very bloom of youth, a sight sufficient 
 to excite pity even in barbarians, daily offered for sale to the first 
 purchaser. Accursed deed! Infamous disgrace! that men, acting in a 
 manner which brutal instinct alone would have forbidden, should sell 
 into slavery their relations, nay, even their own offspring .” 
 
 * For a full account of them, see my “ Memorials of the Canynges’ Family 
 and them Times, &c.,” pp. 42—54. 
 
 + William, of Malmesbury, lib. ii., ch. 20. Life of St. Wolstan, Bishop 
 of Worcester. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 27 
 
 It seems to Lave been a sort of fashion among persons of quality in 
 many countries as well as in Ireland, to have English slaves in their 
 service; and so common were they in Scotland, that there was scarcely 
 a house of any note without one ; and they were to be found even as 
 far off as Italy; it being recorded that Gregory, Pope of Rome, was 
 moved to compassionate the condition of the poor, degraded, illiterate 
 English nation, by seeing three youths belonging thereto, exposed for 
 sale in the market place of that city. The suppression of this horrid 
 trade was effected by Wolstan, Bishop of Worcester, and Lanfranc, 
 Archbishop of Canterbury, “by whose earnest solicitation (says William, 
 of Malmesbury), William the Conqueror destroyed the trade of those 
 scoundrels who used to sell their slaves.” It seems, however, that they 
 had “great difficulty in persuading the king to this measure, who at 
 length complied, although with considerable reluctance, on account of 
 the revenue arising from the duty which was paid to him on the sale.” 
 
 The first of the religious orders settled in Bristol appears to have 
 been the Benedictines, who came here soon after the Norman Conquest. 
 They were the most illustrious division or sect belonging to the Church 
 of Rome, and though misguided men, the world has been, and still is, 
 more indebted for the benefits derived from their literary labours, than 
 it ever was to its mightiest conquerors. True, there was much of evil 
 in their system, but writers, when addressing themselves to the subject 
 of monkery, as professed by the Benedictines, have too frequently 
 dilated on its extravagancies, and forgotten altogether its better side; 
 for from them went forth a band of men imbued with a spirit of 
 learning and intelligence, which kept the nations of Christendom from 
 sinking entirely into absolute mental degradation. Devoted to literaturo 
 and the useful arts, as well as to religion, they preserved to our times 
 the labours of those of earlier ages, as well as handed down their own. 
 
 The Benedictine Priory of St. James is therefore the oldest monastic 
 erection which remains of the middle ages in this city.* It is said to 
 owe its origin to Robert, Earl of Gloucester, a natural son of King 
 Henry I., but I think in part only. Leland saysf that he devoted 
 
 * In point of antiquity this structure takes precedence of every other 
 ecclesiastical edifice in Bristol, and very properly, therefore, introduces its 
 Religious Houses to the notice of the reader ; no other exhibiting specimens of 
 architecture of so early a date. 
 
 t Itin., vol. vi., fol. 88. 
 
28 
 
 HISTORY Of BRISTOL. 
 
 every tenth stone which he had provided for erecting a castle in another 
 part of the town, “towards building the chapel of St. Mary, near the 
 monastery of St. James,” and not the entire priory, as writers have 
 generally stated, without sufficiently considering the nature of the 
 evidence on which they have founded such opinion. The priory itself 
 seems to have been an earlier erection than its chapel, having a cemetery 
 laid out and awaiting consecration in the year 1129, when Simon, 
 Bishop of Worcester, “dedicated the churchyard of the Church of 
 St. James, at Bristol, then in building.'’' * The Earl of Gloucester 
 appears also to have “richly endowed (the chapel or church) with 
 lands, liberties, and possessions, and enriched (it) with ornaments.” f 
 The priory “extended from the existing Whitson Court, westward, to 
 the Barton, eastward, and consisted, on the east side of the church, of a 
 large mansion house, with a spacious long hall, a buttery adjoining, a 
 long gallery extending to the church, rooms under, and a chamber at 
 the west end of the long gallery, an extensive green court adjoining, 
 a great gate house, entering by the churchyard into the said green 
 court, a dwelling-house, a great stable in the court, a brew-house and 
 bake-house near to the kitchen door, a little garden adjoining the brew- 
 house. Another garden lay between the west end of the church and 
 the said great gate house, also a little way or lane leading out of the 
 great court to the west part of the gate, entering into the way that parted 
 Shooters’ Close and the Montague’s—all of which was the west part of 
 the said mansion house. On the east side were galleries and chambers 
 in them, parlours, &c., united with the west part—a little square green 
 court and enclosed ground, with a pigeon house—a large barton, 
 extending from the gate in the Barr’s Lane, whereby was the pound and 
 two great barns, also several buildings lying on both sides the barton.” J 
 Of the buildings mentioned above, the chapel alone, now the parish 
 church of St. James, remains to point out the site of the priory, in 
 addition to a few relics of some of the original masonry, which may 
 still be traced on the parade in the churchyard. Most of these old 
 erections were sold, and parted in lots, to various persons, subsequent to 
 the dissolution of religious houses at the Reformation; but more 
 
 Stephens’ Addit. to Dugdale’s Monasticon, vol. ii., p. 191. 
 t Barrett’s History of Bristol, p. 390. Appendix V. 
 t Ibid., p. 382. 
 
HISTORY CF BRISTOL. 
 
 29 
 
 particularly was this done during the reigns of the two first Charleses; 
 and being converted to secular uses, so completely was their ruin 
 effected, that for a century past very little of them has been in existence, 
 beyond those portions to which reference has just been made.* 
 
 The chapel of the priory, even with its chancel, which extended 
 beyond the tower, was not very large or costly. The latter was 
 constructed in 1374, when, upon petition of the inhabitants of the 
 parish to Thomas Chesterton, then Abbot of Tewkesbury, to which 
 monastery this priory was subject, consent was obtained, with the 
 concurrence of the prior of St. James, that the parishioners should be 
 admitted to hear mass and to celebrate all other religious services, both 
 for the living and the dead, as in other diocesan churches, on condition 
 that they built a square belfry of stone, in form of a tower, which was 
 accordingly done. Thus it was a church partly parochial, and partly 
 conventual,—both monks and parishioners performing their respective 
 services therein, until the priory was surrendered at the Dissolution, 
 January 9th, 1540. 
 
 A few years only had elapsed after the establishment of the 
 Benedictines in the Priory of St. James, before a colony of monks 
 professing the rule of St. Augustine, and the order of Canons Regular, 
 as modified by St. Victor, were introduced into the neighbourhood by 
 Robert Fitzharding, who also built here a house for their reception. 
 This he did on a spot well chosen by them; for the monks of the middle 
 ages knew how to select a situation to their purpose, and they exercised 
 no inconsiderable amount of discernment in fixing upon a desirable 
 locality. The most fertile situations were their chosen retreats, and the 
 towers of their beautiful habitations uplifted their hallowed turrets in 
 districts of enchanting sweetness. At times, the foot of some lofty 
 mountain, covered with the choicest fruits, silently witnessed the ever- 
 recurring hour of prayer, when the sombre inmates of these secluded 
 abodes slowly paced with solemn tread their accustomed sanctuary, to 
 watch, to meditate, and to pray. At other times, the monastic house 
 was planted deep in the shade of some romantic valley, where pastures 
 dotted with flocks and herds bountifully supplied the wants of the 
 brotherhood. Here, in luxurious idleness, these solitaries passed the 
 time which their Maker had given them to be employed in the active 
 
 Appendix VI. 
 
30 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 duties of life, in the seclusion of the cloister, shut out from the world, 
 and all its endearing associations,—the mere automatons of a corrupt 
 faith based on the traditions of men, and not on the Word of God! 
 
 The monastic house erected by Robert Fitzharding was not, however, 
 built either on the fruitful side of a mountain, or in the quiet recess of 
 a valley, yet was its site well selected, on the brow of a gently rising 
 foreground, which comprised the manor of Billeswick, purchased by him 
 from Robert Earl of Gloucester, doubtless for the purpose of founding 
 the monastery in question. This spot overlooks the beautiful expanse 
 which then spread out a luxuriating carpeting of greensward towards 
 the hills of which that of Dundry forms a part; but where now many 
 an erection intervenes, suited to the requirements of modern times and 
 an advanced state of society. Between the Abbey and the hills of 
 Mendip lay this lovely tract of country, watered by the Avon and its 
 tributaries, on the banks of which was the abbot’s park, bounded 
 towards the northwest by the hill of St. Brendon, where dwelt a hermit 
 of reputed piety.* Northward, in after years, the hospital of the 
 Bon-hommes arose, as if to sanctify the neighbourhood; and the Friary 
 of the Carmelites, and the monastery of the Franciscans were cradled 
 in quiet repose beneath the hill of St. Michael, half way up which stood the 
 Nunnery of St. Mary Magdalen. Beyond these was the Priory of 
 St. James already noticed, with the King’s Down (of after times) rising 
 at its back as if to shelter it from the winds of winter. Eastward 
 dwelt the Dominicans, and a brotherhood of Benedictines are said to 
 have been seated in a priory at St. Philips. The military Knights of 
 the Temple had not then existence, but they, too, soon afterwards built 
 their princely dwelling near where now the leaning tower of Holy Cross 
 appears tottering, as if about to fall and crush the passing stranger. 
 On the south lay the Canon’s Marsh, and the extensive domain of 
 Bedminster, which, too, owned Fitzharding for its lord. Within this 
 circuit old Brightstowe was inclosed, and its noble castle reared its 
 defiant battlemented towers. Nearer home was the people’s promenade, 
 where now Queen Square has “ a local habitation and a name.” 
 
 Such was the site selected for the erection of a dwelling suited to the 
 supposed requirements of a few monks of an order then but newly 
 ordained by Pope Innocent II., and which had been established at the 
 
 Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. GO. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 31 
 
 Lateran Council in 1139* ten years after the cemetery of St. James’s 
 priory was dedicated. Whether or not “the blessed Augustine preached 
 the Divine word to the Gentiles” on the site of the house consecrated 
 to his memory (which tradition affirms) it is, perhaps, impossible to 
 determine. As, however, he appears to have itinerated, which was the 
 custom of the monks at that early period of their institution, it is not 
 improbable that Bristol was visited by him, and that College Green 
 witnessed the labours of himself and his associates. To the memory 
 of one of these early missionaries, a structure of some kind is said to 
 have been erected for purposes of worship; but this statement is 
 somewhat hypothetical, although mention is certainly made of a sacred 
 building standing at a distance from the abbey in after ages.t 
 
 An inscription over the abbey gate, College Green, informs us that 
 King Henry II., and Lord Robert Fitzharding, were conjointly the 
 founders of the monastery of St. Augustine. By a comparison of dates, 
 however, it appears that the future monarch, then Prince Henry, was 
 but nine years old when the establishment was commenced; and 
 therefore, from his tender age, of little assistance in the matter; he 
 moreover was not present at the consecration of the edifice, but with 
 his uncle Geofiry, at Anjou; and as he was not more than fifteen years 
 of age when this ceremony took place, he could render very little 
 pecuniary aid towards the erection of so large a collection of buildings 
 as was contained within the precincts of the Abbey of St. Augustine. 
 The letters composing the inscription, too, are in the style of those 
 used in the time of Henry VII., and therefore most probably refer to 
 the completion of the upper part of the structure by Abbot Elyott, 
 who died iu 1526. From all these circumstances, together with the 
 
 * The Canons Regular of St. Augustine were probably the least ascetic of 
 all the monastic orders, and this, perhaps, will in a great measure account for 
 the irregularities subsequently mentioned in the text in this work respecting 
 them. Enyol de Provins, a writer in the middle ages, says of them, they were 
 “ well shod, well clothed, and well fed; went out when they liked, mixed with 
 the world, and talked at table. ” Hence, perhaps, the difficulty many of their 
 superiors had in restraining their passions, and keeping them within the bounds 
 of propriety and decorum. 
 
 + “The Chapel of St. Jordan was at a distance from the Abbey, in the 
 College Green; and although its exact site cannot now be ascertained, it appears 
 to have been standing so late as the year 1491-2 ; when the sacrist of the Abbey 
 accounted for twenty-two pence received as oblations from the box of St. 
 Clement, adjacent to the Chapel of St. Jordan, in the Green Place. ”—Rot. penes 
 Decanum et Capit, Bristol. 
 
32 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 testimony of Leland, and other witnesses of credit, we cannot err, I 
 conceive, in regarding Robert Fitzharding as the sole founder of this 
 monastery. 
 
 The father of Robert Fitzharding appears to have resided “ in 
 Bristowe, in Baldewynne Street,” where, at the “ Great Stone House,” 
 it is probable the son was bom towards the end of the reign of William 
 the Conqueror. Very little is known of him previous to the erection 
 of the Monastery of St. Augustine, which appears to have been founded 
 about the year 1142, and completed, so far as to allow of its dedication, 
 in the spring of 1148;* which ceremony was performed by Robert, 
 Bishop of Worcester, assisted by Boniface, Bishop of Exeter, George, 
 Bishop of St. Asaph, and Nicholas, Bishop of Llandaff; and on 
 Easter-day of the same year, six monks of the monastery of Wigmore 
 professing the rule of St. Augustine, and the order of Canons Regular, 
 were inducted into the new foundation, one of them, named Richard, 
 being chosen superior of the convent. 
 
 From this time until the dissolution of the Abbey by Xing Henry 
 VIII., it was presided over by twenty-five abbots, some of whom were 
 unworthy of the position they occupied; ingratitude seems to have 
 been a prevailing offence with the officials of many of the abbeys in 
 the middle ages, but in none was it more apparent than in the conduct 
 of the abbots of St. Augustine. The very first of these lordly superiors, 
 like Thomas a’Becket, quarrelled with his patron, the first Maurice, 
 Lord Berkeley, eldest son of the founder of the monastery, for that 
 he, “having occasion to make a ditch about his Castle the broader (for 
 the better fortifying thereof), took in some few feet of ground out of 
 Berkeley churchyard, which church, with the tithes thereof, his 
 ancestors had conferred on the aforesaid monastery. The abbot 
 beholding this as a great trespass, or rather, as a little sacrilege, so 
 prosecuted the aforesaid lord with church censures, that he made him 
 in a manner cast the dirt of the ditch in his own face, inforcing him to 
 a public confession of his fault, and to give five shillings rent for ever, 
 with some tithes and pasture for as many oxen as would till a 
 
 * Dugdale says that Leland, Willis, and Tanner, tell ns that this monastery 
 was founded in 1148; by referring to Willis, however, (Mitred Abbies, vol. 1., 
 p. 22(5) I find that “Robert Fitzharding, the founder, began An. 1141 to build 
 the Monastery, in his manor of Bileswick, near Bristol, having An. 1148 
 procured the same to be consecrated.” 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 33 
 
 plow-land, by the words of his will, Pro emendatione culpas suce ,” (by 
 way of expiating his offence.) * * * § This abbot Richard died September 
 1st, 1186, and the Lord Maurice in three years afterwards; but so 
 much offended was the latter with the lordly priest of St. Augustine’s 
 who had treated him so ungratefully, that he ordered his body to be 
 buried at Brentford, in Middlesex, rather than be entombed in the 
 sepulchre of his parents in the abbey founded by his father. 
 
 Philip, who became the second abbot, was in 1196 removed to 
 By lands in Yorkshire. The monastery of St. Augustine seems to have 
 greatly prospered under his governance, for he obtained, besides other 
 advantages, from John, Earl of Moreton, afterwards King John, a 
 confirmation of all the grants previously made to the establishment, 
 with many additional liberties and privileges, f 
 
 John, his successor, is said by Mr. Britton | to be “ probably the 
 Bristol monk who, according to Bale, wrote a history of his own time.’’ 
 I have carefully examined that writer, but without finding so much as 
 the mention of this abbot’s name. Mr. Barrett remarks § that “he 
 governed 29 years, and died the 12th February, 1215.” 
 
 Another John, or, as Abbot Newland says, Joseph, was the third 
 superior of this abbey, but he died in a few weeks after his election, 
 and was succeeded by 
 
 David, who was chosen in 1216; he was present in 1218 at the 
 dedication of Worcester Cathedral, and performed the funeral obsequies 
 of Robert, Lord Berkeley, in 1221. Barrett says || he resigned or died 
 in 1234; which of the two is uncertain, as in the “Annals of Worcester” 
 he is said to have relinquished his office; whilst Brown Willis, quoting 
 “Wharton’s Collections,” states that he died in the year I have 
 mentioned. 
 
 To David succeeded William de Bradestan, who was born at 
 Winterbourne, in Gloucestershire, and had already filled the office of 
 prior to the house of St. Augustine. He was elected to the abbey 
 May 21st, 1234, but as he also resigned on the 20th of August, 1242, 
 it is likely the house had been for a long time in a state of disorder; 
 
 * Fuller’s Church History, Book VI., p. 327. 
 
 t Monasticon Anglicanum, vol. i., 1034. 
 
 i Hist, and Antiq. of Bristol Cathedral, p. 8. 
 
 § Hist, of Bristol, p. 266. |] Ibid., and Appendix YII. 
 
 D 
 
34 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 for on a visitation made by Walter de Cantilupe, Bishop of Worcester, 
 in that year, the discipline of the monastery was found to be very loose; 
 so much so, indeed, that the prior and some other officers were removed, 
 and the abbot himself was probably advised to tender his resignation, 
 as its superior, at the same time, rather than permit himself to be 
 forcibly expelled from office, which he did: “after which (says Browne 
 Willis), he lived ten years, till May 20th, 1252, and then died.”* 
 
 It was during the abbacy of Bradestan that the mayor and commonalty 
 purchased from the convent, for nine marks of silver, sufficient land in 
 St. Augustine Marsh for making a new quay or trench, t 
 
 William Long, the camerarius or chamberlain of the convent at 
 Keynsham, was the next abbot of St. Augustine’s monastery, who, like 
 his predecessor, received the benediction at Worcester. During his 
 abbacy the right of the Bon-hommes of the Gaunts Hospital to inter 
 their dead in the “viridis placea,” or green place, now College Green, 
 hitherto used by them in common with the brethren of this abbey, was 
 disputed by the latter fraternity; but it was decided by the Bishop of 
 Worcester, that the brethren of the hospital should bury their dead 
 there on condition that they always left the ground level, “because of 
 the pleasantness of the place; that neither party should have common 
 of pasture there, but the abbot might mow the same, and strew the 
 grass in his churches of Saint Augustine the Greater and the Less.” X 
 This abbot died May 17th, 1264, and was succeeded by 
 
 Richard de Malmesbury, who ruled the abbey about twelve years. 
 He died September 13th, 127 6, when John de Marina was elected the 
 eighth abbot, October 10th, in the same year. This man appears to 
 have been of weak health for many years, owiug to which the mis- 
 government of the house during his abbacy is probably in great part to 
 be attributed; for it appears to have been in much disorder in his time, 
 both in spiritual and temporal matters. At the visitation of the Bishop 
 of Worcester, in 1278, it is said to have been “ damnabiliter prolapsam,” 
 and it was ordered “that in future they (the monks) do not, as bees, 
 fly out of the choir as soon as service is ended, but devoutly wait as 
 become holy and settled persons, not as vagrants and vagabonds; and 
 returning to God due thanks for their benefactors, and so receiving at 
 
 * Mitred Abbies, vol. i., p. 229. t Appendix VIII. 
 
 f Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 346. 
 
niSTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 35 
 
 last the fruits of their religion, to which they have specially devoted 
 themselves. And as the present abbot was not sufficiently instructed 
 to propound the Word of God in common, he appointed others in his 
 stead: and ordered that silence be better observed than usual, that no 
 one go out without urgent necessity, and not then but when two are in 
 company, one the elder, the other the younger, licensed by the abbot, 
 or the prior in his absence.” Ordinances were also made for the 
 punishment of offenders, for the regulation of the refectory and 
 infirmary, and the episcopal malediction was pronounced against such 
 as should feign themselves sick, thereby “to live a dissolute life” and 
 fraudulently to despise God’s worship. The brethren were not to 
 congregate “for the sake of drinking and surfeiting,” and were to 
 refrain “from detraction and obscene speech.”* John de Marina died 
 February 21st, 128G,f and to him succeeded 
 
 Hugh de Dodington, who was elected, and his election confirmed, 
 early in the year 1287; he died November 2Gth, 1294, when 
 
 James Barry was chosen to be abbot, and obtained the royal assent 
 December lGth following. The temporalities were restored to him 
 January 7th, 1295; and after presiding over the convent for the space 
 of twelve years, he died November 12th, 1306. His successor was 
 Edmund Knowle, whose election took place November 30th, 1306. 
 “During his government he built the church which is now standing 
 from the ground, with the vestry, &c., and furthermore procured of the 
 king a confirmation of all the possessions of this monastery—10 
 Edward II.” % He ruled the abbey about twenty-six years, and died 
 June 9th, 1332. 
 
 Although Abbot Knowle appears to have been an amiable man, and 
 well deserving the elevated rank he attained, he does not seem to have 
 been more fortunate than were some of his predecessors, in enforcing 
 obedience to monastic rule among the brethren over whom he presided; 
 for the Bishop of Worcester, at a visitation in 1320, found many 
 irregularities prevailing. He ordered a large number of hounds, which 
 were kept by the monks, to be removed; the almoner friar, Henry de 
 Gloucester, to be displaced; inquiries to be made into the conduct of 
 two others of the brotherhood who were accused of incontinence; and 
 
 * Barrett’s History of Bristol, pp. 2G1-2-3. 
 t Willis’s Mitred Abbies, vol. i., p. 229. * Ibid. 
 
 D 2 
 
36 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 also into that of friar William Barry, who had caused dissension among 
 the fraternity. The sick were to be better provided for; the brethren 
 were to be allowed a sufficiency of cash as heretofore; care was to be 
 taken that the mass of the Blessed Virgin be duly and solemnly 
 performed; that the forty pence usually distributed in the convent be 
 not detained by the prior or sub-prior; and that William Barry, who 
 was under a sentence of excommunication for apostacy, be absolved, his 
 penance of drinking water only, which he had done constantly on 
 Wednesdays, be remitted; and that he be allowed to drink beer and to 
 eat pulse, but to abstain from eating fish. 
 
 In 1327 Abbot Knowle refused to receive for interment in the church 
 of his abbey, the body of the murdered King Edward the Second, for 
 which he has been reproached with disloyalty; but it is probable that such 
 refusal was made by the advice, or, perhaps, command, of his patron, 
 the third Thomas, Lord Berkeley, who had bestowed rich gifts upon 
 the canons of the monastery. 
 
 John Snow, the next abbot, received the benediction from the Bishop 
 of Worcester, in July, 1332. He was the first and only abbot of this 
 religious house that ever attended Parliament. Having governed nine 
 years, he died July 12th, 1341; and his successor, 
 
 Ralph Asshe, was confirmed abbot, August 2nd, 1341. His 
 attendance in Parliament being inconvenient to himself, and burthensome 
 to the revenues of the abbey, he petitioned for, and obtained exemption, 
 “ because he held not by barony, nor was his abbey of royal foundation.” 
 Bristol was visited by a plague during his abbacy, which so reduced the 
 number of brethren in this establishment, that very few survived who 
 were old enough, according to canonical law, to officiate as priests. He 
 diedJVTarck 1st, 1352; and 
 
 William Cooke succeeded, and was installed by mandate from the 
 prior of Worcester, he having been sub-prior of the house over which he 
 was called to preside, “a religious man, professing the rule of Saint 
 Augustine and the order of Canons Regular, honest, of a lawful age, 
 above thirty, in the order of priesthood, and born in lawful wedlock.” * 
 His installation took place March 7th, 1353; ten years afterwards he 
 resigned the abbacy, aud died April 8th, 1364. His successor was 
 
 Barrett’s History of Bristol, p. 259. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 37 
 
 Henry Shellingford, otherwise Blcbery, who was elected in 1366, hut 
 he so mismanaged the house, that scarce five years had elapsed after 
 his election, before the king found it necessary to issue a mandate, 
 commanding the Bishop of Worcester to visit the monastery, because 
 the abbot had, by incurring excessive expenses, so wasted the revenues, 
 that divine service was almost at an end, almsgiving had ceased, and 
 that unless timely precautions were taken, the canons would be all 
 dispersed. * In consequence of this order the bishop visited the abbey 
 and provided for its better governance, various ordinances for that 
 purpose being issued in the year 1374. He died December 2nd, 1388. 
 
 John Cerney governed from the death of the last-named abbot, until 
 October 6th, 1393, when he died, and 
 
 John Daubeny succeeded, who appears to have superintended the 
 affairs of the house with greater success, no complaint having been 
 made against him during the thirty-five years he presided over it. He 
 died January 26th, 1428, and 
 
 Walter Newbury succeeded, who, like his estimable predecessor, 
 Abbot Knowle, appears to have also met with much trouble in the 
 office to which he was elevated; for so refractory were the canons, that 
 they expelled him, and appointed one of their own body as abbot in 
 his place. But he having, during the five years in which he ruled the 
 abbey, wasted its revenues, and otherwise incurred the displeasure of 
 the brethren, was in his turn thrust out of the office in which they had 
 seated him, and Newbury was reinstated. He presided over the 
 convent thirty-five years, with advantage to the establishment, and died 
 September 3rd, 1463; to him succeeded 
 
 William Hunt, who was elected on the 11th day of the same month. 
 Of him nothing particular is recorded independent of his labours in 
 connection with the building and repairing of the abbey itself, and 
 which will be noticed in its proper place; he died March 14th, 1480, and 
 John Newland, or Nail-heart, succeeded, having been elected on the 
 6th of April following. On account of his great abilities, this abbot 
 was several times employed in foreign embassies by King Henry VII. 
 He appears to have expended considerable sums of money in repairing 
 and embellishing the monastic buildings; and he acquired so much 
 popularity by his strict attention to his religious duties, and by his 
 
 Barrett’s History of Bristol, p. 263. 
 
38 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 deeds of charity, as to be designated, after his death, the “ Good Abbot.” 
 His successor was 
 
 Bobert Elyott, whose name occurs as “the purveyor of the kitchen,” 
 but whether the same person or not, is uncertain. He was elected 
 September 27th, 1515; his predecessor, after governing the abbey 
 thirty-four years, dying on the 12tli of June, in the same year, Elyott 
 died in 1526, and to him followed in the abbacy 
 
 John Somerset, who died in 1533, when 
 
 William Burton was elected, September 9th, 1534. At this time 
 the doctrines of the Protestant Beformation were very generally listened 
 to with attention by the people, and w r ere as greatly opposed by the 
 monastic establishments, but by none more than the abbey of St. Au¬ 
 gustine. Notwithstanding which, however, its abbot, with seventeen 
 other members of this house, were compelled to subscribe to the King’s 
 supremacy. He died in 1537, when the last abbot of the monastery 
 was elected in the person of 
 
 Morgan Guilliam ap Guilliam, who was evidently a Welshman. He 
 surrendered his house into the King’s hands, December 9th, 1539, and 
 obtaining a pension of £80 per annum for life, he died before the year 
 1553. Air. Barrett says, “in Fuller and Speed’s History he is charged 
 with keeping six lewd women ; ” but I have carefully examined those 
 writers, and find no such mention of his name, and am therefore willing 
 to believe it to be untrue, although we know from incontrovertible au¬ 
 thority, that the monks at the time of the Dissolution were charged 
 with the most flagrant crimes, and of which w t c are assured they were 
 guilty. The discipline of the abbey of St. Augustine w r as by no means 
 favourable to morals; it was much less severe than that enforced in 
 most monastic institutions, or than that to which monks were supposed 
 generally to adhere; yet it was sufficiently stringent for the purposes 
 intended, had it been always insisted on by the superior. Unfortunately 
 however for the peace of the fraternity, and the well-being of the 
 establishment, this was in many instances grossly neglected, or it would 
 not have been necessary to ordain, two hundred years after the house 
 was built, that “ in the chapter correction was to be done without re¬ 
 spect of persons, harder penance to be imposed on the more gross and 
 frequent offenders,” or that the inmates of the abbey were to observe 
 habits of sobriety and temperance in eating and drinking. Greater 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 39 
 
 and more flagrant irregularities than these, however, marked the con¬ 
 duct of the monks of St. Augustine; offences, too, which were not 
 free from the taint of impurity. Under the semblance of sanctity they 
 perpetrated all manner of lewdness, without any reference whatever to 
 the sacred obligations by which they were bound to a life of abstraction 
 from the world, and a renunciation of its pleasures. Excesses seem to 
 have crept in among them, as we have seen, at an early date of their 
 institution, and mal-practices which required the surveillance of their 
 diocesan were matters of frequent occurrence. Drunkenness and ob¬ 
 scenity must also have been common among these monks, or they 
 would not have been enjoined to avoid such vices ; nor would the abbot 
 himself have been required to maintain no superfluous dependents. “In 
 vain new rules of discipline were devised, or the old corrected by re¬ 
 forms. Many of their worst vices grew so naturally out of their mode 
 of life, that a stricter discipline would have no tendency to extirpate 
 them. Their extreme licentiousness was sometimes hardly concealed 
 by the cowl of sanctity.” * 
 
 At the time of the dissolution of the Abbey of St. Augustine, its 
 inmates consisted of an abbot, prior, sub-prior, and about fourteen 
 canons, and their servitors,! for whose maintenance, and also for the 
 religious services of the establishment, ample provision seems to have 
 been made at various periods of its existence. Its founder, Robert 
 Fitzharding, who assumed the cowl in his own monastery, and died 
 there, gave to the canons the manors of Berkeley Herness, Almondsbury 
 Horfield, Ashelworth, and Cromhall, with all the appurtenances thereto 
 belonging, in woods, meadows, pastures, and all other things, “ when he 
 became and was a canon.” He also appears to have endowed this 
 monastery by “ deeds laid down upon the altar,” with other manors, as 
 “ Cerney, Blackensford, and divers lands in Erlingham in the county of 
 Gloucester; and the manor of Leigh near Bedminster, and St. 
 Catherine’s near Portbury, in the county of Somerset; Fifehead, in the 
 
 * Hallam’s Middle Ages, vol. 3, p. 303. 
 
 + At the rear of a prebendal house in Lower College Green, are several 
 apartments, one of which is traditionally called “ the nuns' room." It is entered 
 by a Perpendicular English doorway, and contains piscinas and recesses, in one 
 of which it is said once stood an image of the Virgin. There are many other 
 indications of antiquity in this building, from which it would seem that it was 
 once the residence of a few sisters attached to the neighbouring convent. From 
 one of the rooms a flight of stone steps leads to the cloisters of the monastery. 
 
40 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 county of Dorset, and the manor of Belliswick juxta Bristol, wherein the 
 monastery is seated; and with the churches and advowsons of Tickenham 
 and Portbury, in the county of Somerset, and the churches and advowsons 
 of Berkeley,* Wotton, Bolnhall, and Beverston and all other his churches 
 and advowsons in the hundred of Berkeley, with their chapels, in the 
 county of Gloucester, and with divers houses in Bristol.” His eldest 
 son, the first Maurice, Lord Berkeley, also gave “ two hides of land in 
 Hinton, and one in Alkinton, in the parish of Berkeley, and the tithes 
 of all pannage of his chases of Micklewood, Appleridge, Oakley, and 
 Weak or Wotton parks, and pasture for so many oxen as will till a plow- 
 land to feed with oxen, as pure and perpetual alms.” t His second son 
 Robert also “ gave to this monastery the church of St. Nicholas in 
 Bristol, divers messuages in the said town, and lands in Paulet in the 
 county of Somerset.” % 
 
 The third Robert, Lord Berkeley, son of the above Maurice, confirmed 
 all his father’s and grandfather’s grants to this monastery, and gave still 
 more liberally to this favoured institution, by bestowing upon it “ all 
 his houses, lands, and tenements, within the walls of Bristol, which 
 were many and great. He also gave divers lands in Berkeley, Ham, 
 Cowley, Nibley, and Hulmancot, in the county of Gloucester.” 
 
 The first Thomas, Lord Berkeley, brother to the above Robert, also 
 confirmed the grants of his predecessors, “ and likewise gave divers 
 lands in Berkeley, Cowley, and Hinton, in the county of Gloucester, 
 also common of pasture for twenty-four oxen in Ham, and discharged 
 all their lands in the hundred of Berkeley and Portbury, from all 
 service and earthly demands.” 
 
 Maurice, Lord Berkeley, the second of that name, son and heir to the 
 above Thomas, “ gave lands in Berkeley, Beverston, Wolgaston, and 
 Eavlingham, and common of pasture in divers of his manors.” His 
 son, the second Thomas, Lord Berkeley, besides confirming to the 
 convent all the gifts bestowed on it by his ancestors, directed “that 
 the lands given by them should be a manor within the hundred of 
 Berkeley, and should be called the manor of Canonbury; and granted it 
 a court leet with stocks, pillory,and tumbrel in the said manor; also he 
 
 * Lord Berkeley exchanged the rectory of Sutton Boninton for Berkeley, in 
 the reign of Queen Anne. 
 
 + Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 251. + Ibid. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 41 
 
 restored to tlie brethren their plate and vestments which had been 
 plundered from them in the barons’ wars, being of great value.” 
 Maurice, the third of that name, his son and heir, confirmed the grants 
 of his ancestors to the monastery, and the third Thomas who held the 
 title did the same ; and also “granted to it all estrays and comelyrs as 
 by the bailiff of the said lord should be found upon any of the said 
 abbot’s lands.” The fourth Maurice “ obtained a Papal Bull from 
 Pope Urban II.,” to aid the monks in repairing the convent. William, 
 Lord Berkeley, in 1489, “gave to this monastery several houses in 
 London, and lands in the counties of Worcester and Buckingham; ” 
 and lastly, Maurice, the sixth lord of that name, “ gave to • this 
 monastery his best pair of vestments with all the furniture, and £20 in 
 money, one gilt cross with all the relics enclosed in the same with all 
 his best gilt cosets, also one pair of white vestments with all their 
 furniture, and the best pair of black vestments with his best missal, 
 and a good chalice.” “ Thus to this noble family was this monastery 
 beholden for its liberal endowment as well as for its first foundation 
 and erection ; each of them distinguished himself as the loving father 
 and patron of this church ; they nursed it as it were from its cradle, 
 supported it in its infancy, and still continued to protect and enrich it 
 in the riper years of its maturity, and were doubtless men of as great 
 piety and extensive charity, as they were many of them of the 
 greatest abilities both in the cabinet and in the field ; they gave such 
 large estates to monasteries from a pious zeal and religious motive, and 
 endowed them with so many benefices, that the family is said to have 
 had but one rectory to which they might present a chaplain, which was 
 Sutton Bonington (already mentioned), and that afterwards was 
 exchanged for the vicarage of Berkeley, near their castle,” * with the 
 dean and chapter of Bristol, for Lord Berkeley to have the right of 
 presentation of at least one living on his former vast estates. 
 
 The donations made to this monastery by the Berkeley family were 
 greatly added to by others, “ many kings and princes favoured it with 
 grants and confirmations, and protected it with their power; and many 
 private gentlemen of fortune distinguished it with their bounty.” At 
 the dissolution this monastery was certified to be worth, in old rents, 
 according to Speed, £767 15s. 3d. per annum ! 
 
 * Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 257. Fuller’s Church History. 
 
42 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 In surveying the remains of the Abbey of St. Augustine, we find 
 no great difficulty in tracing its boundaries, and in referring to every 
 building of importance which is known to have been erected within its 
 precincts. College Green was its sanctuary, the extent of which was 
 nearly the same in the middle ages as at present; the erection of a line 
 of houses on its western side, having somewhat abridged its dimensions 
 in that direction by the formation of the thoroughfare known as Frog 
 Lane; the rank of dwellings on the eastern side, also extending from the 
 church of St. Augustine, most likely curtails the same privileged spot 
 towards the city, then but a seaport town. Its form, therefore, was 
 triangular, as it is now. Here the violator of the law, and even the 
 murderer, took refuge from the penalty due to his crimes; and, once 
 within its limits, it was an act of unheard-of enormity to attempt to 
 force him from it. “ We can hardly regret” (says Mr. Hallam),* “ in 
 reflecting on the desolating violence which prevailed, that there should 
 have been some green spots in the wilderness, where the feeble and the 
 persecuted could find refuge.” In the reign of King Henry VII., 
 authority was obtained from Pope Alexander VI., for the suppression of 
 sanctuaries ; no place from that time being “ a sanctuary for treason, all 
 traitors being pronounced enemies to the Christian faith.” 
 
 This sanctuary was also a burial place, as we have seen, which was 
 of great advantage to the neighbouring religious houses; because for the 
 privilege of being interred therein, the affluent endowed a chantry, or 
 bequeathed of his substance for the celebration of his obit, with lamps, 
 masses, <fcc. It was dedicated to St. Mary, and after it was broken, as 
 just mentioned, it was used as a rope walk, in 1495. The Marsh, 
 where now Princes Street and other thoroughfares, with the adjacent 
 square, have risen into being, also formed part of the property of this 
 monastery before the channel of the river Froom was turned into its 
 present course. 
 
 At the south-west extremity of the sanctuary still remains the 
 porter’s lodge, or principal entrance to the abbey; and beneath an arch 
 as rich in Anglo-Norman design and workmanship as any in England, 
 we are more immediately ushered into the domain of its once lordly 
 abbot. Many portions of the highly-finished carving on this beautiful 
 relic of the early descendants of the Norman Conqueror, remain as 
 
 Middip Ages, vol. iii., p. 351. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 43 
 
 perfect in their outline, and as clearly defined and sharp in all their 
 minute and elaborate detail, as if chiselled but yesterday. Yet has this 
 arch stood the brunt of stormy winds and tempests for upwards of 
 seven centuries; a silent witness of the rise and fall of kingdoms and of 
 empires—of dynasties and governments; whilst upon much of its own 
 fair form the corroding hand of time has scarcely traced its impress. 
 The super-structure raised upon this firm foundation, although erected 
 by Abbot Elyott more than three centuries and a-half later, has 
 suffered much more from the effects of our variable climate, and not 
 less from the despoiling hand of man, in the removal of its beautiful 
 bay windows and the substitution of common sashes, as well as of the 
 costly pinnacles and battlements which once appeared in elaborate 
 carving upon its summit. 
 
 Passing through the abbey gate, we enter the open space now known 
 as the lower College Green, but which, in the olden time, appears to 
 have been the grange or barton of the establishment. At the bottom 
 of a gently sloping ground on the left hand, which the lapse of ages 
 and the result of modern improvement has raised above its ancient level, 
 is the entrance, or porter’s lodge, which conducts to the poor remains 
 of the abbot’s palace. This entrance consists of a Norman arch, 
 supported on each side by three columns having cushioned capitals. 
 The face of the arch itself is adorned with the zig-zag and other 
 mouldings of an interesting character; very like those which ornament 
 the lateral arch on the west side of the principal entrance to the 
 convent from the sanctuary. Although of much smaller dimensions, 
 this archway is, nevertheless, of sufficient magnitude to form a somewhat 
 imposing entrance to the abbot’s palace; and the massy hooks upon 
 which its strong iron-bound gate was suspended, still remain to attest 
 that it was a place where security was as much an object of importance 
 with the convent in those rugged times, as it was with the castellated 
 dwelling of the noble. The opposite' or east side of this arch of 
 entrance is also Anglo-Norman in style, with mouldings, interlaced and 
 zig-zag, supported on each side by one column only. Over this entrance 
 was the porter’s habitation, now occupied by a comparatively modern 
 superstructure; which, however, has about it some interesting features 
 of a style in architectural decoration prevailing in the seventeenth 
 century; these consist of ornamented ceilings, stone fire-places, &c.; one 
 of the latter bearing the Eoman initials N.P. and the date 1664. 
 
44 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 The opening beneath the Anglo-Norman arch of entrance to the 
 porter's lodge from lower College Green, just described, has been partly 
 filled up with another arch in the Perpendicular style of English 
 architecture; over which is a shield charged with the rebus of Abbot 
 Newland or Nail-heart, with another bearing the arms of the Berkeley’s, 
 the great patrons of the monastery. The first shield undoubtedly refers 
 to the “Good Abbot” as the renovator of the buildings which belonged 
 to it, for most of them he not only greatly improved but considerably 
 enlarged. 
 
 From the porter’s lodge a small square or court-yard is entered, in 
 which are several interesting relics of Abbot Newland’s additions to the 
 conventual buildings, consisting of windows, doorways, <fcc., but the 
 whole is greatly modernized. One of the latter, at the south-east 
 extremity, conducts into what is now, if not originally, a dwelling 
 house at the east end of the garden of which is a small archway built 
 underground, and which must have been approached by steps, before 
 access to it could be obtained, the head of the doorway being scarcely 
 level with the surface of the ground. It opens into an apartment of 
 very circumscribed extent, but which at one time appears to have had 
 a grained roof, and another doorway opposite that of entrance. It is 
 not improbable that this apartment once formed a sort of vestibule to 
 passages which I believe exist beyond it; but the doorway last spoken 
 of is completely blocked up by the falling in of the roof further on, 
 through the carelessness of a boy who, in searching for supposed 
 treasure in 1850, made his way through it from above. The fact of 
 the fall of the roof proves the existence of a passage of some kind in the 
 direction referred to, that is, towards the church of the monastery, and 
 in the immediate vicinity of the ruins of the abbot’s palace. In the 
 month of December, 1854, I had an opportunity of tracing what was 
 supposed to exist, for at that time such a passage was accidentally 
 discovered, which, at some distance from the entrance, branched off in 
 two directions; one to the south-west being choked with earth, whilst 
 another to the north-east apparently terminated in what seemed to be 
 a flight of stone steps, which only further search can make satisfactory 
 whether correct or not. If found to be correct, it will also probably be 
 ascertained that these passages once communicated with that mentioned 
 by Mr. Barrett,* who records, that in making some repairs in the palace 
 
 * History of Bristol, p. 285. 
 
HISTORY 07 BRISTOL. 
 
 45 
 
 in 1744, which had become the residence of the bishop of the diocese, 
 a room or dungeon (an Anglo-Norman crypt, having a groined roof 
 supported by two columns, which still remains), and a passage leading 
 out of it, was discovered; but no attempt to ascertain anything further, 
 relating to the latter, appears to have been made. The entrance or 
 vestibule to these passages appears to have been constructed in the time 
 of Abbot Newland, but the passages themselves probably existed many 
 ages before his abbacy, and may, perhaps, boast an Anglo-Norman 
 origin. 
 
 The time when these passages were rendered useless is open to 
 conjecture, but we may be sure it did not occur until after the 
 suppression of the monastery in 1539. At that time many of the 
 monastic buildings were either destroyed or converted to other purposes, 
 and there is sufficient evidence remaining, in the presence of broken 
 arches close to the palace, but forming no part of it since the 
 Reformation, which would lead us to suppose that these passages 
 were stopped up at that time. This conjecture, however, can scarelybo 
 the correct one, inasmuch as coins were found in the soil during the 
 excavation, which were struck during the reign of Philip of Spain to 
 commemorate the wars in the Low Countries, which had not then taken 
 place; we are safe, therefore, in concluding that their partial destruction 
 was at a subsequent period. Although we have no record of the fact, 
 yet I have no doubt sufficient presumptive evidence can be produced to 
 show that the monastic establishment was, at least, in part restored 
 during the reign of Queen Mary, and that when the accession of 
 Elizabeth somewhat destroyed the hope of a return to Catholicism in 
 England, these subterranean passages, then probably revealing for the 
 first time to the Protestant mind the iniquitous purposes for which they 
 are believed to have been constructed, were, with the supposed prison of 
 the abbot beneath his palace, so destroyed as not only to blot out the 
 remembrance of their existence, but also to render them utterly useless 
 for the purposes of crime. Mr. Barrett records * that when the 
 apartment beneath the palace was broken into, as already noticed, the 
 remains of human bones and implements of iron apparently used for 
 purposes of torture were found in it; and when we remember the 
 power exercised by abbots in the middle ages against offending 
 
 History of Bristol, p. 285. 
 
46 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 humanity, and the horrible severity of the punishments inflicted upon 
 those who dared question the dogmas of the Church of Rome, or depart 
 from its discipline, we ought to feel thankful that here at least the 
 application of such barbarous inflictions may be reckoned among things 
 that are past, and that they will never again stain the annals of free, 
 enlightened, happy England. 
 
 Returning to the porter’s lodge at the entrance of the abbot’s palace, 
 and crossing the little courtyard before-mentioned, we come to a doorway 
 hi the Perpendicular English style of building which opens into a 
 passage leading to the southern side of the cloisters, now demolished; 
 over it is the rebus of Abbot New land. This doorway, which is not 
 quite in a line with the porter’s lodge, leads into a gloomy passage, about 
 a third part of which from the entrance appears to have been added to 
 the original; this portion of the passage being continued with the same 
 style of arch; while that beyond it is circular, and probably Anglo- 
 Norman. At the termination of this dark passage, we leave nearly all 
 that is ancient on this side the palace of the abbot, excepting some 
 relics of buttresses, windows, and doorways, of the time of John 
 Newland, but which it is impossible to identify with any particular 
 structure, and ascend a flight of steps, on the top of which under an 
 Early English arch, we enter the cloisters of the abbey, which, if 
 constructed on this side, in the same style, were erected about the 
 middle of the thirteenth century. At the east end of this (south) side 
 of the cloister square, by a tasteless opening made by Bishop Butler, 
 the abbot’s palace is entered, the first apartment being a somewhat 
 spacious room, which has the appearance of having been considerably 
 altered to suit modern requirements; so much so indeed, that its 
 original appropriation cannot now be determined. It most probably 
 formed the abbot’s hall of entrance to his palace from the cloisters; 
 opposite to which, opening through the thickness of the wall, looking 
 southernly, is a very beautiful recessed Perpendicular English window, 
 the soffit of which is enriched with panelling. From it a delightful 
 view was obtained by the abbot over the south western portion of the 
 conventual estates; extending beyond which the horizon seemed to belt 
 the Somerset hills. Nearer home the lovely vale of the Avon spread 
 itself out before his eye; whilst beneath the abbey walls the pensive 
 monks of St. Augustine sought a solitary walk in the well-ordered 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 47 
 
 garden below; and to which doubtless the Early English doorway 
 before-mentioned, conducted, after passing probably some apartments 
 appropriated either to devotional purposes, or to the domestic use of the 
 brethren. Traces of walls, doorways, <fcc., on the exterior of this 
 window, still show that buildings of minor note extended to some 
 distance beyond the ruins at present observable; but these are not 
 of sufficient interest to require further remark. 
 
 Near the beautiful window just described, a doorway on the east side, 
 now built up, led into the interior apartments of the palace; and beneath 
 was the kitchen and other offices of domestic necessity; but the 
 devastation caused by the riots in 1831, has so completely destroyed 
 the principal features of the building, that it is extremely difficult to 
 say with any degree of certainty what were its peculiar characteristics, 
 either as to its magnitude or design. Close by are the remains of 
 the private chapel of the abbot, which, from the style of window on 
 the north-east side, now built up, must have been originally raised very 
 soon after the crypt beneath it (for so I choose to call it), although, 
 perhaps, not strictly such. As far as an examination could determine 
 the point, this window appears to have been an Anglo-Norman opening; 
 but the view of it is so obstructed that it is scarcely possible to speak 
 with certainty; the mouldings, however, very closely approximate to 
 those of the Early English style. The east window is one of three 
 lights, the head being filled with as many trefoils, their cusps 
 broken and otherwise much injured by time and violence. The 
 remainder of the windows, as well as all the doorways, both in the 
 chapel and the palace, are of a much later date; some referring to the 
 additions made by Abbot Newland at the close of the fifteenth century, 
 and others to those made by Bishop Butler in the middle of the 
 eighteenth. On the south side of the chapel, a short flight of steps 
 remain, which lead underground, but it is not apparent for what purpose 
 they were designed; it may have been to obtain access to the cells 
 adjoining the crypt beneath the palace already described, unless we 
 suppose that a similar structure existed under the chapel, which, 
 however, is not apparent. There are also on this side the edifice, traces 
 of walls to a considerable extent, which probably point to the boundary 
 of the monastic buildings in that direction. 
 
 An inspection of the walls of the palace will show specimens of 
 Anglo-Norman sculptured stones, built in with the work of the time of 
 
48 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Abbot Newland, who seems to have pulled down most of the old 
 Norman structure, and re-erected much of the future residence of his 
 successors. There are also many other similar instances occurring in 
 other parts of the building, as well as in the boundary walls adjacent. 
 
 The east side of the cloisters, to which we now' return, exhibits a 
 mixture of good Perpendicular English architecture, with examples of a 
 very inferior character. The latter must have been constructed at a period 
 when it had been resolved to erect the suppressed abbey into a 
 bishopric. The corbel heads which supported the former roof still 
 remain, and may, in fact, be traced nearly round the entire square. 
 Many of these heads are very beautiful, but they have suffered greatly 
 from the numerous coats of whitelime and other injurious matter with 
 which they have been covered; and which has nearly obliterated in 
 many of them, every feature of their former excellence. 
 
 Beneath this eastern portion of the cloisters is the vestibule to the 
 chapter house of the convent, which, together with the noble apartment 
 into which it leads, is among the most interesting remains of Anglo- 
 Norman architecture in Europe. These examples, with the abbey 
 gateway, the entrance to the porter's lodge leading to the palace, and a 
 few minor portions of the monastery, form the principal remaining 
 relics of the buildings erected by Robert Fitzharding. 
 
 The chapter house is profusely ornamented with mouldings peculiar 
 to the style in which it is erected; among which the zig-zag in great 
 variety, and the cable, predominate. The sides and west end of this 
 splendid room display beautiful examples of those intersecting, semi¬ 
 circular arches, from whence the pointed or English style of architecture 
 is believed to have derived its origin. The stone vaulting is supported 
 by massy ribs, springing from clustered columns, and these ribs are 
 richly embellished with similar adornments to those found on the sides 
 of the room. Light is admitted chiefly through three stained glass 
 windows at the east end, which throw a dim illumination over the 
 whole structure, and tend greatly to produce the feeling of awe with 
 which the spectator is generally affected on entering this matchless 
 apartment. In the vestibule to this room, w r e meet with one of the 
 first, if not the first, example of the pointed arch existing, if we except 
 those on the west front of the priory church of St. James, which are 
 older.* 
 
 Appendix IX. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 49 
 
 Beyond the vestibule to the chapter house is an Anglo-Norman door¬ 
 way in the east wall of this side of the cloisters, but now built up, 
 which once formed an entrance into the church of the abbey, which 
 will be described in a future page when treating of the cathedral. The 
 north side of the cloisters is walled up from end to end ; but it con¬ 
 tains several very beautiful niches for the reception of figures, which 
 cannot now be seen. The exterior exhibits a good example throughout 
 of late Perpendicular English architecture ; the whole being much 
 better designed than any other portion of this part of the monastery. 
 Over this northern cloister there formerly existed several small apart¬ 
 ments, which not many years ago were taken down ; and the walk 
 beneath where, centuries long past, monks paced in solemn contemplation, 
 was filled up as at present. 
 
 The western portion of the cloisters has long been completely de¬ 
 molished ; but a good recessed doorway of the Decorated English 
 character leads out of that part of the square into a building, part of 
 the upper portion of which is considered to have been the refectory of 
 the establishment; but the whole has been so completely altered for 
 purposes of modern usage, that conjecture alone can supply the want 
 of positive evidence. 
 
 On that part of the present deanery next the sanctuary was the 
 dove-house of the abbey ; which, together with a dwelling and garden 
 adjacent, was given by Maurice, the fourth of that name, Lord Berkeley, 
 in the year 13GG, to William Winchcomb, chaplain, to pray in the 
 monastery for the soid’s health of his mother deceased. At the back of 
 the deanery were the dwellings of the petty canons, as they were called, 
 but more properly the servitors of the regular brethren. In these 
 buildings are several doorways of late Perpendicular English archi¬ 
 tecture ; with the exception of which, the whole has been so completely 
 modernized, that little remains of the original structure on the ground 
 floor, save where the exterior walls, supported by buttresses, can be 
 traced with certainty. In the dormitories, too, at the top of the 
 building, we discover in the gabled roof, remains of arches in wood, of 
 the style of architecture prevailing at the close of the fifteenth century. 
 
 Upon the plaster which covers the sloping roof of these apartments, 
 is a variety of sacred and profane subjects depicted in clear black outline, 
 without the slightest mixture of any other colour or shading whatever. 
 
 E 
 
50 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Although certainly not the work of the middle ages, they were as 
 certainly executed at a period not long subsequent to the Reformation. 
 The figures, which are numerous and varied, are, notwithstanding a 
 want of accuracy in the drawing, exceedingly graceful and striking, 
 and are evidently the work of a master, being hit off with a 
 few strokes of the pencil with wonderful effect. The subjects 
 consist of pictorial representations of historical passages in the Old 
 and New Testaments, together with the parables of our Lord; and 
 numerous allegorical designs, after the manner of Quarles’ Emblems, 
 but of an earlier date. They were accidentally discovered a few years 
 ago, when Dr. John Lamb was Dean of Bristol, by the removal of some 
 paper with which the walls of the room were hung. Attached to each 
 drawing are a variety of Latin sentences and inscriptions, both in the 
 old Church Text and Roman characters.'* 
 
 It would be interesting to associate these drawings with the monks 
 of the middle ages : the dresses of most of the figures, however, and 
 the mixed character of the inscriptions, evidently refer to a period sub¬ 
 sequent to the dissolution of religious houses. Although Queen Mary 
 re-established and endowed several monastic institutions during her 
 short reign, it is by no means certain that the Abbey of St. Augustine, 
 at Bristol, was one of those so favoured. John Hollyman, a monk of 
 Reading, was raised to the bishopric very soon after Mary came to the 
 throne ; the Mass and the Latin services of the Church of Rome were 
 again introduced ; and these drawings may have been executed at that 
 very time by some one connected with the new establishment, although 
 we have no proof that monks, as such, were again placed in the monas¬ 
 tery. A careful examination of the head-dress of the female figures 
 will show a general correspondence to that introduced by Queen Mary 
 herself, and subsequently adopted by Mary Queen of Scots, and which 
 became the fashion of the age. The apparel of the male figures also is 
 that which was worn by the upper classes, especially during the entire 
 reign of Queen Elizabeth and James I. ; they may therefore have been 
 executed as early as that of Queen Mary : if so, they were, in all proba¬ 
 bility, done by some member of a religious house which had been 
 suppressed by the reforming spirit of King Henry Till., and who was 
 
 * The Author has made a copy of these beautiful drawings, and deposited 
 it in the City Library. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 51 
 
 accustomed to this mode of embellishing the walls of churches and 
 other sacred structures after the manner of the middle ages. 
 
 At the western extremity of the dwellings of the petty canons are 
 the remains of the abbey stables ; the entrance doorway to which, of 
 somewhat large dimensions, and the buttresses supporting the building, 
 still stand in all their integrity. Round the barton, now Lower College 
 Green, were other offices, such as the “ granaries of the bakers and 
 brewers, ” the dwellings of the “ stable-keepers of my lords the 
 abbots,” &c. The places of abode of these servants were included, 
 probably, in the buildings last described, as there are no indications of 
 any such erections having had existence westward of the stables. Many 
 structures once standing in this barton have, however, been destroyed ; 
 as there are numerous instances in which portions of Anglo-Norman 
 work have been discovered built into the walls of modern houses ; and 
 these remains, wherever found, undoubtedly refer to the outbuildings of 
 the monastery erected by Robert Fitzharding. 
 
 Of the Augustine monks Fuller says, “ This Order in England 
 afforded three-score-and-ten eminent writers, and one in Germany worth 
 them all in effect,—I mean Martin Luther, who by his writings gave a 
 mortal wound to all these Orders, yea, and to the root of the Romish 
 religion.” * 
 
 The religious Mendicant Orders who arrived in England at the begin¬ 
 ning of the thirteenth century were very soon located in Bristol; 
 Maurice Berkeley de Gaunt founding a house for the Dominicans in 
 1229. Its situation was “a little higher than the Gray (Friars), on 
 Frome in the right ripe of it: ”t that is, it stood on the Broad Weir, 
 having Philadelphia Street eastward, Merchant Street westward, and 
 Rosemary Street northward of the convent. The remains of this house 
 are still considerable, and are principally engaged by the “ Society of 
 Friends,” their meeting-house occupying the site of the church ; the 
 dormitory, kitchen, and cloisters are now their school premises ; and a 
 burial ground is attached to their house of worship, where now slumber 
 in quietude, mingling in one common dust, many a turbulent follower 
 of the fierce and fiery Dominic, w'ith all that is mortal of those who 
 were once members of the more peaceful fraternity of Quakers. 
 
 e 2 
 
 Fuller’s Church History, p. 268. 
 t Leland’s Itin., vol. 7, p. 70. 
 
52 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 In the refectory, with the kitchen adjoining, are the original fire¬ 
 places, now occupied by modern grates. Two Early English windows, 
 of two lights each, adorn the south side of the refectory, having interior 
 arches supported by detached columns of a chaste and very beautiful 
 character. The dormitory, which was once used by the Guild of 
 Cutlers, presents in its east window a fine example of the Early English 
 style of building, being of three lights, the arch supported by columns 
 in harmony with the rest of its simple but elegant members. * The 
 west end of this apartment is adorned with a window of two lights in 
 the Decorated English style, the head being filled with quatrefoils. 
 Above this is a square opening of one light, and over the window at the 
 east end is a deeply recessed trefoil opening. On the north side of the 
 room are fifteen Early English windows, each of one light ; those on 
 the south side are of recent construction. The roof, which is of oak, 
 is probably of a somewhat later date than the older parts of the 
 building, erected in the thirteenth century. Portions of the cloisters 
 also remain, but the windows, which are of the same stj r le, occupy 
 another situation, to suit the present destination of the structure. The 
 room used for a girls’ school was, after the Reformation, occupied by the 
 Guild of Bakers, but excepting the remains of an oak roof, it contains 
 little of interest. 
 
 Few of the houses of the Friars were ever endowed, yet many of 
 them were large and stately buildings, and had noble churches, in which 
 great men often chose to be buried, which brought honour and profit by 
 legacies left to them. Maurice de Berkeley, lord of Beverston Castle, 
 died May oth, 1486, and, it appears, was buried here; as also was 
 John Yiel, Esq., the first sheriff of Bristol, who died March 9th ; 
 Walter Frampton, who died January 2nd; Richard Spicer, June 1st; 
 Matthew de Gurney, one of the founders of this house of friars, 
 August 28th; Lady Maud Denys, October, 1422 ; Sir William Daubeny, 
 kuight, who lies in the choir ; the heart of Robert de Gurney is buried 
 in this church ; and Anselm de Gurney lies in the choir, who died 
 November 15th.+ Three stone coffins were discovered in what is now 
 called the Quaker’s friars, on the 10th of February, 1814, by some 
 
 Bemoved from the “Bakers’ Hail ” opposite, 
 t Barrett’s History of Bristol, pp. 400, 401. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 53 
 
 workmen engaged in constructing a cistern. The}' contained the entire 
 skeletons of two men and one woman. 
 
 In 1530, John Hilsey, the black, or preaching friar (as the Domini¬ 
 cans were called), of Bristol, was made Bishop of Rochester, and was 
 the sixty-sixth prelate, which elevation he enjoyed but three years. 
 
 The house of the Franciscan, grey friars, or friars minors, “ was on 
 the right ripe of From Watar, it was founded before 1234,” * but it 
 has so entirely disappeared, that although no pains have been spared 
 in making a search upon its site, scarcely a vestige remains of what once 
 was “ a large, grand, and noble building, being one of the capital cus¬ 
 todies of Franciscans in the kingdom.” It had nine other friaries under 
 its control, each having a common seal. The spot once occupied by 
 this house is now where stands the Unitarian meeting house, Lewin’s 
 Mead, with the premises of Messrs. Cooper, Shute, and Cooper, and 
 those also of Messrs. Ford and Canning : on excavating the ground be¬ 
 longing to the latter firm in October, 1851, the remains of several 
 bodies, enclosed in coffins apparently of oak, but black with age, were 
 discovered; and a part of the upper portion of a beautiful square¬ 
 headed Perpendicular English window, which shews that some of the 
 buildings which stood here must have been erected after the year 1400. 
 
 “ The priory of the Carmelites (White Friars) was the fairest of all the 
 houses of the frieries in Bristol, and stood on the right rype of the 
 From, over against the Key : f the site of it is now occupied by the 
 school or hospital founded by Edward Colston. Speed informs us that 
 it was built by Edward I., in the year 1267; “perhaps when he was 
 Prince of Wales,” says Mr. Barrett ; that writer forgetting that the first 
 English prince who bore that title was his son, afterwards the un¬ 
 fortunate King Edward II., who was barbarously murdered in Berkeley 
 Castle. Not an arch, a window, or anything else indicating that a con¬ 
 vent ever stood here, can now be traced. 
 
 “This Carmelite friery was of large extent, occupying all the ground 
 from the Red Lodge and garden, down the hill to St. Augustin’s Back; 
 and was bounded by Pipe Lane on the west, and Steep Street on the 
 east; and besides the house and lodgings for the friers, their church 
 was most elegant and spacious, with many chapels in it, and many very 
 
 * Tanner’s Notitia. 
 
 + Leland’s Itin., vol. v., p. 53. 
 
54 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 good families lie buried therein.” * Many eminent men, whose names 
 deserve recording, were members of this fraternity, and will be found 
 noticed in a future page. 
 
 Augustinian Eremites, of farre later date than Augustinian monks, 
 who first entred England, Anno 1252, went under the notion of Begging 
 Fryars, taking the denomination of Poveiiie .” t Their “ house was 
 hard by the Temple Gate, within it,” J on the north-west,bordering on the 
 banks of the river Avon, probably towards Temple Back. It was founded 
 by Sir Simon and Sir William Mont-acute, about the beginning of the 
 reign of King Edward II. In one of Stow’s manuscripts Robert 
 Pocock is said to have been the founder. William Wyrcestre says it 
 was consecrated in the month of July, 1320. The house (of which not 
 a trace remains) appears to have been dissolved in 1543, and the site, 
 Ac., sold to Maurice Dennis. The conventual buildings, however, do 
 not seem to have been by any means extensive. 
 
 The form of admission into this Order is thus set forth in a writing 
 in my possession, made by “ Frater Ricardus” from the records of the 
 convent. “ Brother Thomas, prior provincial of the Order of the 
 brethren, Hermits of St. Augustine, in England, To his beloved in 
 Christ, William Sparke and Johanna his wife, the prayers, and what¬ 
 soever sweeter can be drawn from the side of the Crucified. The 
 devotion which you, for the reverence of God, bear to our Order, as I 
 received with sincere affection of charity in receiving, believing it to be 
 acceptable to Christ, by reciprocal spiritual benefits, to recompeuce the 
 pious. I receive you into all and singular suffrages of our religion in 
 life as well as in death. Conceding to you, by the tenor of these 
 presents, a full participation of all the benefits which the clemency of 
 the divine Saviour will deign to work through the brethren of the said 
 Order scattered through the province of England, in masses, vigils, 
 feasts, abstinences, preachings and prayers, and all other divine exercises. 
 Adding also from special favour, that when the decease of any one 
 belonging to you shall be made known in our provincial chapter, that 
 shall be devoutly done for you which is a custom to be done there in 
 common for our brethren. In testimony of which thing the seal of my 
 office is affixed to these presents. Given in our Convent at London, 
 
 * Barrett's Hist, of Bristol, p. 413. 
 
 t Fuller's Church Hist., p. 268. + Lelancl’s Itin., vol. rii., p. 92. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 55 
 
 on the twenty-fourth day of the month of December, the year of the 
 Lord One Thousand Four Hundred and Eighty.” 
 
 There were many of these convents of hermits in England, but 
 perhaps none were better known than those who followed the rule of 
 St. Augustine ; by which the brethren were to have all things in 
 common ; the rich who fraternized with them were to sell all they 
 possessed and bestow the proceeds on the poor. They were to receive 
 nothing unless approved by their superior; and to whatever place he 
 retired on the approach of intestine turmoil or strife, they were to retire 
 also. The morning of each day was to be spent in physical labour, the 
 after-part in reading, except on Saturday and Sunday. On the former 
 they provided necessaries for themselves, and on the latter only, in 
 addition to their devotional services, they were permitted to drink 
 wine. They were never to go alone into the world, but were to be 
 accompanied in all cases by a brother. They were never to partake of 
 food but in their convent, and to receive no letters or presents of any kind 
 in secret; and although women were received into their convents as 
 nuns of the Order, they were never to entertain a thought in relation 
 to them, but strictly to observe modesty, chastity, and charity, and 
 every other Christian virtue. “ To give them their due,” says Fuller, 
 “ they were good disputants ; ” and in this consisted their chief excel¬ 
 lence. “ In the original principles of monastic orders, and the rules by 
 which they ought, at least, to have been governed, there was a character 
 of meekness, self-denial, and charity, that could not wholly be effaced. 
 These virtues, rather than justice and veracity, were inculcated by the 
 religious ethics of the middle ages; and in the relief of indigence it may, 
 upon the whole, be asserted, that the monks did not fall short of their 
 profession.” * 
 
 The hospitals of the middle ages were endowed establishments, 
 generally for the support of poor brethren, who, when sick and past 
 labour, might here find an asylum in which a comfortable provision was 
 made for their declining days, and their pathway to the grave was 
 smoothed as they approached its confines. In this particular they were 
 different from the monasteries of their time, which being inhabited by 
 the regular clergy, were almost wholly confined to devotional exercises; 
 
 Hallam's Middle Ages, vol. iii., p. 350. 
 
5G 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 and yet the hospital was not without much that was ecclesiastical in its 
 constitution; for in an age when the power of the priest was all-potent, 
 and his influence was felt throughout society, it could not be that a 
 charitable institution should be established without an amalgamation 
 of the religious with the benevolent. Accordingly, it is observable, 
 that in most of the hospitals in the middle ages, priests resided with 
 the poor lay brethren upon the foundation, of the benefits of which 
 they were alike the recipients. 
 
 Many of these hospitals were like the road-side inns of modem 
 times; with this difference, that in the latter the traveller has to pay for 
 his refreshment, whilst in the former it was obtained for nothing, and 
 in some cases a night’s lodging into the bargain. The Hospital of the 
 Gaunts, College Green, appears to have partaken of the charitable and of 
 the religious, too; for here dwelt together, upon one common foundation, a 
 master, three chaplains, and a limited number of poor brethren, who at 
 first seemed to have numbered twenty-seven, "' and entirely subject to 
 the management and direction of the canons of the monastery of St. 
 Augustine. By the inmates of this hospital provision was made for the 
 passing strauger, and the neighbouring poor were likewise cared for, 
 that duty being a part of then - constitution; and the sick, too, shared 
 their bounty. As in the monasteries every brother was habited in a 
 peculiar kind of dress, so in these hospitals the attire of all the inmates 
 was according to the rule enjoined upon them by their founder. No 
 one was admitted into the brotherhood without undergoing a similar 
 process to that enforced in the greater religious houses, but it does not 
 appear that any vow of poverty was exacted from the applicants for 
 admission into hospitals. Having pledged himself to chastity, 
 which was in all cases demanded, the noviciate was admitted, and from 
 thenceforward his entire services were the property of the church. 
 
 The Gaunt’s Hospital is by some writers said to have been founded 
 by Kobert, third son of llobert Fitzharding, the founder of the Abbey 
 of St. Augustine. He married Hawise de Gourney, and had an only 
 son, Maurice, who appears to be the first who assumed the name of 
 Gaunt. This Maurice died at Portsmouth, without issue, in 1230, and 
 to him, and not to his father, we may with greater probability assign 
 
 Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 359. 
 
HISTORY OP BRISTOL. 
 
 57 
 
 the honour of having conceived the design of erecting this hospital; 
 but whether he actually commenced it is very uncertain. At his death 
 he seems to have left large possessions to his sister’s son, Robert de 
 Gourney, who, it is generally believed, was in reality the builder, if not 
 the founder of the structure in question, in compliance with the will of 
 his uncle, Maurice de Gaunt, and for the repose of his soul; and that its 
 erection was begun immediately after his death by Robert de Gourney, 
 who augmented the number of the recipients of his bounty to one 
 hundred poor persons daily for ever, thus making a separate and 
 distinct endowment.* “ The governor of this house is sometimes called 
 prior, and the house itself a priory of the order of St. Augustine.”f 
 The brethren established in this hospital (which, when completed, 
 was dedicated to the honour of God, St. Mary, and St. Mark), were 
 called “ Boneliomes or Goodmeu, (and) were also Eremites, brought 
 over into England by Richard, Earl of Cornwall, in the reign of King 
 Henry III., his brother; so styled eminently because of their signall 
 goodnesse.” | An eminent authority § says that of “ Gaunt’s alias 
 St. Mark’s College, Magistri Maurice de Gaunt (who was the), first 
 master and founder, died 1229, or 1230.” To him succeeded “Henry 
 de Gaunt (whose name) occurs in 1266;” he was a younger brother 
 of Maurice, just mentioned, from whom he appears to have received 
 the appointment; and from the fact that his nephew and heir, Robert 
 de Gourney, “by his deed duly executed, presents and approves” of 
 the appointment of Sir Henry, “ who calls himself clerk and brother 
 of Maurice,” we have strong presumptive evidence that the erection of 
 tills hospital was commenced by Maurice de Gaunt, and finished by 
 Robert de Gourney, for there seems to have been a sort of agreement 
 between the two parties, that on the completion of the structure, Sir 
 Henry, who was probably a needy younger brother, should be appointed 
 governor of the house. Having entered upon the duties of the office, 
 he continued in the discharge thereof until 1268, when he resigned 
 through the infirmities of age, and dying in the following year, “ lies 
 buried in the vesturye under a flat stone.” || 
 
 The Hospital of the Gaunts, from the foundation to the dissolution 
 of the house, was presided over by William, mention of whose name 
 
 * Tanner’s Notitia. + Lelaud’s Coll., vol. i., p. 85. 
 
 f Fuller’s Church History, Book vi., p. 277. § Tanner. 
 
 U Lelancl's Itin., vol. vii. 
 
58 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 is made in 1318; John Tittlebury or Tedbury, deprived in 1346; when 
 John Stokeland succeeded; Thomas de Overe, resigned in 1370, and 
 was followed in the’office by Walter Bruningel, in 1370; William Lane, 
 1391; John St. Paul, 1410; John Shaftesbury, who resigned in 1424; 
 Nicholas Sterre, died in 1437; John Halle, 1437; John Moulton, 
 resigned in 1445; William Wyne, 1445; William Prowse, 1467 ; John 
 Mede, died 1494, to whom succeeded Richard Colyns; Thomas 
 Tylor occurs in 1516, as does Richard Bromfield, 1527.* In 1534, 
 John Coleman, master, John Helice, Richard Fitchett, Robert 
 Benet, Thomas Pynchyn, his brethren, resigned “ this rich house, with 
 all its lands and possessions, plate and ornaments, into the King’s 
 hands,” for the King’s use.t The “ church, houses, and buildings, were 
 to remain undefaced,” excepting the Master’s lodgings, with the hall, 
 buttery, pantry, and kitchen, which were considered superfluous. 
 
 The boundary of the hospital of the Gaunts is still indicated by a 
 niche in the angle of the corner house of Pipe Lane and Frogmore 
 Street, with, near it, the remains of a winged lion carved in stone. 
 Part of a similar figure, which formerly stood against the western corner 
 of St. Mark’s Lane, on St. Augustine’s Back, is now on the premises 
 belonging to Baldwin Street Hall. The noble mansion of the Master 
 of the hospital, together with the cloisters, were taken down, and upon 
 their site was erected Queen Elizabeth’s Hospital and the Red Maid’s 
 School. Unity and Orchard Streets are erected upon the orchard of 
 the Hospital, and Culver Street is built upon the spot where the 
 “ culver or pigeon-house” of the brethren once had existence. 
 
 Another religious house called the hospital of St. Bartholomew the 
 Apostle, for the support of men and women, or nuns and friars, was 
 situated at the west end of Lewin’s Mead, near that of the Franciscans; 
 its garden extended backwards and lay over against the nunnery of St. 
 Mary Magdalen, on St. Michael’s Hill. It was also a priory of Canons 
 Regular, % as well as “ an hospital for the poor, with a church ; ” being 
 governed by a prior and prioress. 
 
 When, and by whom, this hospital was founded, is unknown, but as 
 Lord de la Warre was the patron in 1386, it probably owes its origin 
 
 * Tanner. 
 
 f Barrett’s History of Bristol, p. 373. The arms of the hospital were gules, 
 three geese passant, argent. 
 
 X William of Wyrcestre, p. 208. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 59 
 
 to the family of the Gaunts, from whom he was descended. The 
 original entrance gateway still remains, the arch being of the Early 
 English style of architecture, and four centred, like a Tudor arch, which 
 is most unusual, there being but three or four instances of it in existence 
 of so early a date. On each side of the interior of this porch is an 
 arcade of arches in the same style, and apparently constructed about 
 the year 1220. On the left hand of this entrance porch, or porter’s 
 lodge, is a seated figure, but so mutilated that it is not possible to say, 
 with certainty, what it represented when entire. 
 
 At the dissolution, this house, with all the lands, &c., thereto 
 belonging, “was purchased of Sir Thomas West, Knight, and Lord de 
 la Warre, patrons and founders, George Croft, master, and the brethren 
 and sisters, and conveyed to the mayor, burgesses and commonalty of 
 Bristol, for erecting a free grammar school, in pursuance of the will of 
 Robert Thorn, Esq.” * 
 
 At the bottom of Redclifle Hill, and extending from the street back 
 to the river Avon, once stood the hospital of St. John the Baptist, but 
 of which nothing remains; its site, however, is pointed out by St. John’s 
 Lane. This house, too, consisted of brothers and sisters of the Order 
 of St. Augustine, and is said to have been founded by “John Farceyn 
 alias Farcey,” but the date is not stated. “ It became, in time, very 
 well endowed, and had many tenements in Bristol, as well as estates in 
 the country belonging to it.”f It was, at first, under the government 
 and patronage of the Bishop of Bath and Wells; but for some time 
 before the dissolution it was under that of the mayor and commonalty 
 of Bristol. 
 
 The name of the first master of this hospital, upon record, is that of 
 Brother Thomas, who appears to have received his appointment in 1261; 
 to him followed Edmund dieto le Thyelare, in 1292; and John de 
 Monigton, in 1343, who resigned in 1348. In 1383 William Topesleye 
 was master, and Nicholas Sterr in 1430. John Hall, in 1442, was 
 “ instituted at the presentation of Clement Bagot, mayor of Bristol, and 
 the commonalty; this hospital was, by its foundation, collegiate, but 
 there being now but one brother in the said college not 22 years old, 
 therefore, for want of brethren, it ceased to be a college.’’ % In 1467 
 
 * Barrett's Hist, of Bristol, p. 432. t Ibid. 
 
 + Barrett’s History of Bristol, p. 595. 
 
60 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 William Prowse, at the presentation of William Canynges, mayor, left 
 the rectory of Wraxal for the mastership of this house. In 1504 
 Richard Collins, S.T.P., having a dispensation from the Apostolic See 
 to hold any benefice, was instituted and inducted to the rectory of St. 
 Stephen, March 16th, in that year. In 1542 Richard Bromefield 
 surrendered this hospital to the King, it having been possessed by the 
 friars above 364 years. The brethren had an ancient chapel contiguous 
 to the west end of the church of St. Mary Redcliffe, dedicated to the 
 Holy Ghost, which was surrendered with the convent. 
 
 The site of the King David Inn, on St. Michael’s Hill, was once 
 occupied by the nunnery of St. Mary Magdalen, which owes its 
 foundation to Eva, wife of Robert Fitzharding, who, herself, became 
 the first prioress. Mr. Barrett says * “ it is not certain whether she 
 built it whilst his wife, or his widow;” but as Robert Fitzharding died 
 in the month of February, 1170, and Eva, his wife, in that of March 
 in the same year, as he himself states, the slightest reflection upon the 
 subject would have shown him that he need not have perplexed himself 
 at all upon the subject. The truth is that Eva founded the nunnery 
 during the life-time of her husband, and whilst he was engaged in the 
 erection of the monastery of St. Augustine. On the completion of the 
 two structures, both husband and wife having taken the monastic vows, 
 retired to the respective houses they had built, where they ended their 
 days at the time above stated. 
 
 It is a popular error to suppose that religious houses dedicated to 
 Mary Magdalen have any reference to her early character as being 
 unchaste, or disreputable; and therefore, that nunneries, hospitals, and 
 other retreats of a similar kind were, when dedicated to her in the 
 middle ages, asylums for the abandoned of her sex, but who were 
 desirous of reforming their hitherto vicious lives. The origin of this 
 error arose, in all probability, from the fact that the inmates of these 
 institutions were called “penitents” in common, which expression, 
 however, had no reference to their supposed previously dissipated 
 character; on the contrary, they were among the most virtuous of our 
 female population; and out of respect to this house in Bristol, it is on 
 record that the nuns were held in such high estimation, that although 
 all the other religious houses in it were suppressed at the Reformation, 
 
 Barrett’s History of Bristol, p. 426. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 61 
 
 the continuation of this institution was strongly recommended to the 
 visitors of the king, on account of its utility. At this time it contained 
 but three professed nuns, but it had many novices beneath its roof, 
 whose business it was, in conjunction with their superior, to educate 
 the daughters of the principal inhabitants of the town, who readily 
 sent them here for instruction. Yet at an earlier period there appear 
 to have been many more of these professed nuns within the walls of 
 this convent; and even male, as well as female, inmates resided here, 
 for when, in 1347, Agnes de Gloucester was prioress, “ Brother John” 
 is said to have been the rector or prior, probably over the friars here 
 located. 
 
 There are no perceptible remains of the house of the nuns erected 
 by Eva Fitzkarding. A doorway at the bottom of the cellar stairs at 
 the King David Inn, another at the top of them, and one or two others 
 in the superstructure, together with a newell or winding staircase, 
 extending from the ground floor to the summit of the building, is all 
 that it contains which at any rate refers to the middle ages; and as 
 these portions of it are erected in the Perpendicular style of English 
 architecture, and at a somewhat late period of its practice, it is not 
 unlikely that the entire building was re-constructed when John 
 Newland was abbot of St. Augustine’s monastery. The prioresses 
 after Agnes de Gloucester in 1347, were Maud de Luttleton, March 
 27th, 1349, w T ho resigned July 21st, 1356; Margery Longe, one of the 
 nuns was elevated to the office, August 2nd, 1363; Elizabeth Wodecroft, 
 October 29th, 1369; Alice Claybile died prioress, no date recorded, 
 and was succeeded by Joan Walys, a nun of this house, elected 
 December 4th, 1421; Catherine Brown died prioress, who was followed 
 by Eleanor Graunte, March 4th, 1520. 
 
 Besides the religious houses above-mentioned, there were many others 
 partaking both of the hospital and the almshouse, which deserve a 
 passing notice. There was that of St. Catherine, at Brightbow, without 
 Bristol, in the parish of Bedminster. It was founded by Lord Bobert 
 de Berkeley, for a warden and seven poor brethren; the founder dying 
 May 13th, 1221, when it was strictly a w r ay-side hospital, designed for 
 the relief of travellers and pilgrims journeying from place to place, 
 and having occasion for temporary lodging and refreshment only. 
 Subsequently a few priests were added to the brethren already 
 
62 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 established here, who wore the habit of seculars, with a cope or mantle 
 of black, and a St. Catherine wheel of cloth of another colour sewed 
 to the left breast. 
 
 This hospital was enlarged in the reign of Edward I., and in 
 1346 Sir Thomas Berkeley founded a chantry in the chapel of the 
 establishment, for a priest to say mass for his father and mother; and 
 here, too, the obit of the founder of the hospital itself was yearly 
 celebrated with great solemnity. Little now remains of this house to 
 show either its extent or character. 
 
 “ Without Temple Gate was an hospital called Roger Magdalen’s, of 
 Nonney, which (who) was founder of it.” * Mention is also made by 
 the same writer that “ Ther was an hospital of old time, wher of late 
 a nunry vas, called St. Margaret’s.” j Tanner speaks of one “on the 
 west side of Redcliffe hill (as) an ancient hospital for lepers, dedicated 
 to St. Mary Magdalen.” J Leland, again, tells us that “ Where now.St. 
 Laurence church is (Bell-lane), was sumtime a nunnery;” § but of these 
 houses we have now no further record nor the slightest remains, and 
 probably others have shared the same fate. Besides the priory of St. 
 James, also, “mention is made of two others belonging to the 
 Benedictines, of which a traditionary account was preserved to the time 
 of William Wyrcestre; one situated on the site of St. Philip’s Church, 
 the other, which was a cell to Glastonbury, on the site of St. Stephen’s 
 Church, near the Key.”|| Mention is also made by Barrett IT of the 
 hermitage of St. Brandon and the chapel of St. Vincent. 
 
 At the top of Old Market Street in the parish of St. Philip and 
 Jacob, stands an hospital or almshouse founded by John Barstaple, a 
 Bristol merchant, which he dedicated to the Holy and Undivided 
 Trinity, and St. George. Here were located by the founder, six poor 
 men and six poor women, and a priest to officiate to them; the former 
 numbers being increased subsequent to the Reformation. The oiiginal 
 building has been twice replaced by other erections, one of which has 
 been partially built very recently (1858). In the floor of the chapel 
 were, until recently, the brass effigies of the founder and his wife 
 carefully preserved; they are now at the office of the Charity Tmstees, 
 
 * Leland’s It in., vol. vii., p. 96. flbid., vol. vii., p. 92. 
 
 J Notitia. § Itin., vol. vii., p. 91. || Tanner’s Notitia. 
 
 IT History of Bristol, p. 60. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 G3 
 
 awaiting the rebuilding of the chapel of the institution. Under the 
 former is inscribed in Latin—“Here lies John Barstaple, burgess of the 
 town of Bristol, founder of this place, who died the 15tli kalends of 
 October, the Dominical letter D., 1411, to whose soul may God be 
 merciful, Amen.” Beneath the feet of his wife is—“ Hei’e lies Isabella, 
 once the wife of John Barstaple, who died in the year 1400, to whose 
 soul may God be merciful. Amen.” 
 
 The almshouse in Steep Street, in the parish of St. Michael, was 
 founded by John Foster, another Bristol merchant, who appears to have 
 taken the necessary steps thereto, immediately after the year of his 
 mayoralty, in 1481, for we find that “ by indenture dated 4th October, 
 1st Richard III., 1483, Margaret Merrick (of whom no mention is made 
 by Mr. Barrett), prioress of the house of St. Mary Magdalen, and the 
 sisters of the same, conveyed to the said John Foster a piece of void 
 ground, adjoining the above (house and land of St. Mary Magdalen), 
 and also three cottages adjoining, also a piece of void ground, lately 
 occupied by two tenements, and two gardens behind the same,” &c.* 
 
 The ground thus secured, the almshouse seems to have been at once 
 erected; for in the following year measures were taken to construct a 
 chapel for the use of the inmates, as appears by the deed which relates 
 to the conveyance of a piece of land to Foster for that special purpose, 
 “by indenture dated 12th April, 2nd Richard III., (1484) between 
 Daniel John Worcestre, prior of the house of St. James, of Bristowe, 
 of the one part, and Thomas Galcong, parson of St. Michael’s, of 
 Bristowe, whereof the abbot of Tewkesbury is patron, of the other 
 part; it is stated that an agreement had been made between the said 
 prior, and John Foster, merchant, of Bristowe, for ground of the said 
 prior upon Saint Michael’s Hill, and that Foster was to have said ground 
 under the seal of the House of Tewkesbury for ninety-nine years, 
 paying annually to the prior of St. James, which is a member of the 
 same house, and his successor, for the ground, four shillings, the said 
 Foster, within the space of a year, to make upon said ground a chapel 
 in the honour of the Three Kings of Coleyne, wherein a priest shall, 
 divers days in the week, sing mass to the relief of divers poor people 
 there dwelling, for which poor people the said Foster, of his charity, 
 hath builded divers houses, for the performance of which it is agreed 
 
 Appendix X. 
 
64 
 
 HISTOKY OF BKISTOL. 
 
 that the indenture should remain with Harry Weston, Steward, of 
 Bristowc, until the said chapel be so built, and finished, forasmuch as 
 the rent received is less than of old time, because the building now 
 standing upon the ground is rnynouse, and standeth without a tenement 
 decayed, and that great cost must be had to make it a chapel.” 
 
 Upon this site, which was 36ft. in length and 90ft. in breadth, the 
 chapel was erected in the year 1484, and dedicated, according to the 
 stipulation of the Abbot of Tewkesbury, to the three kings of Cologne. 
 The exterior seems little altered in appearance from its original state, 
 excepting only such as would naturally occur through age and the 
 effects of weather. In it the occupants of the almshouse (which was 
 rebuilt in 1702) attend the service of the Church of England every 
 Wednesday evening, when prayers are read by the minister of St. 
 Michael's, at whose church they are expected to appear on Sundays. 
 The sacrament is administered to them three times in the year in their 
 own chapel, by the minister referred to. 
 
 After John Foster’s death, his executor, John Esterfield, bought the 
 land on which the almshouse and chapel are situated, in fee, at his own 
 private cost; and in 1503, “Elizabeth, prioress of the house of St. 
 Mary Magdalen, Bristowe, in consideration of thirty-eight shillings and 
 sixpence paid by John Esterfield, executor of John Foster (acknowledges 
 it to be) in full of all arrears of rent, in respect of premises near the 
 almshouse builded by said John Foster, which premises were granted by 
 the Lady Margaret, late prioress, deceased.” On the 20th of December, 
 1504, at his own charges, John Esterfield conveyed to William Greville, 
 sergeant-at-law and recorder of Bristol, John Esterfield, clerk, Henry 
 Esterfield and John Esterfield, merchants, sons of the said John 
 Esterfield, Arthur Ivemys, John Bowland, and Richard Hoby, merchants, 
 Thomas Harding, town clerk, and John Hotting, all the premises of the 
 almshouse, for the benefit of the charity. In the 19th year of Queen 
 Elizabeth’s reign they were conveyed by the above-named recorder and 
 others to the mayor and corporation, in whose hands the charity 
 remained, until the Municipal Reform Bill passed, in 1832, which 
 placed it under the control of the trustees to the Bristol charities. 
 
 In Lewin’s Mead, parish of St. James, was Spencer’s almshouse, 
 erected about the year 1493, by William Spencer, who was executor to 
 William Canynges, who, by will, bequeathed the “residue of all and 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 65 
 
 singular his goods and chattels, not before disposed of, after paying his 
 debts and funeral expenses,” to distribute the same for the benefit of 
 his soul, as should seem expedient. With this residue was this 
 almshouse erected, and when finished, was dedicated to the Holy 
 Trinity. It was founded for twelve persons, and “on the 5th October, 
 8th Henry VII., William Spencer ordained that 2s. should be weekly 
 distributed unto twelve persons, well disposed, of the English nation, 
 that had been householders in the said town (of Bristol), and lived of 
 alms in the almshouse, lately builded by the said William Spencer, in 
 Lewin’s Mead of the said town, with the goods of William Canynges, 
 late of Bristowe, merchant, paying unto every of the said poor persons, 
 2d. weekly; also, as often as there should happen any of the said poor 
 folk to decease, or to be misgoverned, and would not be reformed by 
 the chaplain, for the time being, then the said chaplain, by the advice 
 of the said William Spencer, during his life, and afterwards by the 
 advice of the mayor of Bristowe, for the time being, should put another 
 person (English) in the place of the person so deceased or misgoverned, 
 and that, as often, and when, as such case should fortune, for evermore: 
 And also, if it should fortune, for lack of the number of poor people 
 being in the said almshouse, any part of the said 2s. weekly should 
 remain in the hands of the said chaplain undistributed, or not disposed 
 of, then the said money, so remaining undisposed of, should be kept in 
 his hands, toward the reparation of the said almshouse, and disposed by 
 the said chaplain in reparation of the said house, by the advice of the 
 mayor of Bristowe, for the time being, as often, and when, as need 
 should be; of the which money and reparations the said chaplain, for 
 the time being, should yield true account unto the said mayor, at such 
 time as the mayor should appoint in that behalf, and that ordinance to 
 be kept for evermore.”* 
 
 This almshouse, which is now entirely removed, was situated next to 
 the Pointmakers’ Hall, and opposite the Franciscan Friary, Lewin’s 
 Mead. At the back of the street was a row of small dwellings having 
 
 O O 
 
 one room only, and that upon the ground floor. 
 
 In Temple Street stood the Weavers’ Hall, of which some remains 
 still exist; and beneath it is the hospital or almshouse for four poor 
 
 Report of the Commissioners on Charities, vol. i., p. 399. 
 
6G 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 women, which has long been tenantless; and at the east end where 
 Divine service was once performed, all is now totally silent and deserted. 
 The hall has been successively used as a Wesleyan chapel, a Jews’ 
 synagogue, and a charity school; for the latter purpose it is still 
 occupied. 
 
 Of Burton’s almshouse, Long Row, Mr. Barrett says,* “ It was 
 erected by Simon de Burton, about the year 1292,” and he quotes 
 Leland in support of the assertion, who writes,f “ The almesehowse by 
 Seynt Thomas Churche is called Burton’s almesehowse. Burton, maior 
 of the towne, and founder, is buried in it.” And who was Simon de 
 Burton ? The answer to this query is given by the writer of “ The 
 History of Bristol;” also in the “Orphan Book,” in the possession of the 
 corporation, written many hundred years after the fact narrated is said 
 to have taken place; and a modern inscription on one of the benefaction 
 tables in the church of St. Thomas, the parish in which it is situated ; 
 the 1 atter being merely an echo of the other two; the church, itself, 
 possessing no record whatever in which the name of Simon de Burton 
 in any way appears, but it has documents which speak of John Burton. 
 The Charity Commissioners, too, in their inquiries, could obtain no 
 information respecting the founding of this almshouse, until the 
 beginning of the sixteenth century. I find, however, in the previous 
 century, lived, iu the reign of Henry VI., one John Burton, a wealthy 
 merchant of Bristol, and the founder of a chantry in the church of St. 
 Thomas, and also of one in that of St. Mary Redcliffe, where he was 
 buried. To this individual, I have no doubt, belongs the honour of 
 establishing the almshouse so long accorded to Simon de Burton. From 
 the extraordinary fact that no record exists of any land left by Simon 
 de Burton for the maintenance of this almshouse, as stated in the 
 “ Orphan Book,” that his name does not appear in connection with the 
 parish of St. Thomas, in any gift, donation, or bequest, whatsoever, to 
 this or any other charity; and that no mention is made of any bestowment 
 for its maintenance until the year 1523, previous to which time it was 
 supported by the inhabitants of St. Thomas Street; and, moreover, that 
 Simon de Burton lived in the parish of St. Leonard,J we may well 
 
 * History of Bristol, p. 564. + Leland's Itin., vol. Hi., p. 89. 
 
 t Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 506. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 07 
 
 doubt the truth of the statement in the “ Orphan Book,” and of that 
 also of Mr. Barrett. John Burton was bailiff, sheriff, and mayor of 
 Bristol, in rotation, and also member of Parliament, in the fifteenth 
 century. Long Row, where this almshouse stands, was, in his time 
 called “ Burton’s Lane,” and I have no doubt that he erected it, as 
 already intimated, and not Simon de Burton, as has been popularly 
 believed since the days of Mr. Barrett. As William Wyrcestre makes 
 no mention of Simon de Burton, I am disposed to regard him as 
 altogether a fictitious person ; and if, as I believe, the almshouse was 
 founded by a bequest made by John Burton some time after Wyrcestre’s 
 death, his silence respecting him is accounted for, the death of the old 
 topographer having already occurred. 
 
 “ The site of the house of Knights Templars, and afterwards of the 
 prior and brethren of St. John of Jerusalem, is at present not very 
 easily to be traced,” says Mr. Barrett,* writing in 1789 ; he thinks, 
 however, that it stood near the church, and that probably, the “ present 
 site of Dr. White’s Hospital, and the houses adjoining, seems to be the 
 spot, where old arches still appear to point it out.” Where there is so 
 much uncertainty, I should think it quite as likely that this house once 
 stood nearer to St. Philip’s Bridge, for on demolishing the old tavern 
 known as the Giant’s Castle, to make way for that structure, a few 
 years ago, an ancient window, and some corbels which had supported 
 arches, were discovered, of apparently about the middle of the fourteenth 
 century. Some persons place this house nearer Temple Gate. 
 
 To the monks and friars of the middle ages, Bristol is indebted for 
 some of the pipes and conduits of water she still possesses. Leland 
 enumerates them in his time thus :—“St. John’s, harde by St. John’s 
 Gate. The Key pipe, with a very faire castellette. All-Hallow pipe, 
 harde by the Calendaries, without a castelle. St. Nycholas pipe, with 
 a castellette. Redcliffe pipe, with a castellette, hard by Redcliffe 
 churche, witheowte the gate. Another pipe, without Redcliffe gate, 
 having no castelle. Another by Port waulle without the waulle.”t 
 
 The Carmelites brought a fountain of pure spring water from the 
 Park Street side of Brandon Hill to their House on St. Augustine’s 
 Back, through Frog Lane, and along Pipe Lane, which received its name 
 
 t Itin., vol. vii., p. 7L 
 F 2 
 
 Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 54G. 
 
68 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 from that circumstance. Here was their principal cistern, from which 
 they supplied their own friary adjacent, the prior subsequently grant¬ 
 ing a feather pipe to run through Host Street and Christmas Street 
 to St. John’s church. On the suppression of the monasteries, the 
 expense of keeping this pipe in repair was sustained by the 
 churchwardens of this church; the conduit, within memory, standing 
 inside the gate of St. John. 
 
 The Key pipe was not a benefit to the town derived through the 
 instrumentality of the monks, to whom it was, in this instance at least, 
 in no wise indebted, for it is kept in repair by the corporation. Its 
 construction dates back as far as the fourteenth century. In 1717 it 
 stood not far from Clare Street, when it was removed to make way for 
 the Fish Market, to the north side of St. Stephen’s church, and re¬ 
 erected nearer the river. In 1770, when St. Leonard’s church, which 
 stood in Corn Street, was pulled down, it was again removed, and its 
 sculptured ornaments of the early part of that century were lost to 
 admirers. The water rises north east of the Orphan Asylum, Ashley 
 Hill, and flows to Bristol through Baptist Mills, under Newfoundland 
 Street, Milk Street, the Horse Fair, over Bridewell Bridge, to the 
 cistern under the Quay, where, at the corner of the Tontine warehouses, 
 it yields an ample supply of the pure element for the use of 
 the citizens. 
 
 The water that fills All-Hallow pipe rises on the north side of Maudlin 
 Street, nearly opposite where the Moravian chapel now stands; it was, 
 centuries ago, the site of the orchard of the Priory of St. James, whose 
 superior, in the year 1400, granted it to the parish of All Saints; its 
 progress to the Exchange, where the conduit originally stood, is through 
 Lewin’s Mead, Christmas Street, and Broad Street. St. Nicholas pipe 
 and conduit has been long suppressed; it stood nearly on the site of the 
 toll-house on the north-west side of the bridge, and was entirely 
 removed with the old church and gate, Arc., in 1762. 
 
 In 1207 Lord Bobert de Berkeley gave “Huge Well,” a spring of 
 water at Knowle, to the parishioners of St. Mary Redclitfe, for the 
 joint use of themselves and the brethren of the Hospital of St. John 
 the Baptist, situated in Redcliffe Pit. This gift was made at the request 
 of William, whose name, as chaplain of Redcliffe, occurs under that 
 date. The spring rises in a field on a farm at Lower Knowle, and the 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 69 
 
 water is conveyed in leaden pipes to Redcliffe Hill, a distance of about 
 a mile and a-half; in the course of which it passes under the New Cut 
 for the river Avon, at Temple Gate. It supplies St. Thomas pipe, 
 which is a feather from Redcliffe; and once did, also, the conduit for 
 the use of the Augustine Eremites, Temple Gate. 
 
 Besides the secular guilds and the societies of Knights Templars and 
 Hospitallers which have been noticed, there were others of a more 
 religious character connected with some of the old churches of Bristol, 
 of which, with the exception of the Kalendaries, little has been 
 recorded. One of the most ancient of these was “the fraternity of 
 St. John the Baptist,” attached to the destroyed church of St. Ewen, 
 in which was a chapel set apart for the use of the brethren. It is 
 unknown whether this society is the same as one that, after the 
 dissolution, was called the Society of Merchant Taylors or not; nor is 
 it likely ever to be determined, as the societies seem to have been 
 greatly confounded with each other. 
 
 The crypt of St. Nicholas church was used as a chapel by the 
 fraternity of the Holy Ghost. This religious guild or society appears 
 to have held its meetings in conjunction with another brotherhood 
 also established here in honour of the Holy Cross. The expenses of 
 both fraternities seem to have been defrayed by rents, but from whence 
 derived is not clearly ascertained. There was also a religious society 
 attached to the church of St. Mary Redcliffe, where they had a chapel 
 dedicated to the Holy Ghost, or, as it was sometimes called, St. Spirit, 
 or St. Sprite. 
 
 The most notable religious society existing in Bristol during the 
 middle ages, was the Kalendaries, whose origin is traced to a remote 
 period; Robert Fitzharding having, it is said, removed them from the 
 church of Holy Trinity to that of All Saints, so early as the year 1066. 
 This date, however, is evidently erroneous, the probable period of such 
 removal being in the reign of Henry II., with whom Fitzharding was a 
 great favourite. 
 
 The Society or Guild of Kalendaries was constituted of priests, with 
 a few lay brothers and sisters; or, as William Wyrcestre’s maternal 
 uncle, Thomas Botoner (who was a brother here), says, it was “a 
 college of priests founded of old, or fraternity in honour of the feast of 
 Corpus Christi, long before the Conquest, about the year 700, as I 
 
70 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 myself saw and read in letters certificatory of an old hand in the time of 
 Wolstan the Bishop.”* Leland says that “the Calendaries, otherwyse 
 cawlyd the Gilde or Fraternitie of the Clergie and Commonaltie of 
 Brightstowe. The original of this fraternitie is out of rnynde.” f 
 Its antiquity, therefore, cannot be doubted. Their name is derived 
 from the nature of the occupation in which they were engaged, that of 
 “keeping a kalender or monthly register of all the public acts, registering 
 deeds, rolls, <fcc.,” pertaining to the old town, and noting the doings of 
 its inhabitants. 
 
 Still more useful were the Kalendaries as public librarians, for this 
 fraternity had such an institution under their charge, although, perhaps, 
 its influence was very limited, as, during the middle ages, few of the 
 people were either able to read, or willing to avail themselves of it 
 when they could. 
 
 The first express mention of the library of the Kalendaries occurs in 
 a deed of John, Bishop of Worcester, and is dated 1464. % It ordains, 
 among other matters, that the prior of the Kalendaries “shall constantly 
 reside (in the house adjoining the church of All Saints), and shall take 
 custody of a certain library, newly erected, at the bishop’s expence, in 
 the said house, so that every festival day, at two hours before nine and 
 for two hours after, free access and recess may be granted to all willing 
 to enter for the sake of instruction ; and the said prior, if duly required, 
 shall lay open doubtful and obscure places of Scripture to all that ask 
 him, according to his best knowledge, and shall read a public lecture 
 even- week in the said library, according to the appointment of the 
 bishop and his successors.” 
 
 It is certain, however, that the Kalendaries possessed a library before 
 the date above-named, for entries occur in the ledger book to prove it. 
 There we find Sir John Gyllarde, prior of the fraternity, who died 
 June 28th, 1451, as the executor of Richard Haddon, effected sundry 
 repairs, in which mention is specially made of the library: and we 
 further find that the said prior made other alterations; and, referring to 
 the house of the Kalendaries, mention is made of a door communicating 
 with the library. § 
 
 * Wjlliam Wyrcestre, p. 190, &c. f Itin., vol. vii., p. 87. 
 
 i Barrett's Hijtory of Bristol, p. 454. § Ibid, p. 438. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 71 
 
 The library of the Kalendaries was a most curious and valuable 
 depository of all that was rare in the records of the middle ages, and it 
 is said to have numbered many hundred volumes. All these were 
 produced by the scribes of those times, long before the great and 
 marvellous invention of the fifteenth century. With the sorry exception 
 of two imperfect volumes of legends, still preserved in the vestry of 
 All Saints church, the whole of these costly manuscripts, rich in local 
 history, national incidents, and theological disquisition, were destroyed 
 in 1466, through the carelessness of a drunkard named Thomas 
 Poyntmaker. “ The loss sustained by this fire was irreparable, as the 
 society was so ancient, and as the records of the city, as well as those 
 of their own Fraternity, were, in effect, destroyed by it, so that any 
 uncertainty concerning the foundation and early state of old Bristol may¬ 
 be easily accounted for, by deriving it from this destructive accident by 
 fire, a loss greatly to be lamented, but never to be repaired.” * 
 
 From this time we hear little more of the Kalendaries. The small 
 amount of income which the Fraternity derived from the few grants of 
 land made at various periods for their support, fell into the hands of the 
 King at the dissolution of the House in 1534, and the brethren of this 
 useful society, scattered among the people, obtained a scanty maintenance 
 by teaching, transcribing, and other engagements of a similar kind, and 
 thus they assisted (unwillingly, we may suppose), in spreading 
 knowledge in associations where it had, hitherto, no existence, until, in 
 the usual course of events they were “ gathered to their fathers.” 
 
 The dissolution of the monastic institutions and religious fraternities 
 by King Henry VIII., did not affect those in Bristol until about the year 
 1537; when “all the four orders of fryers were suppressed throughout 
 all the realm, and also in this city of Bristol, as namely the White 
 Fryers, the Grey Fryers, the Austin Fryers (Eremites), and Dominick 
 Fryers, with divers other houses of religion, as monkerys and nunnerys.”t 
 The larger houses, with the Abbey of St. Augustine “ so liberally 
 endowed, so powerfully protected, and so strongly secured by royal 
 charters and confirmations (followed), yielding to the common fate of 
 other religious houses which were seized for the King’s use, though it 
 was thought their riches were the occasion of their ruin, and their gold, 
 jewels, and estates, were wanted to enrich the royal coffers.” % 
 
 Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 45S. t Bristol Memorialist, p. 41. 
 
 7 Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 278. 
 
72 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Several ancient stone crosses are mentioned by William Wyrcestre as 
 existing in Bristol before the Reformation. One called “Stallage, or 
 Market Cross, stood in the midst of the market stalls, near Temple 
 Church, belonging to the Knights Templars, for the supply of the 
 tenants of their peculiar district.”* A second cross stood “ yn Baldwyne 
 Strete been IIII crosse wayes metyng, one waye goyng ys a grete wyde 
 way goyng to Bafft Strete, the second waye goyng northward by a hygh 
 grese called a steyr of XXXII steppys ynto Seynt Collas Strete, the other 
 tweyn metyng wayes at the seyd Cros of Baldwyne Streete.”f A third 
 cross stood in Old Market Street, near Lawford’s Gate; a fourth in the 
 Castle Ditch; a fifth on the bridge near St. James’s Churchyard ; and 
 a sixth, called by way of distinction, the High Cross, stood where the 
 four principal streets of the town met in the centre. Here it was placed 
 in the reign of Edward III. as a memorial to future ages of the charter 
 granted by that monarch to the burgesses of Bristol. Some manuscript 
 calendars mention a High Cross standing on this spot in 1247, where 
 also the market, it is said, was held, but of this we have no corroborative 
 evidence. 
 
 The High Cross, whose absence from Bristol is a subject of regret, 
 was erected at a time when the Decorated style of English architecture 
 was in full practice, and when it was executed by British artists in all 
 its beautiful and elaborate detail. Niches were constructed for the 
 reception of statues, and those of Kings John, Henry III., Edward III., 
 and Edward IV., were placed in them; the three former having been 
 benefactors to the town when the Cross was first erected, and the latter 
 subsequent to his visit to Bristol in 14G1. These effigies, together with 
 the entire cross, were enriched with gold and colours in profusion, in 
 1490, and again in 1495; and they so remained, both as to ornamentation 
 and position, until the year 1633, when, in the bad taste of the times ; 
 the High Cross was raised to a greater elevation, and enlarged so as to 
 receive four more figures, in as many niches prepared for the purpose. 
 These figures were representations of Henry VI., Elizabeth, James I., 
 and Charles I. From the last mentioned date the civic High Cross 
 stood upon this spot until 1733, when it was removed to College Green 
 and re-erected in the centre of that open space, until, being regarded as 
 
 Dallaway’s Antiquities of Bristow. 
 
 + Ibid, p. 42. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 73 
 
 a worthless thing, this beautiful relic of the middle ages was given away 
 in September, 1768, by the Very Reverend Cutts Barton, Dean of 
 Bristol, to Henry Hoare, Esq., who immediately removed it to his seat, 
 Stourhead, Wiltshire, in the beautiful grounds of which delightful 
 retreat it seems at last to have found a secure resting place.* 
 
 It is highly probable that at each of the stone crosses, public markets 
 were held long after the close of the middle ages; others were thrown 
 down at the Reformation, having, as it was thought, a tendency to keep 
 alive the religious, yet idolatrous veneration of the people. 
 
 At the time of the dissolution of religious houses, the conventual 
 church of the Abbey of St. Augustine, the church of the Hospital of 
 the Gaunts, and that of the Priory of St. James, were preserved 
 amidst the general ruin which attended most of the monastic structures 
 of this country, to be used for purposes of Divine worship according to 
 the rites of the Reformed faith. Besides these, Bristol then contained 
 the churches of St. John the Baptist; St. Stephen; Temple, or Ploly 
 Cross; St. Mary Redcliffe; St. Thomas the Martyr; St. Nicholas ; 
 St. Mary-le-Port ; St. Peter and St. Paul; St. Philip and Jacob; 
 St. Michael the Archangel; All Saints; Holy Trinity, or Christ Church; 
 St. Werburgh’s ; and St. Augustine-the-Less, with the destroyed 
 churches of St. Lawrence, St. Leonard, and St. Ewen. 
 
 In the early stage of its history, little seems to have been done to 
 protect Bristol from the assaults of an enemy, except the erection of the 
 walls and gates we have noticed, and perhaps a simple fort or tower. 
 Mr. Barrett seems very desirous of placing the founding of Bristol 
 Castle as early as the time of the Anglo-Saxons, but his account of this 
 structure before the reign of King Stephen is too absurd for belief. 
 Stow mentions a castle built by Edward the Elder, in 915, “at the 
 mouth of the water of Avon;” for which statement, Mr. Seyer says, 
 “ It is to be regretted he has quoted no authority ; ” and he adds, “ If 
 there was such a one, I cannot suppose, as some have done, that the 
 castle of Bristol was the place intended.” f Subsequently, when writing 
 under the reign of William Rufus, he says, that then the castle of 
 Bristol is first mentioned by historians; yet on the very same page, if 
 
 * Appendix XI. A new civic cross was erected at the east end of College 
 Green in 1850; the architect was John Norton, Esq. 
 
 t Memoirs of Bristol, vol. i., p, 242. 1 J bid, p. 328. 
 
74 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 “he concludes, without hesitation, that the Conqueror, or some one by 
 his authority, built a castle at Bristow, very near to the walls of the 
 town, on the same ground, or part of it, where Robert, Earl of 
 Gloucester, afterwards built the great Castle ! ” It is strange, however, 
 as this writer himself subsequently remarks, that if such a fortress 
 really existed, it is not mentioned in Domesday Book, which was 
 compiled in 1086, by order of the Conqueror himself! 
 
 It is admitted that the high antiquity of structures of such magnitude 
 as Bristol Castle is known to have been, is rather confirmed than 
 disproved by the silence of our earlier writers as to their origin. 
 Leland, in his investigation of this subject, appears to have met with a 
 book written in Latin, from which we learn that Robert, Earl of 
 Gloucester, “ buildid the Castelle of Bristowe, or the most part of it. 
 Every man sayith that he buildid the great square stone dungeon, and 
 that the stones, thereof, came oute of Caen, in Normandie.’’ This 
 quotation rather makes the earl the restorer or rebuilder of the castle, 
 than the original founder; which I believe to be the fact, the first 
 castellated structure in this locality having been erected, as some 
 suppose, by Geoffrey, Bishop of Coutance, soon after William the 
 Conqueror became possessed of the sovereignty of England. No 
 express mention is made, however, of this castle until the reign of 
 William Rufus, when we find it was held by the same Geoffrey, as its 
 constable, for Robert, the eldest son of the Conqueror. It must 
 therefore have been erected in the reign of the latter, perhaps in the 
 latter part of it. At this time it could have been but an inconsiderable 
 fortress, and so continued until the Earl of Gloucester made it his chief 
 residence; at which time he so greatly enlarged it, and made so many 
 additions to it, as to be regarded as its founder. These extensive works 
 had certainly been commenced during the life-time of his father, King 
 Henry I., and probably about the year 1110 ; for in the following year 
 we find him in possession of both the town and the castle which 
 commanded it. 
 
 The position of Bristol Castle, on the east or Gloucestershire side of 
 the town, was well selected; the rivers Avon and Frome being made to 
 encircle it, as it were, with a natural moat. It stood apart from other 
 structures, and rose from the banks of these streams in solitary 
 grandeur. At its feet the busy haunts of men engaged in trade were 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 75 
 
 spread out upon the plain round about it; or rising gradually towards 
 the hills beyond, the suburban villa of the merchant, and the monastic 
 dwelling of the recluse, found protection beneath its shadow. 
 
 Bristol Castle consisted of two wards: in the outer ward, or that 
 entered from St. Peter Street, was the great donjon keep, beneath 
 which was constructed that dreadful apartment known as the dungeon 
 or prison, a comfortless subterranean cell, of a very repulsive and 
 forbidding character. A very narrow and steep flight of steps, 
 constructed in the wall, conducted to this dreary place; to which air 
 was admitted by an aperture in the roof only, strongly secured by 
 means of a falling, or trap-door, through which provisions or other 
 necessaries were conveyed to the unfortunate prisoners. In this outer 
 ward also stood the church, or rather chapel, of St. Martin, for the use 
 of the garrison. 
 
 The inner ward, which was larger than the outer, contained the 
 dining or banqueting hall, and chapel, together with other structures 
 intended for the accommodation of the king and his attendants when 
 visiting the town, for within the fortress they of course took up then- 
 temporary residence. The whole was surrounded by massy walls and 
 bulwarks, the chief entrance to the main building being by a well 
 fortified gate situated at the east end of St. Peter’s Street, where, also, 
 was the barbican which was constructed for its special defence. 
 
 In the upper stage of the castle keep were the state apartments, in which 
 resided Earl Robert, who, whether the builder of the entire fortress or 
 not, certainly raised its principal tower. There he held high court, 
 and from thence he led his followers forth to do battle in a cause which 
 placed, at last, upon the brow of his youthful nephew, “the round and 
 top of sovereignty.” Here, too, he imprisoned King Stephen for several 
 months, and .within the walls of his own castle the earl himself finished 
 his chivalrous course in the year 1117; as did also his son and 
 successor, William, in 1183. On the marriage of the youngest daughter 
 of the latter with John, Earl of Moreton, afterwards King John, the 
 castle became the property of the crown, and so continued until it 
 was sold by Charles I. to the citizens of Bristol. 
 
 The castle appears to have sustained a siege as early as the year 
 1138, when Earl Robert was its governor; and again in the reign of 
 Richard L.; but of the result to the building we are not informed, nor 
 
76 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 do we know whether it suffered spoliation or not. One of the most 
 interesting episodes in its history occurred during the reign of John, 
 for in this fortress that relentless monarch cruelly confined his niece, 
 the Princess Eleanor, who, after her brother, Prince Arthur, was heir to 
 the crown. Here she wiled away an irksome captivity of forty years’ 
 duration, until death released her from her sufferings in the twenty-fifth 
 year of the reign of Henry III. Tn this castle, too, Prince Edward, 
 afterwards King Edward I., in the wars of the barons, having demeaned 
 himself with considerable hauteur towards the townsmen, was by them 
 besieged; and from it by stratagem only, not very creditable to himself, 
 was he allowed to depart; the Bishop of Worcester becoming security 
 for the fulfilment of a promise which he faithlessly broke, but was 
 ultimately compelled, by the people, to fulfil. The Battle of Evesham 
 occuring subsequent to this, in which the forces of the royalists were 
 victorious over the Earl of Leicester, the castle of Bristol was taken by 
 the prince, who fined the town in the sum of one thousand pounds. 
 
 From the reign of the first Edward to that of Henry VIII. we find 
 no mention of any addition to the castle, or of any considerable repairs 
 being done to it; although, from the remains still existing in the 
 Perpendicular style of English architecture, we know that additions 
 were made, and alterations and repairs were effected. The structure 
 must have greatly suffered from the many assaults it withstood, yet no 
 known record remains of the renovation of any part of it. Although 
 portions of the building may have been, from time to time, repaired or 
 restored, the greater part seems rather to have been suffered to go to decay, 
 and wherever dilapidated and so left, there appears to have been little 
 or no attempt made to stay the progress of the inroads of time upon 
 such parts of the fabric. This neglect had so far effected its ruin in 
 1480, that the “beautiful chambers (were) naked and uncovered, void 
 of planchers (planks) or roofing. The dwelling (also) of the officers of 
 the kitchen (and the residence) of the constable, or keeper on the south 
 part of the magnificent tower, was all 'pulled down and ruinous, which 
 is great pity.”* Leland, who inspected the building some sixty years 
 later, says, “There be many towers yet standynge in both of the courtes, 
 but all tendith to ruine.” f 
 
 William Wyrcestreqp. 209. 
 t Itin, vol. vii., p. 84. 
 
HISTORY OP BRISTOL. 
 
 We are informed * that at the period of the Reformation, many 
 tumults were raised by the Roman Catholics in various parts of the 
 country on account of the change which had been effected in their 
 position by Henry VIII., and that, among other fortifications in England 
 which underwent reparation at that time, mention is made of Bristol 
 Castle, which, it is said, was put in a position to withstand an attack, 
 the walls being mounted with cannon. It appears afterwards to have 
 been a depot for confiscated property taken from the monasteries, on the 
 dissolution of religious houses. A mint for coining was also established 
 within its walls, under the guardianship of a constable or governor, 
 which office seems to have been constantly filled until the reign of 
 Charles I., who, as before stated, sold the castle, with all its 
 appurtenances, to the corporation. It was possessed by the 
 Parliamentarians during the civil wars of the seventeenth century, when 
 the perverse and unfaithful conduct of the monarch drew upon him the 
 just retribution of his people. It again underwent a change of masters, 
 and was occupied by the troops under Prince Rupert on behalf of the 
 King, until, in 1643, it surrendered to the forces of the Parliament under 
 the command of General Fairfax and his Lieutenant-General, Oliver 
 Cromwell. It continued to be held for the people until it was ordered 
 to be demolished by the latter on his attaining the Protectorate, which 
 order was put in force in January, 16 55. Thus, after occupying a 
 distinguished place in the annals of the country for nearly six hundred 
 years, it was so far destroyed that little remains to point out its extent, 
 or the position of any portion of its fortifications, but a few meagre 
 relics, which still perpetuate, in silence, the spot once frowned upon by 
 its towers and turrets. 
 
 In Tower Street are two apartments which once constituted portions 
 of this fortress ; the most northern of which is believed to have been 
 the portico or vestibule to the banqueting hall which stood near this 
 part of the castle. The writer who held this opiniont describes its 
 roof as being supported by pillars “ topped with Saxon capitals ; ” in 
 fact, he designates the entire apartment as of Saxon architecture, which 
 shows how little he knew of the subject, for the whole is constructed in 
 
 * Barrett’s History of Bristol, p. 222. 
 t Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. i., p. 383. 
 
78 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 the Early English style of architecture, every member agreeing thereto. 
 As this fashion in building grew by degrees out of the Anglo-Norman 
 style, which succeeded that of the Anglo-Saxon, and was not invented 
 until the thirteenth century, it follows that the structure in question, 
 having no feature akin to the Anglo-Saxon mode of building, cannot 
 belong to that period of our history—in fact it was constructed during 
 the thirteenth century, and not before. Opposite the entrance from the 
 street is a semi-circular or Anglo-Norman arch of the age of Earl 
 Robert, the reputed builder, which tradition asserts was the principal 
 entrance to the great banqueting hall, but this is mere conjecture. 
 
 The second apartment Mr. Seyer supposed “ to be a crypt or ante- 
 chapel,” but the reasons he assigns for such an opinion are to me 
 extremely unsatisfactory, as it appears more like a waiting or servants’ 
 room. The style of architecture in which it is built is Perpendicular 
 English, and therefore it could not have been erected before the reign 
 of Richard II., because its invention did not take place until then. 
 Here “ there can be no doubt that the palace which the Consul (Earl), 
 Robert built, with its hall, chapel, chambers, &c., stood on the eastern 
 side of Tower Street, on the same line where the houses now stand; and 
 there being then no house opposite, the palace stood on the green, and 
 fronted it. The situation of the portico is certain, and the hall must 
 have been adjoining.”* 
 
 At the back of the house, No. 56, Castle Street, is an apartment 
 below the level of the thoroughfare, which was originally of a circular 
 form, but is now deprived of much of the interest which once attached 
 to it, owing to the caprice of some former occupant of the premises, and 
 a want of appreciation of its value to the future inquirer after its 
 history. From the circumstance that there was formerly a large square 
 stone with a ring fixed in the centre of the floor of this room, it has 
 been regarded as the castle dungeon, but this is incorrect, because we 
 know that the great keep of the fortress, beneath which that prison 
 house was constructed, stood on the opposite side of the street, and its 
 site may be fixed, with more propriety, nearer to Narrow Wine Street. 
 As the apartment referred to, with the contiguous walls, stands in 
 immediate proximity to the river Frome, the whole were doubtless 
 connected with the outworks of the castle. 
 
 Sewer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. i., p. 386. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 79 
 
 Beneath the cottages at the back of Castle Green are two apartments 
 looking over the river Froom, which certainly belonged to the fortress. 
 They were once approached by stone steps now removed, and may be 
 confidently regarded as part of the original structure of Earl Robert. 
 Like many other gloomy underground apartments to which the real 
 purpose of their construction cannot with certainty be applied, these 
 rooms are also known by the distinctive appellation of the dungeon. 
 
 The doctrines of the Reformation were preached in Bristol at a very 
 early period, for John Purney, who was curate or assistant to Wycliffe, 
 frequently proclaimed its truths here; and the great Reformer “ himself 
 no doubt often visited this town, for in 1375, King Edward III. had 
 presented him with the Prebend of Aust, in the collegiate church of 
 Westbury-on-Trim, in which situation, and with his zeal, he surely took 
 the opportunity of recommending his opinions from the pulpits of 
 Bristol.” * “ The fire which Wycliffe kindled was never wholly 
 
 extinguished; although smothered by the authority of Church and 
 State, it often burst forth again, until at the Reformation it overpowered 
 all opposition.” + In 1498, persecution for religion is said to have 
 begun here, when “ many were apprehended for heresy in Bristol, for 
 which some were burnt, and some abjured to bare faggots.” | In 1539, 
 “ George Wisard, a Scottish preacher, set forth his lecture in St. 
 Nicholas Church, in Bristow,” and as many who heard it “were 
 perswaded by that herettical lecture to his heresie, (he) was accused by 
 Mr. John Kearney, deane of this dioces; and being convicted and 
 condemned, was enioyned to beare a faggott in St. Nicholas Church, 
 and about the parish of the same, the 13tli of July; and in Christ 
 Church and parish therof, the 20th of Julie; which iniunction was 
 dulie executed in forme as aforesaid.” Wishart was subsequently burnt 
 at St. Andrews by order of Cardinal Beaton, March 2nd, 1546. 
 
 * Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 1 64. 
 
 + Ibid, p. 170. 
 
 7 Ibid, p. 215. The faggot was a badge of disgrace, “worn in times of 
 Popery on the sleeve of the upper garment of those who had recanted and 
 abjured what the then powers called heresy. For those poor terrified wretches 
 were not only condemned to the penance of carrying a faggot to such an 
 appointed place of solemnity; but for a more lasting mark of infamy, they were 
 to have the sign of a faggot embroidered on one and sometimes each sleeve. 
 And the leaving off this badge or faggot was often alleged as the sign of 
 apostacy. ” — Fosbrolce. 
 
80 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 The Reformation, begun in Bristol by Wycliffe’s curate, if not actually 
 by himself, was greatly forwarded about the year 1520, by William 
 Tyndale, who also frequently preached in the old town; and having 
 subsequently translated the Bible into English, which he afterwards 
 published, he was eminently useful. The spot on which he chiefly took 
 his stand when he propounded the reformed doctrines to his hearers in 
 Bristol, was, as Fox says, “in a large meadow called St. Austin’s 
 Green;” he also preached in its streets, and probably occupied the 
 pulpits of its churches. In 1534, followed Hugh Latimer, who also 
 was opposed by the priests, yet “ his preaching seems to have thrown 
 the whole town into confusion; ” he encountering much opposition from 
 “John Ilylsey, doctor and pryor of the freers preachers,” and others. 
 Subsequently, Latimer preached in the churches of St. Nicholas, the 
 Black Friars, and St. Thomas; where also his doctrines were violently 
 contended against by “ master Heberdyne (who) there preached sharply 
 against Latomer’s articles; (whereby) the King’s town of Bristow fell 
 into infamy, discord, strife, and debate; ” Heberdyne declaring in one 
 of his discourses, there were “ twenty or thirty heretics in Brystow, 
 and that all Brystow was knaves and heretics.” Commissioners were 
 appointed to inquire into the truth of these statements, and to report 
 the result of their investigations to Thomas Cromwell, visitor-general of 
 all the monasteries throughout England, in which capacity he played a 
 principal part in the suppression of religious houses. 
 
 The accession of Queen Mary to the throne in 1553 re-established 
 Roman Catholicism, but we have no reason to believe that sufficient 
 time had elapsed for the re-introduction of monks and friars (except, 
 perhaps, in part) into the suppressed religious houses in Bristol, still 
 left unscathed. “ The true religion was abolished, and the abominable 
 Mass, with the Latin sendee and other ceremonies of the Romish religion, 
 established in the church.” * Popery was rampant in Bristol, as 
 elsewhere; and painful evidence of its cruelty and intolerance is upon 
 record. Dalby, the chancellor of the diocese, persecuted some individuals 
 to the death, who, rather than abjure the Protestant faith, sealed the 
 truth with their blood on the spot where now stands Highbury Chapel, 
 St. Michael's Hill, built for the use of the Independent Congregational 
 
 Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 233. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL, 
 
 81 
 
 Dissenters worshipping there; who have erected within that structure 
 a marble tablet recording both the names of the supposed jive sufferers, 
 and the date of their martyrdom, as follows:— 
 
 In Memory 
 of the under named 
 Martyrs, 
 
 who during the reign of Queen Mary, 
 for the avowal of their Christian faith, 
 were burnt to death on the ground 
 upon which this Chapel is erected. 
 
 Richard Shapton, Richard Sharp, 
 
 suffered Oct., 1555. May 17th, 1557. 
 
 Edward Sharp, Thomas Hale, 
 
 Sept. 8th, 1556. May 17tli, 1557. 
 
 Thomas Banion, 
 
 August 17th, 1557- 
 
 ‘ ‘ Be not afraid of them that kill the body and 
 after that have no more that they can do.” * 
 
 Immediately after the suppression of religious houses in England, 
 Henry VIII. resolved to erect Bristol into a bishopric, the town 
 becoming a city in consequence. “The church of the monks was fixed 
 upon for the cathedral; which began to be demolished, and was like to 
 undergo the common fate of other ancient and venerable structures 
 (when) a stop was put to it by order of the king; on his being informed 
 there was yet left standing of the fabric sufficient to make it a cathedral 
 for the bishop’s see, the further destruction was prevented; ” and his 
 majesty, “inspired by the divine clemency,” &c., t erected it into a 
 bishopric accordingly, the church being dedicated to the Holy and 
 Undivided Trinity. 
 
 The Charter of Confirmation, which is dated June 4th, 1542, ordains 
 that the new establishment should consist of one dean, six canons, six 
 minor canons, one of W'hom was to be the sacrist, one deacon, six 
 lay-clerks, 'one master of the choristers, two masters of the Grammar 
 School, four almsmen, one sub-sacrist (or sexton), one porter and 
 verger, one butler, and two cooks; the three latter officers have long 
 ceased. 
 
 The first person selected to preside over the new see was Paul Bush, 
 an Augustine friar of Oxford, Canon of Salisbury, and Provincial of 
 
 * Appendix XII. 
 
 + Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 279. 
 
 G 
 
82 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 his Order in the Priory of Edington, in Wiltshire, “a wise and grave 
 man.” He was consecrated June 25th, 1542, and appears to have been 
 much esteemed among the members of the University of Oxford, to 
 which he belonged, and was a Bachelor of Arts. He was also admitted 
 into Wadham College,* where he was alike distinguished for his 
 theological knowledge and his medical skill; and this being previously 
 a friary of the Bon-liommes, qualified him for his advancement to office 
 at Edington, where he wrote “a lytell boke, contaynyng certayn gostly 
 medycynes necessary to be used among wel-disposed people, to eschewe 
 and to avoyde the comen plage of pestilens.” He is styled, in this 
 volume, “syr Paule Bushe, preste and bone-home in the good house of 
 Edyngdon.” Besides his proficiency in theology and medicine, he was 
 a good orator and poet. Having incurred the displeasure of Queen 
 Mary by marrying Edith Ashley, to avoid expulsion he resigned his 
 bishopric and retired to Winterbourne, where he died in 1558. Among 
 several smaller works of which he was the author, he wrote one 
 intituled “A lytell treatyse in Englysshe, called the extirpacion of 
 ignorancy; and it treateth and speketh of the ignorance of people, 
 shewyng them howe they are bounde to feare God, and to honour their 
 prince.” f 
 
 John Holyman, the second bishop, was a native of Caddington, in 
 Bedfordshire, educated at Winchester School, and subsequently a fellow 
 of New College, Oxford, in 1512. After taking several degrees at that 
 University he became a monk in St. Mary’s Abbey, at Reading. Here 
 he acquired great reputation for learning and sanctity, so much so that 
 he wrote to the University in 1530, requesting to be excused from 
 preaching in that city for the degree of Doctor of Divinity, being 
 desirous rather to address the people of London, to turn them from 
 Lutheranism. J He was opposed to the divorce of the King from Queen 
 Catherine, strongly advocating the validity of the marriage, both by 
 writing and preaching, which obliged him to withdraw to his Rectory 
 of Hanborough, near Woodstock, into seclusion and privacy. When 
 Mary ascended the throne he was again called into active life, and 
 appointed to succeed to the see of Bristol, which Paul Bush had 
 
 * Wood’s Athens Oxon., vol. i., col. 270. + Ibid, 271. 
 
 X Gutch’s Univ. of Oxon, vol. ii., p. 32. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 83 
 
 vacated; and, although a zealous Papist, he seems to have discharged 
 his duties with satisfaction to his diocesans. “ He did not, for ought 
 I can finde, prophane himself with any barbarous cruelty; but Mr. 
 Dalby, his chancellor, sent three, namely, Richard Sharpe, Thomas 
 Banion, and Thomas Hale, to the stake, at Bristol, for testimony of the 
 truth.” Holyman died in 1558, and the see remained vacant three 
 years, when it was granted to 
 
 Richard Cheyney, of whom it appears difficult to say whether he was 
 a Protestant or a Catholic. In October, 1568, “Cheny, Bishop of 
 Gloucester, who also held Bristol in commendam, had given great 
 offence to the citizens of Bristol, by his sermons preached at the 
 cathedral there; and particularly three sermons in August and 
 September this year, in vindication of himself; which some of the 
 preachers there took the confidence to confute in their pulpits.” * 
 Fuller believes him to have been a sincere Protestant.f He died in 
 1579, and the see was held in commendam by the Bishop of Gloucester, 
 until 1589, when 
 
 Richard Fletcher was inducted. He was a native of Cranbrook, in 
 Kent, of which place his father was vicar. Fletcher himself was a 
 fellow of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge; rector of Alderkirke, in 
 the county of Lincoln; in 1572 prebend of Islington, in the cathedral 
 church of St. Paul, London; in 1583 dean of Peterborough, in which 
 capacity, in 1580, he attended the unfortunate Mary, Queen of Scots, 
 to the scaffold at Fotlieringay, when he distressed the poor victim with 
 ineffectual persuasions to die in the Protestant faith. In 1589 he was 
 raised to the bishopric of Bristol,+ and made almoner to Queen 
 Elizabeth; he was translated to Worcester in 1593, and was succeeded 
 by 
 
 John Thornborough, who was born at Salisbury in 1552. At an 
 early age he entered Magdalen College, Oxford, but with little 
 inclination for study. He became chaplain to the Earl of Pembroke, 
 who also conferred upon him the rectory of Cliilmark, in his native 
 county; he subsequently became chaplain in ordinary to Queen 
 Elizabeth, and rector of Bransburton, in Yorkshire. In 1589 he was 
 
 * Strype’s Annals, vol. i., p. 559. 
 
 J Willis’s Mitred Abbies, vol. i., 
 
 t Church History, 
 p. 779. 
 
 G 2 
 
84 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 made Dean of York, and in 1593 Bishop of Limerick,* * * § and in 1603 he 
 was translated to Bristol, holding his deanery of York in commendam,f 
 and in 1616 to the bishopric of Worcester, where he died in 1641. 
 His successor was 
 
 - Nicholas Felton, the son of a Yarmouth merchant, who was 
 successively Fellow and Warden of Pembroke Hall, Cambridge; 
 rector of St. Anthdin’s, and St. Mary-le-Bow, London; a prebend of 
 St. Paul’s Church, London; and installed Bishop of Bristol, in 
 December, 1617 ; from whence he was removed to the see of Ely, in 
 1619. His great learning brought him before the notice of King 
 James, by whom he was appointed one of the translators of the Bible. J 
 “ He had a sound head, and a sanctified heart, was beloved of God, and 
 all good men, very hospitable to all, and charitable to the poor.” || 
 
 Boland Searchfield, his successor, was educated at Merchant Taylor’s 
 School, London, and was subsequently admitted a scholar of St. John’s 
 College, Oxford, of which house he became fellow; also proctor of the 
 University; vicar of Emley, in Northamptonshire; rector of Bowthorp, 
 in Gloucestershire; § and Bishop of Bristol in 1619, which he held until 
 he died in 1622. 
 
 Kobert Wright, the next bishop, was a native of St. Albans, where 
 he was born in 1559. He entered Trinity College, Oxford, at the age 
 of fifteen, and became subsequently a fellow of his college. He was, 
 successively, vicar of Sunning, in Berkshire ; of Hayes, in Middlesex ; 
 rector of Brixton Deverill, Wiltshire; chaplain to Queen Elizabeth; 
 rector of Bourton-on-the-Water, Gloucestershire; canon residentiary and 
 treasurer of Wells; and chaplain in ordinary to King James the First. 
 In 1613 he received the appointment of first warden of Wadham 
 College; in 1618 he was appointed to the rectory of Rottingdean, in 
 Essex; and in 1623 to the see of Bristol.IT He was translated to 
 Lichfield and Coventry in 1632. 
 
 George Coke, D.D., succeeded. He was fellow of Pembroke Hall, 
 Cambridge; rector of Bigrave, Herts; and consecrated Bishop of Bristol, 
 
 * Wood’s Ath. Oxon, vol. iii., col. 3. 
 
 t Richardson’s de Prsesulibus, p. 563. Appendix XIII. 
 
 t Richardson’s de Pra'sulibus, p. 275. || Fuller’s Church History. 
 
 § Wood’s Ath. Oxon. vol, ii., col. 861. U Ibid, vol. iv., col. 800. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 85 
 
 February 10th, 1G32, from whence he was translated to Hereford. He 
 died in 1646. He is described by Kippis as “ a meek, grave, and quiet 
 man, much beloved of those who were subjected to his jurisdiction.” 
 
 Robert Skinner, D.D., was a son of the rector of Pitsford, 
 Northamptonshire, where it has been erroneously said he was born. 
 At the age of sixteen he was admitted a scholar of Trinity College, 
 Oxford, of which house he became a fellow in 1613.; and in July, 
 1637, he was elected Bishop of Bristol; and in 1641 translated to the 
 see of Oxford. 
 
 Thomas Westfield, D.D., the next prelate, was fellow of Jesus 
 College, Cambridge, Archdeacon of St. Albans; rector of Great St. 
 Bartholomew’s, London; also of Hornsey, Middlesex; and a prebend of 
 St. Paul’s Cathedral, London. He was raised to the see of Bristol in 
 1641, but was deprived of its revenues by the House of Commons, who 
 subsequently restored them, stating that he was “a man of great learning 
 and merit.” He is said to have been an excellent preacher, and one of 
 whom Bishop King used playfully to remark that “ he was born an 
 orator;” so diffident, however, was he, that he is said never to have 
 entered the pulpit without trembling ; and on one occasion, having to 
 preach before the King, he actually fainted!* He died in June, 1644, 
 and was succeeded by 
 
 Thomas Howell, D.D., who was born, according to Fuller, at 
 Llangainmarch, Carmarthenshire, in 1588. He was admitted into Jesus 
 College, Oxford, of which he became a fellow, took his degrees in Arts, 
 and obtained Holy Orders. He became a chaplain in ordinary to King 
 Charles I., was subsequently rector of West Horsley, Surrey ; and also 
 of St. Stephens, Walbrook, London; in 1636 a canon of Windsor; and 
 in 1644 was nominated by the King to the see of Bristol. “ On the 
 surrender of that city to the Parliamentary forces, soon afterwards, 
 Howell was so grossly maltreated by them that his death ensued. They 
 stripped the lead from his palace, and thereby exposed his wife to the 
 wind and rain, who was then in childbed, and who died in consequence. 
 They plundered the house, and turned the prelate, with a family of ten 
 children, into the streets. Robbed, insulted, and maligned, he sunk 
 under the weight of his misfortunes; and dying in 1646, was buried in 
 
 Worthies of England. Appendix XIV, 
 
8G 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 the Cathedral.” * Bishop Howell is said to have been “ a man of 
 excellent understanding, and a most eloquent preacher.” His sermons 
 were “like the waters of Siloah, did run softly, gliding on with a smooth 
 stream, so that his matter did steal secretly into the hearts of his hearers. 
 He was a man not only flourishing with the verdure and spring of wit, 
 but happy in the harvest of a mature understanding, and judicious in 
 matters politick, both ecclesiastical and civil, one who, like Diogenes, 
 confuted the enemies of his function and not his person, by circumspect 
 walking.” t 
 
 Gilbert Ironside, D.D., the next bishop, was born at Hawkesbury, 
 Oxfordshire, in 1588, and was admitted a scholar of Trinity College, 
 Oxford, in 1 GOG; a fellow in 1G1G, and proceeded D.D. in 1619. His 
 first benefice was the conjoined rectory of Winterbourn-Stapleton, and 
 Winterbourn-Abbots, Dorsetshire, where he wrote several theological 
 treatises. He was made prebend of Tockerington, Northumberland, on 
 the Restoration of Charles II., and died in 1671, on September 19th, 
 aged 83, and was buried close to the step? of the bishops’ throne, 
 without monument or inscription. 
 
 Guy Carleton, who was appointed to succeed him, was educated at 
 the Free School at Carlisle, from whence he went to Queen’s College, 
 Oxford, in 1621, where he became a fellow; and in 1635, one of the 
 proctors of the University, and vicar of Bucklebury, Berkshire; but 
 was deprived of his preferments by the Parliament on the breaking out 
 of the Civil War, he having taken the side of royalty. On recovering 
 his throne, Charles made him one of his chaplains; and he was 
 subsequently preferred to the Deanery of Carlisle, and to a prebendal 
 stall in Durham Cathedral. He was raised to the see of Bristol, 
 December 20th, 1671, keeping his prebend, together with the rectory 
 of Wolsingham, Durham, in commendam. In 1678 he was translated 
 to Chichester. 
 
 William Goulson, D.D., the next bishop, was a native of some place 
 unknown, in Leicestershire, but was of St. John’s College, Cambridge, 
 and elected Bishop of Bristol, January 16th, 1678 ; he died in 1684. 
 
 John Lake, D.D., was born at Halifax, Yorkshire, and was a scholar 
 of St. John’s College, Cambridge. He was raised to the bishopric of 
 
 * Britton’s Brist. Cath., p. 34. 
 f Wood’s Ath. Oxen., vol. iv. col. 805. Appendix XV. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 87 
 
 Sodor and Man, and translated to that of Bristol, August 12th, 1684; 
 and from thence to Chichester in the year following. Whilst presiding 
 over the latter see, in 1688, he was one of the seven bishops committed 
 to the tower for refusing to publish the king’s declaration for liberty of 
 conscience. 
 
 Sir Jonathan Trelawney, Bart., D.D., was of Christ Church, Oxford, 
 rector of St. Ives and Southill, Cornwall; was consecrated Bishop of 
 Bristol, November 8th, 1685; translated to Exeter in April, 1689; and 
 thence to Winchester, in 1707; when he was removed from Bristol. 
 Knightly Chetwood, Dean of Gloucester, and Archdeacon of York, was 
 nominated by King James II. to the vacancy in 1688, but the 
 appointment was not confirmed, and 
 
 Gilbert Ironside, D.D., of Wadham College, Oxford, the son of a 
 preceding bishop of the same name, was raised to the dignity, and was 
 consecrated October 13th, 1689; and on July 29tli, 1691, translated 
 to Hereford. 
 
 John Hall, D.D., only son of the Rev. John Hall, M.A., Minister of 
 Bromsgrove, Worcestershire, born there January 29th, 1633, admitted 
 at Merchant Taylor’s School, London, June 20th, 1644 ; master of 
 Pembroke College, Oxford; rector of St. Aldgate; and Margaret 
 Professor in the University; was the next bishop. He presided over 
 the see of Bristol for eighteen years, and died at his college at Oxford, 
 February 4tli, 1709, aged 77 years, and was buried in St. Aldgate’s 
 church.* To him succeeded 
 
 John Robinson, D.D., who was born at Cleasby, near Richmond, 
 Yorkshire, and was much commended for his learning and skill in 
 theological controversy, while yet a scholar at Oriel College, Oxford. 
 Accompanying an embassy to Sweden, his talents secured him the 
 appointment of envoy extraordinary, and, ultimately, ambassador to that 
 court, where he was so engaged for the long period of twenty-five 
 years; during which time he w y rote “ An Account of Sweden as it was 
 in 1688, together with an Extract of the History of that Kingdom.” 
 Returning to England, Queen Anne, in reward of his long and valued 
 services, obtained for him the appointment of Dean of Windsor, 
 Registrar of the Order of the Garter, and a prebend of Canterbury ; 
 
 Willis’s Survey, vol. i., p. 783. 
 
88 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 and on the death of Bishop Hall lie was promoted to the see of 
 Bristol. In 1711 he was made Lord Privy Seal, one of the pleni- 
 potentaries for the Treaty of Utrecht, a privy councillor, and a 
 commissioner for the completion of St. Paul's Cathedral. He was 
 translated to the see of London, March 13th, 1713. 
 
 George Smalridge, D.D., the next bishop, was the son of a dyer at 
 Lincoln, and was sent to Westminster School, and afterwards to Christ 
 Church College, Oxford, at both of which places he was supported by 
 the munificence of Mr. Ashmole. At college he was greatly distinguished 
 for his proficiency in learning, and was selected to join in the controversy 
 with Drs. Aldrich and Atterbury, in defence of the Protestant faith, 
 against Obadiah Walker. His first ecclesiastical preferment was to the 
 chapel of Tothill Fields, Westminster; soon after which he obtained a 
 prebendal stall in Lichfield Cathedral. He was afterwards appointed 
 lecturer of St. Dunstan’s in the West, London ; presented to a canonry 
 in Christ Church ; the deanery of Carlisle in 1713; the bishopric of 
 Bristol, April, 1714 ; and, subsequently, almoner to Queen Anne. He 
 died September 27th, 1719 ; and his successor was 
 
 Hugh Boulter, D.D., a prelate distinguished for learning and talent. 
 He was born in London, and received his early education at Merchant 
 Taylor’s School, was admitted a commoner of Christ Church, Oxford, 
 and subsequently a Demi, and fellow of Magdalen College in that 
 University; he afterwards became rector of St. Olave’s, Southwark, 
 Archdeacon of Surrey, and Bishop of Bristol, to which see he was 
 consecrated November loth, 1719; he was translated November 3rd, 
 1724, to the Archbishopric of Armagh, and was made Lord Primate and 
 Metropolitan of all Ireland. 
 
 William Bradshaw, D.D., a native of Abergavenny, in Monmouthshire, 
 was of Baliol College, Oxford; rector of Fawley, Berkshire; prebend of 
 Canterbury ; Dean of Christ Church, Oxford, August 23rd, 1724; and 
 Bishop of Bristol, September 21st, 1/24. He died at Bath, December 
 16th, 1732, aged 62, and was succeeded by 
 
 Charles Cecil, D.D., of Christ Church, Oxford, one of the chaplains in 
 ordinary to the King; rector of Hatfield, Hertfordshire; and a descendant 
 of the noble family of the Cecils, Earls of Salisbury, was elected Bishop 
 of Bristol, January 15th, 1732; and in the year 1734, was translated to 
 the bishopric of Bangor. To him succeeded 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 89 
 
 Thomas Seeker, LL.D.,who was of Exeter College, Oxford. On July 
 9feh, 1733, lie was presented to a prebend of Durham, and the rectory 
 of St. James, Westminster; and on the 2nd of January, 1734, to the see 
 of Bristol, from whence he was translated, in 1737, to that of Oxford; 
 thence to London, and ultimately to the Archbishopric of Canterbury. 
 
 Thomas Gooch, D.D., his successor, was master of Gonville and Caius 
 College, Cambridge, and elected Bishop of Bristol, May 28th, 1737, and 
 Avas the next year translated to Norwich, and from thence to Ely. 
 
 Joseph Butler, LL.D., one of the most distinguished prelates of the 
 eighteenth century, next succeeded. He was the son of a shopkeeper 
 at Wantage, in Berkshire, Avhere he was born in 1G92. He procured 
 admission as a commoner at Oriel College, Oxford, in 1714, and in 1718 
 was appointed preacher at the Bolls Chapel, London; and subsequently 
 presented to the rectory of Houghton, near Darlington, Durham; and a 
 prebendal stall in liochester Cathedral. In 1736 he was appointed 
 clerk of the closet to Queen Caroline; and about the same time he 
 presented her with a treatise, since celebrated as “ The Analogy of 
 Keligion, natural and revealed, to the Constitution and Course of 
 Nature.” In 1738 he was preferred to the bishopric of Bristol, and in 
 1740 to the deanery of St. Paul’s, London. In 1750 he was translated 
 to Durham, and died at Bath, June 16th, 1752, and Avas succeeded by 
 
 John Conybeare, D.D., who was born in Devonshire, and educated 
 at Tiverton School, whence he proceeded to Oxford, where he was 
 admitted to Exeter College in 1707. In 1724 he obtained the rectory of 
 St. Clement’s, Oxford; the deanery of CliristChurch in 1742, and the 
 bishopric of Bristol in 1750. He died July 13th, 1755. 
 
 John Hume, D.D., of Christ Church College, Oxford, rector of 
 Barnes, Surrey, was elected Bishop of Bristol July 23rd, 1756, and in 
 1758, was translated to Oxford, and in 1774 to Salisbury. 
 
 Philip Yonge, D.D., was a fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge; vicar 
 of Arrington, Cambridgeshire ; public orator in the University ; rector 
 of Loughton, Buckinghamshire ; master of Jesus College, Cambridge ; 
 Vice-Chancellor of the University; prebendary of Westminster; canon 
 residentiary of St. Paul’s, London; and rector of Therfield, in 
 Herefordshire; succeeded to this bishopric August 4th, 1758, and in 
 1761 was translated to Norwich. The next Bishop of Bristol was 
 
90 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Thomas Newton, D.D., who was the son of a wine merchant at 
 Lichfield, where he was born, December 1st, 1703; and where he received 
 the rudiments of his education, until he was fourteen years of age, 
 when he was sent to Westminster School. In 1723 he was elected to 
 Trinity College, Cambridge, and, in 1744, was preferred to the rectory 
 of St. Mary-le-Bow, London, and afterwards lecturer of St. George’s, 
 Hanover Square. He was appointed chaplain to the King, and in 1757 
 made prebendary of Westminster, and about the same time sub-almoner 
 and precentor of the Cathedral of York. He was preferred to the 
 bishopric of Bristol in September, 17G1, and at the same time was made 
 residentiary of St. Paul’s Cathedral, Loudon. He died February 15th, 
 1782. He was the author of a “Dissertation on the Prophecies,” and 
 other valuable works. 
 
 Lewis Bagot, D.D., was promoted to the vacant see in March, 1782, 
 having been Dean of Christ Church, Oxford, since January 21st, 1773; 
 iu 1783 he was translated to Norwich; when 
 
 Christopher Wilson, D.D., of Catherine Hall, Cambridge, and 
 prebendary of Westminster, succeeded. He died in 1792; the next 
 bishop was 
 
 Spencer Madan, D.D., who was translated to Peterborough in 1794, 
 and succeeded at Bristol by 
 
 Henry Reginald Courtenay, D.D. ; who, in 1797, was translated 
 to Exeter. 
 
 Folliot Herbert Walker Cornwall, D.D., Dean of Canterbury, 
 followed. He was translated to Hereford in 1802. 
 
 The Hon. George Pelham, D.D., the next bishop, was translated to 
 Exeter. 
 
 John Luxmore, D.D., Dean of Gloucester, was installed Bishop of 
 Bristol in August, 1807 ; in the following year he was removed to 
 Hereford, and in 1815 to St. Asaph, where he died January 21st, 1830. 
 
 William Lort Mansel, D.D., master of Trinity College, Cambridge, 
 was rector of Barwick, Yorkshire, and subsequently Bishop of Bristol. 
 He died July 3rd, 1820. 
 
 John Kaye, D.D., master of Christ’s College, Cambridge, and Regius 
 Professor of Divinity in that University, was next appointed; but 
 translated to Lincoln in 1827 ; his successor was 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 91 
 
 Robert Gray, D.D., a prebendary of Durham, and formerly of 
 St. Mary’s Hall, Oxford; who died September 28th, 1834; when 
 
 Joseph Allen, D.D., succeeded. He was translated to Ely, May 13th, 
 1837 ; the sees of Gloucester and Bristol becoming united in 1836 
 under one prelate, 
 
 James Henry Monk was appointed, on the removal of Dr. Allen, the 
 first Bishop of the united sees. He was born December 13th, 1782 ; 
 attained to a fellowship of Trinity College, Cambridge, in 1805; 
 Regius Professor of Greek in 1808 ; Dean of Peterborough in 1822; 
 and died Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol, June 6th, 1856. 
 
 Charles Baring, D.D., the present bishop, was elected July 18th 
 following. 
 
 Next, in point of age, to the Norman portion of the Monastery of 
 St. Augustine already noticed, is the Elder Lady Chapel, which now 
 forms part of the Protestant Cathedral of the Bishop of Bristol, but was 
 once, as before intimated, the church of the monks. The precise date 
 of its erection is not recorded, but it undoubtedly belongs to the age of 
 Abbot David. It is of pure Early English architecture, and of the 
 thirteenth century, when it w T as constructed; and is like all other 
 edifices of that period, comparatively plain in all its chief constituent 
 parts. The groined roof consists only of simple intersecting ribs or 
 cross springers, the line of their intersection being adorned with richly 
 carved bosses. The ribs themselves, on the north side, rest on single 
 columns, of slender proportions ; but on the south side they repose on 
 capitals only, the shafts once belonging to them having been removed, 
 to allow the construction of two Decorated English arches on that side 
 of the chapel, opening to the north aisle of the church. On the north 
 side of this chapel is an arcade of arches deeply recessed, supported on 
 richly foliated capitals, resting on small detached shafts of Purbeck 
 marble, of which material the whole of the columns in this elegant 
 structure are composed. Between the arches on the south side are 
 similar adornments; and columns, with plain round capitals, support a 
 second tier of arches on both sides of the chapel. The spandrils of the 
 lower range are embellished with a variety of beautifully sculptured 
 figures, some of which are singularly ludicrous. One of them represents 
 an ape playing on the pandean pipes, accompanied by a ram on the 
 violin. Another compartment has a fox running away with a goose ; 
 
92 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 and there are many other designs of a similar character. At the east 
 end of this chapel is a beautiful window of five lights. 
 
 After the Elder Lady Chapel the portions of the cathedral next in 
 order of antiquity, are the choir, with its aisles, the ante-choir, the 
 Virgin chapel, now the vestry, and the sacristy, or vestibule to that 
 apartment. All these parts are built in the Decorated style of English 
 architecture, and may, with certainty, be ascribed to Abbot Knowle, 
 who is said “to have begun rebuilding the church anew, the 25th of 
 Edward the 1st, the 20th of August, that is now standing from the 
 ground, with vestry,” &c.* A deed, also, quoted by Mr. Barrett, 
 bearing date 1311, says that “ the monastery was much dilapidated; 
 (that) through age it was become ruinous; in repairing which, and 
 rebuilding, they had spent much, and ought to expend much more in 
 the work newly begun.” f 
 
 It is not easy to account for the general dilapidation of the abbey at 
 so early a period after its construction by Robert Fitzharding. Little 
 more than a century and a half had elapsed since it was first dedicated 
 to the service of religion, and yet it was considered necessary in so 
 short a time, to re-build it, which, according to Abbot Newland, was 
 begun in 1306, the year of Knowle’s elevation to the abbacy. How 
 far he proceeded with the new works is uncertain, but we may reasonably 
 infer that he did not live to finish the parts I have named, although he 
 made considerable progress towards it, for under John Snow, his 
 successor in office, they were still advancing towards completion; 
 but the want of money, and that depopulating scourge, the plague, 
 having broken out in Bristol in the year 1348, the work was for awhile 
 retarded. Nor was it until the fourth Maurice, Lord Berkeley, procured 
 a Papal bull in 1363 to obtain benefactions towards its reconstruction, 
 that it was again proceeded with. 
 
 It is, then, evident, that the whole of the structure eastward of the 
 transepts (not including the Newton chapel) was not completed until 
 after the date last named; but as that portion of the church is all built 
 in the Decorated style of English architecture, which was rarely 
 practised in this country after the year 1380, it is fair to presume that 
 it was all finished before that year, and according to the original design 
 furnished by Abbot Knowle. 
 
 Barrett's Hist, of Bristol, p. 267. 
 
 t Ibid, p. 289. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 93 
 
 All structures in the Decorated style exhibit the highest point of 
 beauty that can be attained by the English mode of architecture, 
 and it is certain that no other edifices ever transcended in magnificence of 
 display the sacred buildings erected while Edward III. swayed the English 
 sceptre; the period in which Abbot Knowle’s truly beautiful church 
 was completed. The choir, which is highly picturesque, furnishes one 
 of the earliest specimens of those numerous angular compartments into 
 which the vaulted roofs of this style were subsequently much more 
 elaborated. These, which extend along the centre of the building, are, 
 from the east end to about half the extent of the choir, without cusps 
 or feathering; but that architectural device enriches the remainder to 
 the termination of the ante-choir. The roof, instead of resting on 
 clustered columns, as is usually the case, is supported on piers adorned 
 with a variety of mouldings, and three slender shafts clustered on each 
 of two sides. The capitals are sculptured with rich foliage resembling 
 the leaves and fruit of the vine. The lower portion of the altar only 
 belongs to Abbot Knowle’s church, but this is very fine, consisting of 
 three deeply recessed compartments, adorned with richly foliated ogee 
 arches, surmounted with crockets and finials, and flanked by buttresses 
 and niches of great elegance. The spandrils of the arches are each 
 enriched with a shield of arms, belonging to Clare, Earl of Pembroke, 
 King Edward II., and a Berkeley; and crowned with horizontal 
 mouldings, between which corbel heads are introduced, probably 
 representing the features of the monarch and nobles whose arms appear 
 beneath. This altar screen having been greatly mutilated, was restored 
 in 1839 as originally built by Abbot Knowle or his immediate successors. 
 The upper part was added by Abbot Burton, who was elected to that 
 office in the year 1533; his rebus, which is shown in the design, is a 
 bnrr, or shrub sprouting or growing out of a tun. The east window, 
 which has also been re-edified, is filled with stained glass, and being 
 designed with trefoil and quatrefoil lights, approaches nearest to those 
 Catharine-wheel windows which beautify so many of our cathedrals 
 and large churches. This window appears to have been originally filled 
 with painted glass about the year 1320.* 
 
 * Since the above was written the Cathedral has been partially restored, for 
 an account of which see Appendix XVI. 
 
04 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 The interior of this cathedral presents the only example in England 
 of an equal height of vaulting throughout the whole extent of the 
 choir, its aisles, the ante-choir, and the transepts; and as the windows 
 rise to the roof there is no clerestory, which gives to the whole interior 
 an interesting, and highly novel effect, especially to the aisles, which 
 bear some resemblance to Moorish architecture, having a series of 
 horizontal buttresses, or beams of stone, supported by pointed arches. 
 The painted windows at the eastern extremity of these aisles are said 
 to have been presented by the celebrated Nell Gwynne, in the reign of 
 Charles II., but this is mere tradition; and as the arms of Glemham, 
 Dean of Bristol, whose installation into that office took place in 1G60, 
 together with his family alliances, appear in both windows, it is more 
 probable that he was the donor after his elevation to the dignity just 
 mentioned. 
 
 The room now used as a vestry was originally a chapel dedicated to 
 the Virgin Mary, as already intimated, It bears a strong resemblance 
 in its roof to that of the Elder Lady Chapel, having the same number 
 of ribs rising from single columns, with an additional rib extending from 
 the centre of the vaulting to the head of each window; the mouldings, 
 however, are all of the Decorated English character, and the windows 
 also are early examples of the same style. The soffits of the latter are 
 adorned with the ball-flower ornament, which runs round the whole of 
 Abbot Knowle’s building, and is peculiar to this style of architecture. 
 
 There were formerly two altars in this chapel, beneath the windows 
 on the eastern side, the piscinas belonging to which still remain; so 
 also does the iron work from whence tapestry was suspended on festival 
 days. In the north wall is an aumbrye, or locker, the door of which 
 has disappeared. These small cupboards were used for securing the 
 sacred vessels of the altar. In the south wall beneath the principal 
 window is a recess, having three divisions, in which the relics are 
 supposed to have been deposited. On the west side is a door opening 
 to a spiral staircase of stone, which formerly conducted to the 
 apartments of the priests on whom devolved the duty of performing 
 mass at the altars in this chapel; these rooms are now destroyed. 
 
 At the west end of the south aisle is an apartment which, from its having 
 been the burial place of the Newton family, is called their chapel; but 
 from its general character it must have been erected long before it was 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 95 
 
 used by them as a place of sepulture, although it appears not to have 
 entered into the original design of Abbot Ivnowle. The date of its 
 erection appears to be about the time that the Decorated English style 
 was being superseded by the Perpendicular English style, if a judgment 
 may be formed from a window on the east side, which affords a very 
 early example of mullions running into the head of the arch ; yet every 
 other member of this window is of a purely Decorated English character. 
 The erection of this chapel may, therefore, be referred to a period very 
 close upon the commencement of the reign of Richard II. 
 
 No account appears of the continuation of the building of this church 
 until the time of Abbot Newbury, who was elected in 1428. He was 
 a great benefactor to the house over which he presided, and to him may 
 be fairly ascribed the erection of the tower of the church, the architecture 
 of which precisely agrees with the style prevailing in his time. It is 
 the most important feature of its exterior, being one hundred and 
 twenty-seven feet high, and is both elegant in design and of excellent 
 proportions ; possessing a stateliness which no other part of the structure 
 exhibits. It was most probably finished by Abbot Hunt, who succeeded 
 Newbury, and to him may also be ascribed the vaulting of the south 
 transept, both being constructed in the Perpendicular style of English 
 architecture. This transept was certainly raised upon the walls of the 
 old Norman church of Robert Fitzharding, as will appear by a close 
 inspection of the remains of the original building at the west and south¬ 
 west extremity of the structure. On the exterior of the latter an Anglo- 
 Norman buttress rises nearly to a level with the head of the west 
 window of that portion of the building, the base of which appears to be 
 about two feet above the masonry of the old Norman wall. This 
 window is a specimen of the Decorated style, in all its members, and of 
 a very beautiful character; so, also, is the corresponding -window in the 
 north transept, both being of the same design and of the same date of 
 erection. The Anglo-Norman wall extends along the west, south, and 
 part of the eastern portion of the south transept, and, in all probability, 
 it traverses the west, north, and east sides of the north transept, if a 
 judgment may be formed from present appearances. It is also evident 
 that the unadorned spaces between the columns which support the 
 tower, eastward, are portions of the Anglo-Norman structure ; and so, 
 it is likely, are those piers which are faced with columns and mouldings 
 
96 
 
 HISTOKY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 of the Decorated style, within the church, westward. There are also 
 some interesting remains of Fitzharding’s church, consisting of a series 
 of corbel heads, in the staircase leading to the tower, out of the north 
 aisle, which induces a belief that much of the present edifice in that 
 direction was erected upon the walls of the more ancient structure. 
 Beneath the west window of the south transept is an Anglo-Norman 
 doorway, walled up, which evidently was the original entry to that part 
 of the church, before the present communication from the cloisters was 
 opened. 
 
 There is good reason for believing that the tower and south transept 
 were finished abont the year 1476, under the superintendence of John 
 Ashfield, who was “the master of the new works,” from 1472 to about 
 1491, and who, doubtless, furnished the designs, subject to the ap¬ 
 proval of Abbot Hunt, who also “made anew the roofing of the whole 
 conventual church, as well by battlements, with stones and pinnacles 
 decently placed round the said church, as by timber, lead, and other 
 necessaries.”* 
 
 Although it does not appear what particular parts of the structure 
 Hunt’s successor, Abbot Newland, was engaged on, it is certain that 
 the whole of the church was completed, with the exception of the north 
 transept, before the year 1492. It seems that no building was going 
 on at that time, yet the accounts of the Abbey show that stone was 
 certainly procured from the Dundry Quarries by “John Martyn, the 
 master of the new work,” as if in anticipation of the construction of 
 the north transept, which was probably commenced about the year 1498. 
 It was not, however, finished until after Newland’s death. The groining 
 of both transepts are in the same style of architecture, and are worthy 
 of notice on account of their elaborate character, which distinguishes 
 them from the vaulting of every other part of the church; some of the 
 bosses, however, at the intersections, are anything but decent. Mr. 
 Britton says that “ Newland’s arms appear in the vaulting of the roof 
 of the transept,”! but this is an error, he having mistaken a shield 
 bearing a human heart pierced with two swords, for the rebus of the 
 “ Good Abbot.” 
 
 * Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 266. 
 fHist. of Bristol Cathedral, p. 61. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 97 
 
 The Abbots Hunt, Newland, and his successor, Elyott, must have 
 expended large sums of money upon the various buildings connected 
 with the church of the monastery under their care, and it is clear, that 
 at Elyott’s death, in 1520, the works were still progressing; for to him 
 is attributed the erection of the very beautiful stalls, with their elaborate 
 carvings in wood, which still adorn the choir; the misereres belonging 
 to them are particularly worthy of attention. John Somerset, who 
 succeeded Elyott, opened the doorway leading from the exterior, on the 
 north side, into the Elder Lady Chapel, over which are his arms, 
 greatly mutilated; this was done, in all probability, because of the 
 unfinished and impassable state of the north transept, then in course of 
 erection. I have said before that the upper part of the altar screen was 
 constructed by Abbot Burton, who was elected in 1533, which shews 
 that the interior decorations of the Abbey Church were going on until 
 close upon the dissolution of the Abbey in 1539. On its becoming a 
 cathedral, the stalls of Abbot Elyott were removed from their original 
 situation near the tower, to their present position in the choir, The 
 bishop’s throne was erected by Paul Bush, and the organ screen appears 
 to have been constructed about the same period; the space over the 
 archway being adorned with the Tudor arms and supporters, and the 
 entire screen is embellished with various elaborately carved devices. 
 The initials T. W., which occur on the west front, with something like the 
 strings of a cardinal’s hat twisted about them, were not intended, as some 
 suppose, for Cardinal Wolsey, but for Thomas Wright, who was appointed 
 receiver-general for the chapter in 1541; the organ itself was built in 
 1629, when the stone pulpit in the ante-choir was also presented to the 
 cathedral by Bishop Robert Wright. The centre west window (under 
 the tower), which claims to belong to the Perpendicular English style, has 
 an extremely meagre appearance, having no cusps or finish about it. It 
 was constructed also in 1629, and is inserted beneath the arch originally 
 opening into the nave. The north window, over the present chief 
 entrance to the church, bears the date of 1704, which would lead to the 
 belief that its predecessor was destroyed in the great storm, November 
 20th, 1703, when the cathedral suffered much injury. It is singular 
 that the mouldings round this window, on the interior side of the 
 church, and also the small shafts and capitals which support them, are 
 all of the Early English style. It is extremely difficult to account for 
 
 H 
 
98 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 this architectural feature, and equally so for the remains of a recessed 
 archway beneath it, in the corner adjoining the Elder Lady Chapel, as 
 well as some curious arches, niches, &c., in what is called the Newton 
 Chapel. 
 
 There can be no doubt that there once were a nave and aisles to 
 this cathedral, but the period and purpose of their destruction has 
 occupied very little attention from those who have written upon the 
 subject. Every observer must have noticed that on the exterior, at 
 the west end of the cathedral, are the remains of two arches of the 
 nave, with clustered columns and capitals, from whence rise a portion 
 of the ribs which supported the vaulting. These are incorporated in 
 the large modern buttresses beneath the tower, and there is also, at 
 some distance from the western wall of the north transept, the base of 
 a buttress which most probably indicates the termination of that end of 
 the church. A few years ago the foundation, or basement work of the 
 ancient nave, it is said, was laid open by the city architect, R. S. Pope, 
 Esq., who, in effecting some necessary alterations at the cathedral, 
 brought this interesting subject to light; “ the ground plan, indicating 
 those remains, consisting of the bases and plinths of piers, on the south 
 side.”* From a comparison, too, of the columns and capitals mentioned 
 above, which are of the Decorated English character, with those in the 
 interior of the church, there can be no doubt of then - forming a portion 
 of Abbot Kuowle’s structure, and that the nave, witli its aisles, had 
 been demolished, not by the agents of King Henry VIII., at the 
 dissolution of the religious house to which they belonged, but by those 
 successors of Abbot Kuowle who built the transept, and were engaged 
 in re-constructing the edifice in the Pependicular style of English 
 architecture then newly invented, but were frustrated in their design by 
 the suppression of the abbey, as already stated. This opinion is 
 confirmed by Mr. Britton, who says,f “ Although it is not easy to 
 explain when and on what account the nave and aisles were demolished, 
 we may presume that it was anterior to the dissolution, and that their 
 re-erection was among the works in progress by Newland, Elyott, Hunt, 
 &c.” At the west end of the church the arches of the nave and its 
 
 Proceedings of the Archaeological Institute, 1851, p. 50. 
 f Hist, of Bristol Cathedral, p. 51. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 99 
 
 aisles, now walled up, may be so distinctly traced, as to leave no doubt 
 of those parts of the structure having been continued. 
 
 An opinion, however, prevails, that the destruction of the western 
 portions of this church was effected by Oliver Cromwell, with shot fired 
 from Brandon-hill during the siege of Bristol in the civil wars of 
 Charles I. No lengthened observations are necessary to refute an 
 opinion so fallacious; a few remarks, however, may not be out of place 
 in a work intended for popular reading. The opinion referred to rests 
 upon tradition alone, without a tittle of authentic historical evidence 
 to support it. 
 
 The careful reader of our local annals will not fail to observe that no 
 ■ mention whatever is made of the presence of Oliver Cromwell in this 
 city before the year 1645 ; consequently, whatever relates to the doings 
 of the belligerents in Bristol, prior to his arrival, may be dismissed with 
 one short sentence, namely, that notwithstanding the city underwent all 
 the casualties incident to repeated attacks, the cathedral is not once men¬ 
 tioned, nor is its immediate vicinity. We have, therefore, good reason 
 to conclude that it was unmolested, and continued to be so until the 
 arrival of Cromwell in the year stated above, at which time the city was 
 in the hands of the Boyalists, together with all the forts, gates, and 
 walls. 
 
 On the 21st of August, 1645, General Fairfax and Lieutenant-General 
 Cromwell reconnoitred the city, and on the 10th of September they 
 began storming it. The attack, however, was confined to the taking of 
 the various gates and forts, the whole of which on the Kingsdown side, 
 towards the river Avon, fell into the hands of the Parliamentarians, in¬ 
 cluding Prior’s Hill Fort, which stood in the south-east portion of Pugley’s 
 Feld, at the top of Ninetree Hill. About four hours after the taking of 
 this fort, Prince Rupert “ sent a trumpet to desire a parley, which the 
 General (Fairfax) embraced on account of the city being set on fire in 
 several places, and on condition of the fire being immediately stopped, 
 which was done accordingly.” * The “ Mercurius Veridicus ” of Sep¬ 
 tember 17th, more explicitly says, “The town was fired in three places 
 by the enemy (the besieged Royalists), which we could not put out, 
 which began to be a great trouble to the General, and all his officers, 
 
 *Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 403. Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 236. 
 
 H 2 
 
100 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 that so famous a city should be wasted ; but whilst they were viewing 
 that sad spectacle, the Prince sent a trumpet to the General, desiring a 
 treaty for the surrender.” We subsequently read that the fires were ex¬ 
 tinguished, the treaty was proceeded with, and the articles were agreed 
 to ; also, that by seven o’clock the same evening part of the garrison 
 marched out of the city, with all their arms and accoutrements, bag and 
 baggage ; Prince Rupert himself, “ with eight noblemen, many ladies 
 and gentlemen, five hundred horse, and one thousand four hundred foot 
 soldiers,” following the next day, September 11th ; on which afternoon 
 the city, castle, <fcc., were given up to Fairfax.* 
 
 King Charles severely censured Prince Rupert for delivering over the 
 city to the parliamentary General, which drew from the Prince a vindi¬ 
 cation of his conduct, in “ A Declaration and Narrative of the state of 
 the Garrison and City of Bristol; ” in which he states, as a reason for 
 surrendering up the city, his fear lest Brandon Hill Fort should be taken 
 by the besiegers, and that the conquest of the Royal Fort would then have 
 been easily accomplished. This fort, “ which had the reputation of 
 strength, lay open to Brandon-hill fort, which, if taken, would, from its 
 height, with the cannon, command the whole plain with it.” t His 
 (Prince Rupert’s) apprehension that the Royal Fort might be cannonaded 
 from Brandon Hill Fort was a weak excuse (for yielding up the city to 
 Fairfax); which it would have been time enough to have urged when 
 that fort (Brandon Hill Fort) should have been taken, and the effects of 
 its fire had become intolerable; which might never have happened, the 
 two places being half a mile distant from each other, and apparently 
 on the same level.” X What makes the taking of the Royal Fort by that 
 on Brandon Hill (had the latter fallen into the hands of the Parliament¬ 
 arians), very problematical, is, that the Royal Fort was mounted with 
 twenty-two pieces of cannon, whilst that on Brandon Hill could boast 
 of only six ! 
 
 From what has been advanced, it is clear that the charge against 
 Oliver Cromwell, of having destroyed the west end of the cathedral, 
 has no foundation in truth. The supposition that the nave and aisles 
 could have been destroyed by shot fired from Brandon Hill Fort, which 
 
 * Barrett’s History of Bristol, p. 242; and Seyer, vol. 2. 
 t Barrett, p. 239. t Seyer, vol. ii., p. 462. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 101 
 
 was never in Cromwell's possession during the siege, is simply absurd, 
 if we bear in mind that the Abbey Gateway, the old refectory of the 
 monks, and other buildings, still stand between the place of destruction 
 and the thing destroyed, and yet these structures were uninjured! It is 
 not improbable that those who attribute the destruction of the nave of 
 this structure to Oliver Cromwell, may not be aware that Thomas 
 Cromwell, Earl of Essex, who flourished a century before, was one of 
 the commissioners appointed by Henry VIII. to execute his designs at 
 the dissolution of religious houses, which may account, in some measure, 
 for the manner in which the name of the Protector has been handed 
 down, by tradition only, in connection with Bristol Cathedral. 
 
 The monuments in this church, in point of age, commence with that 
 to the memory of Abbot David, who “ was buried under a marble, with 
 the figure of a human skull and cross on it,” * in the north transept, at 
 the foot of the steps leading to the Elder Lady Chapel. Mr. Britton, 
 however, who is not particularly accurate in describing this stone, thinks 
 it “ doubtless commemorates one of the earliest abbots, (but that it) 
 was probably removed from the old church.” f 
 
 Proceeding first with the tombs of the abbots, and then with the 
 warriors of the middle ages, which are found in this cathedral, the next 
 claiming attention is that to the memory of Abbot Knowle, erected in 
 the north wall of the choir of the building, and immediately adjoining 
 the altar. On a slab beneath an arched recess, lie the effigies of the 
 abbot in full canonicals, his head surmounted with a richly adorned 
 mitre, which rests on a pillow supported by angels, and at his feet is 
 a lion. There are no less than seven of these beautiful arched recesses 
 existing in the church of Abbot Knowle, which, rising above the tomb 
 itself, are constructed so as to form canopies, ornamented with elaborate 
 and costly workmanship. The front and sides of these tombs are 
 adorned with a series of niches and buttresses, in the best style of art; 
 tombs placed beneath arches inserted in the walls of a church are 
 usually appropriated to the founders of the building, as in the instance 
 before us. 
 
 On the south side of the chancel, beneath a recess similar to that 
 just described, repose the effigies of Abbot Newland, arrayed in full 
 
 * Barrett’s History of Bristol, p. 206. 
 t History of Bristol Cathedral, p. 58. 
 
102 
 
 HISTORY OR BRISTOL. 
 
 pontificals; with two angels at his feet supporting a shield charged with 
 his device—three nails piercing a human heart—as emblematical of the 
 name which he assumed, that of Nailheart. 
 
 Opposite to Abbot Xewiand, and adjoining the tomb of Abbot 
 Knowle, is that of Morgan Gwilliam (as is supposed), the last official 
 who presided over the monastery. It is certain that he was buried in 
 his own church, but it is not quite as certain that the effigy in the 
 recess indicated, was intended to represent him, although it is generally 
 believed to be so. 
 
 Besides the abbots above mentioned, the following are known to have 
 been interred in this church, or its precincts; but of whom no 
 monument remains:—William Long, buried in the Dorth aisle; John 
 de Marina, in the chapter-house; Hugh Dodington, in the north 
 transept, between two other abbots whose names are not known; James 
 Barry was buried under a marble on the south side of the rood altar, 
 which probably stood at the entrance to the choir, before the stalls 
 were removed to their present position subsequent to the Reformation; 
 Ralph Asshe was buried in the middle of the choir; William Cook, 
 before the door entering the Lady Chapel; Henry Shellingford, in the 
 chancel beside the high altar; John Cemey, in the chancel; and 
 Walter Newbury is said, by Mr. Barrett,* to have been “buried against 
 the north wall,” and to be represented “ carved in stone in pontificalia, 
 lying on his back with crosier and mitre.” This figure has been 
 supposed to be carved for Abbot Gwilliam, but it is far more likely, I 
 conceive, to have been meant for Walter Newbury, who was certainly 
 more deserving such an honour. 
 
 The oldest effigy in the cathedral is that of the first Thomas, Lord 
 Berkeley, in the south aisle, westward, close to the Newton Chapel; he 
 is represented in the habit and posture of a Knight Templar ; his legs 
 crossed, and his shield charged with a chevron, and ten crosses pattee, 
 the latter he was the first of the family to assume. • He married Joan, 
 daughter of Ralph de Somery, Lord of Campden; niece of William 
 Marshall, Earl of Pembroke ; and died November 29th, 1243, aged 76 
 years. As this and the next figure are older than Abbot Knowle’s 
 church, it is probable they were removed from the old structure of 
 
 Hist, of Bristol, p. 268. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 103 
 
 Robert Fitzharding’s founding, and deposited in their present position 
 after the reconstruction of the building, about the year 1320. 
 
 In the recess eastward to that just mentioned, lie the effigies of the 
 second Maurice, Lord Berkeley, who died April 4th, 1281, aged 63 
 years. In this figure, as well as in that last described, we see the 
 commencement of the gradual transition from mail to plate armour, 
 which commenced in the thirteenth century. The body of the warrior 
 is habited in a hawberk, or shirt of mail, which covers the body, arms, 
 and hands, and reaches down to the knees; the head was protected by 
 a hood of mail attached to the hawberk, and appearing to form part of 
 it. The thighs, legs, and feet, were cased in breeches and hose of the 
 same kind of mail. The knees of both figures were protected by poleyns 
 or knee-caps of plate, which were introduced in the reign of Henry III., 
 who died in 1272. Over the hawberk is worn a long loose surcoat 
 or linen frock, without sleeves, confined round the waist by a narrow 
 girdle, below which it falls open in front, giving considerable freedom 
 and general breadth of effect to the whole composition. The legs of 
 this figure are not crossed as the effigies of crusaders generally are, but 
 the heater-shaped shield of that chivalrous body is retained. The feet 
 rest on the bust of a man, the head of which has disappeared. 
 
 Under an arch between the Elder Lady Chapel and the north aisle 
 is a tomb, at the foot of which is a modern inscription on a plain 
 marble tablet, which records that it (the tomb) is 
 
 “ The Monument of 
 Robert Fitz-Harding, 
 
 Lord of Berkeley, descended from 
 the Kings of Denmark; and Eva his 
 Wife, by whom he had five Sons and 
 two Daughters: Maurice, his eldest 
 Son, was the first of this Family that 
 took the Name of Berkeley: This 
 Robert Fitz-Harding laid the 
 Foundation of this Church, and Mo¬ 
 nastery of St. Augustine in the Year 
 1140, the fifth of King Stephen; dedi¬ 
 cated and Endowed it in 114S. He 
 died in the year 1170, in the 17th of 
 King Henry the Second.” 
 
 On the summit of this tomb repose the effigies of a male and female, 
 the former habited in the mixed armour of the fourteenth century, and 
 the latter in the female attire of the same period. From this circumstance 
 
104 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 it is clear that these figures could not be intended to represent Robert 
 Fitzharding and his lady, who flourished two centuries before; and it 
 will appear, also, on examination, that it is equally incorrect to 
 appropriate them to a warrior who died in 1368, and his wife, as has 
 been thoughtlessly done, by some one affixing a record to the tomb 
 itself, to that effect. 
 
 The head of the male figure is covered with a conical skull cap, or 
 helmet, which is attached to a hawberk or tippet of mail, by an inter¬ 
 laced cordon. Chain mail also appears on the lower part of the body 
 and the feet; the upper portion, as well as the front of the arms and 
 legs, are covered with plate armour. This kind of mixed body armour 
 was introduced in the reign of Edward II., who ascended the throne in 
 1307. The dress of the female effigy also refers to the same period, 
 namely, the beginning of the fourteenth century, when the attire of 
 ladies of rank was composed of the coif, hood or veil, and wimple, 
 covering the head, neck, and chin ; whilst the body was enveloped in a 
 long loose gown, over which was worn a cloak or mantle. This fashion 
 appears to have changed early in the reign of Edward III., who succeeded 
 his father in 1327, when the loose dress was superseded by the tight¬ 
 bodied garment conforming to the shape of the wearer. These parti¬ 
 culars clearly decide the age of this monument, and fix the date of its 
 erection at the commencement of the reign of the last-named monarch. 
 If additional evidence were required, the tomb itself on which these 
 effigies repose furnishes us with it, for the sides are embellished with a 
 series of recessed canopied niches and buttresses, of a style clearly indi¬ 
 cating that the monument belongs to the same period as the figures 
 resting upon it. 
 
 A comparatively recent inscription (just referred to) on a small brass 
 plate, on the south front of this tomb, records that it “ was erected to 
 the memory of Maurice, Lord Berkeley, ninth baron of Berkeley Castle, 
 who died the 8th day of June, 1368. Also of the lady, Margaret, his 
 mother, daughter of Roger Mortimer, Earl of March, and first wife of 
 Thomas, 8th Lord Berkeley. She died the 5th day of May, 1337.” 
 Why a female should in this case be represented on a tomb by the side 
 of a man who was the husband of another, it is difficult to conceive. Mr. 
 Britton is assuredly in error when assigning these figures to so late a 
 period as 1368, when the fourth, and not, as he says, the third Maurice, 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 105 
 
 Loi'd Berkeley, died ; * for the attire of both figures is too early for that 
 date. The third Maurice, Lord Berkeley, died in 1326 : he was twice 
 married, his first wife being buried at Portbury; but his second, who 
 was Isabel, daughter of Gilbert de Clare, whose arms appear over the 
 high altar of the church, is, I have no doubt, the female represented 
 with the third Maurice, her husband , on the monument referred to. Mr. 
 Barrett says t this baron “ died a prisoner in Wallingford Castle, the 
 19th of Edward 2nd, 1326 : he was first buried there, but his body was 
 afterwards removed to this monastery, and is buried in the south aisle 
 under the arch before the choir door ; ” that is, under the arch at the 
 east end of the south aisle, which once opened into the Virgin Chapel, 
 now used as a vestry. The testimony of Dugdale, however, is to be 
 preferred as more correct : who states that the third Maurice was 
 “ buried in the north aisle of the church; ” and we may presume, as 
 the precise spot is not mentioned, that he was interred beneath the 
 monument before us. 
 
 The tomb just referred to as once opening into the Virgin Chapel, is 
 assigned by Mr. Barrett to the second Maurice, lord Berkeley, who died 
 in 1281 ; yet in another place he tells his readers that he “lies buried 
 in the north aisle of this monastery ! ” To account for the arms on the 
 tomb which he could not decipher, he says, at the former page of his 
 work, that they belong to this Maurice’s two wives, whom there he does 
 not name ; and yet, at the latter page, he speaks of but one, “ Isabel, 
 daughter of Maurice de Creoun, a baron in Lincolnshire.” Doubtless, 
 it is difficult to decide who the right owner of this tomb is, because of 
 the Early English ornament upon it, which shews that it must have 
 originally commemorated some one who died in the thirteenth century, 
 and before the building of Abbot Knowle’s church ; yet as the arms on 
 its south front belong to Berkeley, Ferrars, and Quincy, it unquestionably 
 contains the remains of the second Thomas, Lord Berkeley, who died 
 July 23rd, 1321; and his wife Joan, daughter of William de Ferrars, 
 Jun., Earl of Ferrars and Derby, whose arms, with those of her husband 
 and her mother, Margaret, daughter and co-heir of Koger de Quincy, 
 Earl of Winchester, are those depicted on the monument. Mr. Barrett 
 
 History of Bristol Cathedral, p. 59. 
 t History of Bristol, p. 254. 
 
106 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 says that this second Thomas “lies buried with Jane, his wife,”* in the 
 place above mentioned; and Mr. Britton follows him in reiterating the 
 error. The former writer states, that “in an arch in the south wall 
 (aisle) is the effigy of a man in armour lying on an altar-tomb, in 
 memory of Maurice Berkeley, the third lord of that name,” but the 
 armour in which it is arrayed shows, as already stated, that the figure 
 referred to may be more satisfactorily assigned to the second Maurice, 
 who died in 1281. 
 
 The chapel of the Virgin was the burial place of several of the 
 Berkeley family, the bricks on the floor being impressed with their 
 arms as well as with those of some of the abbots. 
 
 There is no memorial remaining here to Robert, Lord Berkeley, who 
 died May 13th, 1221, aged fifty-five years, and who, it is said by 
 Mr. Barrett, was buried, in a monk’s cowl, beneath an arch in the wall 
 of the north aisle of the erection, previous to the present church. A 
 few years since, however, the arch was opened, and a coffin discovered, 
 containing all that was left of this baron. The body, in tolerable 
 preservation, was enveloped in horse-hair, enclosed in leather, the 
 interstices in the coffin being filled with earth. 
 
 Several members of the Berkeley family, too, were, no doubt, interred 
 beneath or near the great tomb already described, but whose names are 
 not recorded. Margaret, however, wife of the third Thomas, Lord 
 Berkeley (son of the third Maurice), who died May 5th, 1337, is said 
 to repose here; yet Thomas, her husband, who died October 27th, 
 1361, was buried in Berkeley Church. Their son, the fourth Maurice, 
 who was at the Battle of Poictiers, September 19th, 1356, where he 
 was severely wounded, died at Berkeley, aged 37, June 8th, 1368, and 
 lies interred with his mother, at Bristol.f Robert Fitzharding, with 
 Eva, his wife, we are told, on the authority of Dugdale, “ lies buried in 
 the Quire of Saint Augustine’s Abbey, whereof he was the pious 
 founder.” X Sir James Berkeley bequeathed his body, by will, in 1404, 
 to be buried in his father’s tomb; and here, too, if his will was carried 
 out, rests the fifth Thomas, Lord Berkeley, who died in January, 1532; 
 for he directed that his body should be first interred in the church of 
 
 * Hist, of Bristol, p. 254. + Ibid, p. 255. 
 
 X Baronage, vol. i, p. 350. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 107 
 
 Maugotsfield, in Gloucestershire; and, after three months, be removed to 
 this abbey, and there be buried near his first wife, Eleanor. 
 
 Against the east wall of the Newton Chapel is a chantry tomb of 
 grey marble, which, we are informed, is “ In memory of Sir Richard 
 Newton Cradock, of Barrs Court, in the County of Gloucester, one of 
 his Majesties Justices of the Common Pleas, who died December the 
 13th, 1444, and, with his Lady, lies interred beneath this monument;”* 
 and we are further informed that this memento was placed on the tomb 
 “by Mrs. Archer, sister to the late Sir Michael Newton, of Barrs Court, 
 1718.” Its erection “may have been to the memory of a Cradock, 
 (but) the notion that the Judge was buried there must have arisen from 
 some misapprehension, and it is not true that he died in 1444 ; for the 
 last fine levied before him was in November, 1448.” f 
 
 The design of the monument in Bristol Cathedral is certainly more 
 recent than the date ascribed to it. It was evidently erected when the 
 English or Pointed style of architecture was gradually gliding, by 
 almost imperceptible degrees, into Anglo-Italian or Debased English. 
 “Beyond a doubt, Judge Cradock and his lady rest in Yatton Church, 
 Somerset;” where, in the centre of the de Wyck aisle or north transept, 
 stands a very handsome alabaster altar-tomb. It is enriched with 
 beautifully wrought niches, within which are full length figures of 
 angels, holding shields in their hands. On the summit the venerable 
 judge and his lady lie represented in the costume of the period. 
 
 “ This tomb is, by tradition, ascribed to Judge Cradock. The female 
 figure is supposed to represent Emma de Wyck. The inscription is 
 gone. There can be no doubt, from the costume, that the male effigy 
 is that of a judge. That it is a Cradock, is confirmed by the garb or 
 wheat sheaf on which his head is laid.” The writer, after noting some 
 other confirmatory circumstances, concludes, “therefore, that Judge 
 Cradock’s tomb is in Yatton Church, and that the tomb in Bristol 
 Cathedral is not his.” He tells us that he cannot assign that tomb to 
 any one else, unless to Richard Newton, a grandson of the judge, which 
 is certainly much nearer the time of its erection. 
 
 * Vide inscription on the monument. 
 
 t Rev. H. T. Ellacombe, in the proceedings of the Archaeological Institute, 1851. 
 
108 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Mr. Britton* speaking of this tomb, says that it “formerly sustained 
 effigies” which “ were destroyed during the civil wars;” but he does 
 not tell us upon what authority he makes such a statement, nor does he 
 say in what posture they were placed, but leaves us to infer that they 
 were extended on the top of the tomb, as effigies usually were. Mr. 
 Barrettt says that “it contained the effigies of two persons kneeling "— 
 neither of which statements can be correct; for had either been true, 
 there would certainly have been some show of the spoliation this tomb 
 is said, by the first-named writer, in echo to the second, to have suffered, 
 by the forcible removal of the effigies under the circumstances they have 
 both narrated; and by the parties they mention as the persons who, not 
 very carefully, we may be sure, removed them from the monument. 
 The truth is, this was merely a chantry tomb, and, it seems, never was 
 graced with effigies, certainly not in stone. Mr. Barrett, in another 
 place, says they were brasses. | 
 
 Very little remains of the painted glass which once adorned the 
 windows of the abbey, and that little is chiefly to be found in the coats 
 of arms which exist in the great east window of the choir of the present 
 church of Abbot Knowle’s erecting. This window was restored (as 
 before mentioned) in 1847; the old glass was retained, and, with much 
 that is modern, used in the restoration; it has, thereby, lost little of 
 the interest originally pertaining to it. In this window appear the 
 arms of 
 
 1. King Edward. III.—Gules, three lions passant; in pale, or. 
 
 2. Berkeley of Berkeley.—Gules, a chevron between ten crosses patted, 
 argent. 
 
 3. Berkeley of Stoke Gifford. —Gules, a chevron ermine, between ten crosses 
 pattee argent. 
 
 4. De Clare.—Or, three chevronels gules. 
 
 5. Warren.—Checquy. Or and azure. 
 
 6. De Spencer.—Quarterly argent and gules, the second and third fretty or, 
 over all, a bend sable. 
 
 7. De Bohun.—Azure. A bend argent cottised or, between six demi lions 
 rampant, of the last. 
 
 8. Berkeley of Coberley.—Gules, a fess, between three martlets, argent. 
 
 9. Bradestone (abbot). —Argent on a canton gules a rose or, barbed. 
 
 * History of Bristol Cathedral, p. 60. 
 t History of Bristol, p. 305. J Ibid, p. 306. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 109 
 
 10. Fitzalan.—Gules, a lion rampant, or. 
 
 11. Beauchamp.—Gules, a fess, between six cross crosslets, or. 
 
 12. Wylington.—Gules, a saltire vaire. 
 
 13. De la Biviere.—Azure, two bars clancette, or. 
 
 14. Montacute.—Argent, three fusils gules, conjoined in fess. 
 
 15. Basset of Uleigh.—Ermine, on a canton gules, a mullet pierced, or. 
 
 16. De la Mare.—Gules, in the dexter quarter an eagle displayed, or. 
 
 17. Beauchamp of Essex.—Or, a lion rampant sable, crowned gules. 
 
 The lights beneath the above coats of arms now form what is known 
 as a complete Jesse window, containing the Crucifixion, the Virgin, and 
 St. John; below are the figures of Jesse, the Virgin and Child, several 
 kings, with twelve of the Prophets. The windows on the north and 
 south sides of the east end of the choir have also been restored; the 
 original glass being most probably of the same age as the east window. 
 There is also some glass in the window at the east end of the Elder 
 Lady Chapel, possibly as old as the reign of Edward I.; and in the 
 west and south windows of the transept; in the former is the white 
 rose, the emblem of the Yorkists. The remainder of the stained glass 
 in the church belongs to the bishopric, and is of very recent date. 
 Beneath a window in the south aisle of the choir is a brass plate, 
 inscribed—“ The upper lights of the above window were inserted A.D. 
 1858, in memory of William Killegrew Wait and Frances Newman, his 
 wife; ” and at the foot of a beautiful memorial window inserted on the 
 north side of the Elder Lady Chapel is the following—“ In memory of 
 the Kev. Henry Harvey, 23 years a canon of this Cathedral, died 20th 
 November, 1854, aged 62. The servant of the Lord must not strive, 
 but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient. O worship the Lord 
 in the beauty of holiness.” 
 
 The arms of the Abbey were, sable, three ducal coronets in pale, or ; 
 and the abbots, as far as we know, were— 
 
 Abbot Bradestone .—See arms in east window of choir. 
 
 ,, Edmund Knowle.—Or, a chevron argent, three roses of the first. 
 
 ,, Ralph Asshe.—A tree in a field all proper. 
 
 ,, William Hunt.—Azure, a St. Andrew’s cross, or. 
 
 ,, John Newland.—Argent, three nails, or, piercing a heart vulned, 
 
 proper. 
 
 ,, Robert Elyott.—Argent, on a chief gules, two mullets of the first. 
 
110 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Abbot John Somerset.—Azure, a saltire argent between, in chief a portcullis 
 or, nailed of the first, with chains pendant thereto of the third, in 
 each flank and in base a fleur-de-lis of gold. 
 
 ,, William Burton —A bur sprouting from a tun. 
 
 Of the bishops who were buried in the cathedral or in its churchyard, 
 very few of them have a monument or other memorial to their memory. 
 An exception, however, is in Paul Bush, the first person who was elected 
 to the dignity. He was, at his death in 1558, interred in the north 
 aisle, where a low altar tomb, supporting an emaciated figure of the 
 bishop, resting his head on a mitre, and having a crosier placed by his 
 right side, perpetuates his memory. Shields of arms adorn the Ionic 
 pillars of this tomb, and a latin inscription, which in English means 
 “ Here lies Paul Bush, the first bishop of this church,” &c., runs round 
 the base and cornice of the monument, now partly obliterated. On a 
 grave-stone below the altar steps is inscribed, “ Of your charity pray 
 for the soul of Edithe Busshe, otherwyse called Ashley, who deceased 
 the 18th day of Oct. A.D., 1553.” 
 
 Bishop Westfield lies buried in the choir, with a Latin inscription, 
 written by himself, which, in English, reads thus ;—“ Here lies Thomas 
 Westfield, D.D.—the least among the bishops, the worst (or first) of 
 sinners. He died June 25th, 1644, full of years and grief. READER, 
 whoever you are, farewell, be sober. He dictated this Epitaph for his 
 tomb while he was alive. His sorrowing wife and relict, Elizabeth 
 Westfield, erected this monument to her much lamented husband.” * 
 
 Bishop Howell, who died in 1646, was buried at the entrance to the 
 choir out of the south aisle, under a plain stone inscribed with only one 
 Latin word, “Expergiscar,” (I shall awake!) 
 
 Bishop Rowland Searchfield has an inscription to his memory against 
 the north wall of the choir; it is, however, nearly obliterated. 
 
 On a black stone inserted in the pavement close to the bishop’s 
 throne, is inscribed—“William Bradshaw, D.D., Bishop of Bristol, and 
 Dean of Christ Church, in Oxford, died December the 16th, 1/32, aged 
 62 nearly obliterated. 
 
 See Appendix XVII. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Ill 
 
 Adjoining the above, southward, is another stone with a Latin 
 inscription, which, translated, is— 
 
 ‘ ‘ The very Reverend Father in Christ 
 Joseph Butler, L.L.D. 
 formerly Bishop of this Diocese, 
 and afterwards of Durham ; 
 what, and how great, a man he was 
 his own age most readily acknowledged. 
 
 And if a lofty mind, a force of genius perspicacious 
 and subtle, and a spirit, pious, unadorned, 
 candid, and liberal, can add any 
 thing to his fame as a ruler or a writer, Ins memory 
 will not easily be obliterated. 
 
 He died at Bath 
 lGth June, 1752, 
 
 Aged 60.” 
 
 There is also an inscription written by the poet Southey on a very 
 effective monument of Painswick stone, in the Perpendicular style of 
 English architecture, by S. C. Fripp, of this city, erected in the east 
 wall of the south transept, as follows:— 
 
 ‘ ‘ Sacred to the Memory 
 of 
 
 Joseph Butler, D.C.L. 
 
 Twelve Years Bishop of this Diocese, and afterwards 
 Bishop of Durham, 
 
 Whose Mortal Part is deposited in the Choir 
 of this Cathedral. 
 
 Others had established the Historical and Prophetical Grounds of 
 the Christian Religion, and the sure Testimony of its Truth, 
 
 Which is found in its perfect Adaptation to the 
 Heart of Man. 
 
 It was reserved for HIM to develope its Analogy to the 
 Constitution and Course of Nature; 
 
 And, laying his strong Foundations in the Depth of that great 
 Argument, there to construct another and irrefragable Proof; 
 
 Thus rendering Philosophy subservient to Faith ; 
 
 And finding in Outward and Visible Things the Type and 
 Evidence of those within the Veil. 
 
 Born, Anno Domini 1692. Died, 1752.” 
 
 “ He who believes the SCRIPTURE to have proceeded from HIM who is 
 the AUTHOR of NATURE, may well expect to find the same sort of difficulties 
 in it as are found in the constitution of nature.” Origen Philocal, p. 23. 
 
 “ Erected by Subscription 
 A.D. mdcccxxxiv.” 
 
 Another stone in the pavement ajdoming the last-mentioned, at the 
 foot of the bishop’s throne, is inscribed to the memory of 
 
 “John Conybeare, D.D., 
 
 Bishop of Bristol, and 
 Dean of Christ Church 
 in Oxford ; 
 
 Dyed July the 13th, 1755, 
 
 Aged 63.” 
 
112 
 
 HISTOKY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 On the north wall of the choir is also a tablet to his memory, with 
 the following Latin inscription, literally translated into English, thus:— 
 
 “ Near this spot lies interred 
 The Very Reverend Father in Christ 
 John Conybeare, 
 
 during life an illustrious ornament 
 of the University of Oxford, 
 
 For he was among the number of those men, only 
 one or two of whom are met with in a generation, 
 a gift from heaven, 
 as it were, 
 
 to exhibit the dignity of human nature. 
 
 What wonder is it therefore if, . 
 
 by the force and acumen of his intellect, 
 he should have so thoroughly overcome 
 the Enemies of revealed Truth, 
 that Christians may glory to-day in this memorable victory! 
 
 And that he should have obtained 
 the eminent position of 
 Dean in the Church of Christ 
 and afterwards the Episcopal Chair 
 in the Church, 
 being called to it 
 
 not so much by the authority of the Rulers, 
 
 Nor by his own Merits, 
 
 As by the determination of the Supreme to preserve, 
 in some manner, the memory of an excellent man. 
 
 This monument was erected from pious 
 reverence for so great a name.” 
 
 Against the west wall of the Newton Chapel is a marble monument, 
 by E. W. Bailey, R.A., a native of Bristol, to the memory of Bishop 
 Gray, with a good medallion likeness of the deceased prelate; with this 
 inscription :— 
 
 “ In the Burial Ground adjoining to this Cathedral Church lie 
 the Remains of 
 Robert Gray, D.D., 
 
 Sometime Rector of Bishopswearmouth, lately a -Prebendary of 
 the Cathedral Church of Durham, and Bishop of Bristol, 
 
 Who died on the 28th Day of September, in the 
 Year of our Lord, 1834, 
 
 In the 73rd Year of his Age, and the 8th of his Consecration. 
 Distinguished in the early part of his Professional Life by 
 Learning and Piety, he was afterwards not less remarkable 
 For an able Discharge of the Duties of the Episcopal Office, 
 Combining, with diligent attention to ecclesiastical Concerns, 
 and liberal Support of the Charities of his Diocese, 
 
 A zealous devotion to the general Interests of 
 the Estabh’shed Church. 
 
 This Monument has been erected to his Memory by the 
 Clergy and Laity of this City and Neighbourhood, 
 
 In Testimony of their Affection for Ins Person, 
 
 Respect for his Principles, 
 
 And Admiration of his Firmness and Fortitude.” * 
 
 Appendix XVIII. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 113 
 
 The only bishop who appears to have been interred in this cathedral 
 without memorial or inscription, was Gilbert Ironside, the first of that 
 name, who died in 1G71. 
 
 The arms of the bishopric are the same as those of the abbey; and 
 those of the bishops, as far as recorded, were :— 
 
 Paul Bush.—Argent, a fess gules, between three boars passant sable, their 
 tusks, hoofs, and bristles or, on a fess a rose between two eagles displayed. 
 
 John Holy man. — Argent a chevron gules inter three roses proper. 
 
 Richard Cheyney.—Cheeky or and azure a fess gules fretty argent. 
 
 John Bullington.— Azure an eagle displayed argent, in his beak a branch of 
 beech or, on a chief of the last, a rose betwixt two crosses bottonee gules. 
 
 Richard Fletcher.—Sable, a cross fleury argent, four escalops of the second. 
 
 Nicholas Felton. — Gules, two lions passant in pale ermine ducally crowned or. 
 
 Rowland Searchfield. — Azure, three cross bows stringed argent, a chief or. 
 
 Robert Wright.—Party per pale or and argent, on a chevron azure, three 
 bezants between as many boars’ heads couped proper. Motto: Dominus mihi 
 adjutor (The Lord be my helper). 
 
 George Cook.—Party per pale, ruby and sapphire, three eagles pearl. 
 
 Robert Skinner. — Sable, a chevron or between three griffins’ heads erased 
 argent. 
 
 Thomas Westfield.—Argent a cross sable. 
 
 Thomas Howell. — Gules, a falcon, wings expanded, argent. 
 
 Gilbert Ironside. — Quarterly azure and gules, a cross fleury or. 
 
 Guy Carleton.—Or a lion rampant, gules. Motto: Sans varier (Without 
 change). 
 
 William Goulson. — Argent, over three bars nebule gules, a bend sable, 
 charged with as many plates. 
 
 John Lake.—Argent, on a saltire engrailed sable, nine annulets or. 
 
 Jonathan Trelawney.—Argent, a chevron sable, betwixt three laurel leaves 
 slipt vert, with the arms of Ulster as a baronet. 
 
 John Hall.—Argent, on a chevron engrailed, inter three lions’ heads erased, 
 sable, an etoile or. 
 
 John Robinson. — Vert, on a chevron sable, between three bucks passant or, 
 as many etoiles of the last.* 
 
 George Smalridge.—Sable, a cross engrailed or, between four bustards 
 respecting each other argent. 
 
 * There is a Runic Motto to these anus in the west window of Bristol Cathedral, which 
 appears to have been first noticed about 1760, and again in 1779 ; they (the arms) occur also in 
 the west window of St. George's Chapel, Windsor ; and are ascribed to Dr. Robinson, who was 
 Dean of Windsor as well as Bishop of Bristol. The adoption, by him, of a Runic Motto, was 
 probably owing to his long residence in Sweden. It reads, “Madur ir multr euke,” and is 
 conjectured to refer to the mortality of man. Dr. Robinson was bom at Cleasby, in Yorkshire, 
 supposed of poor parents, but descended from a decayed gentleman’s family. In the chapel 
 there, is an inscription, referring to the bishop, which concludes with a Runic Motto implying 
 that “man is dust and ashes.’’ 
 
 I 
 
114 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Hugh Boulter.—Or, on a chevron gules, three men’s skulls of the field. 
 
 William Bradshaw.—Argent, two bends sable. 
 
 Charles Cecil.—Barry of ten, argent and azure, over all six escutcheons sable, 
 3, 2, 1, each charged with a lion rampant argent. 
 
 Thomas Seeker.—Gules, a bend engrailed or, between two bulls’ heads or. 
 Thomas Gooch.—Azure, three boars passant argent. 
 
 Joseph Butler.—Argent, between two bendlets engrailed, three covered 
 cups sable. 
 
 John Hume.—Vert, a lion rampant, argent. 
 
 Christopher Wilson.—Quarterly, first and fourth, sable, a wolf saliant or, in 
 chief two etoiles argent, on a canton a cross. 
 
 Henry Reginald Courtenay,-—Or, three torteaux, a bend azure. 
 
 Hon. George Pelham.—Quarterly, first and fourth, azure, three pelicans 
 argent, vulning themselves, proper; second and third, gules, two demi belts 
 paleways, the buckles in chief argent. 
 
 William Lort Mansel.—Sable, a chevron or, between three mullets of the last. 
 Robert Gray.—Vert, a lion rampant, within a bordure engrailed, argent. 
 Charles Baring.—Azure, a fess, or, in chief a bear’s head proper muzzled and 
 ringed, or. 
 
 The monuments in this cathedral, not yet noticed, are somewhat 
 numerous. In the transepts is one of marble by Tyley of this city, 
 wrought in the Perpendicular style of English architecture :— 
 
 “ To the Revered Memory 
 OF PETER MAZE, ESQUIRE, 
 nearly sixty years an eminent merchant 
 in this city, 
 
 who departed this life at his residence, 
 
 Rownham Lodge, County of Somerset, 
 
 On the 14th June, 1849, 
 in the 81st year of his age. 
 
 He lived in peace with all, 
 
 And died in the humble hope of 
 A Glorious Resurrection. 
 
 His remains are interred 
 In the family vault in the chancel of 
 The Church of Long Ashton 
 in the said comity. 
 
 This monument is erected by his son 
 Peter Maze, Esquire, 
 
 High Sheriff 
 
 Of the City and County of Bristol, 
 
 As a tribute of deep gratitude 
 To an affectionate 
 Kind and Loving Father.” 
 
 Arms.—Ermine, on a bend engrailed azure between two eagles displayed, 
 another bend, plain, or, charged with three lions passant proper. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 115 
 
 Mr. Maze was greatly respected in Bristol, and wherever known. He 
 was one of the Protestants of France—a race much endeared to English¬ 
 men by their industry and probity, and by the sufferings of their ances¬ 
 tors in the cause of that truth we so highly prize. He was remarkable 
 for a happy union of cleverness and vivacity with that steadiness and 
 energy which this nation, above all others, loves to see in those who 
 share her enterprizes. He settled in this city many years ago, had a 
 shrewd and just perception of the principles on which commerce ought 
 to be conducted, and never failed in the industry, prudence, and attention 
 which are so essential to the proper management of business. On the 
 passing of the Municipal Reform Bill, in 1832, he was elected a member 
 of the Town Council for the City Ward. In politics he was a Conser¬ 
 vative, and he held his particular views with great firmness. 
 
 On the west wall of the transept is a large tablet in the Louis 
 Quartoise style, elaborately wrought, and inscribed thus :— 
 
 “ Sacred to the Memory 
 of 
 
 Elizabeth, 
 
 during forty-one years the loving and beloved wife 
 of Joseph Cookson, Esquire. 
 
 Her remains 
 
 rest in the crypt of the church at Clifton. 
 
 Died 20th December, 1852, aged 63 years. 
 
 This woman was full of good works and alms-deeds which she did.” 
 
 —Acts ix. 36. 
 
 Arms.—Per pale argent and gules, two legs couped above the knee, in 
 armour, counterchanged. 
 
 Crest.—A demi lion rampant supporting a staff raguled. 
 
 Motto.—Nil Desperandum. 
 
 Higher up, on the same wall, is another marble tablet, with the 
 following inscription:— 
 
 “Sacred to the Memory of 
 William Ogilvie Porter, Esq., M.D., 
 
 Surgeon in the Royal Navy, and for nearly Forty years 
 An eminent Physician in this City. 
 
 He was the Author of ‘ Sir Edward’s NaiTative,’ 
 
 ‘ Medical Ethics,’ &c., &c. 
 
 He died in Portland-square, on the 15th August, 1850, 
 
 Aged 76 years. 
 
 Of Colonel John Porter, who died 
 In the Isle of Man, in the year 1810, aged 38 years. 
 
116 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Of Sir Robert Ker Porter, 
 
 Her Majesty’s Minister at Venezuela: Author of 
 ‘Travels in Babylonia, Persia,’ &c., &c. 
 
 He died at St. Petersburg!!, 4th May, 1842, aged 65 years. 
 
 Of Miss Jane Porter, Authoress of 
 ‘Thaddeus of Warsaw,’ ‘The Scottish Chiefs,’ &c., &c. 
 
 She died in Portland-square, on the 24th of May, 1850, 
 
 Aged 74 years. * 
 
 And of Miss Anna Maria Porter, Authoress of 
 ‘Don Sebastian,’ ‘Hungarian Brothers,’ &c., &c. 
 
 She died at Montpelier, in this city, on the 21st June, 1832, 
 
 Aged 52 years. 
 
 William Porter, Esq., 
 
 Surgeon in the Enniskillen Dragoons, was the Father of 
 This highly Gifted, and most Estimable Family; 
 
 He died at Durham, in the year of Our Lord, 1780. 
 
 Their Mother, Mrs. Jane Porter, died at Esher, in Surrey, 
 
 On the 18th of June, 1831, aged 86 years. 
 
 This Tablet is erected by their Devoted Friend, 
 
 Mrs. Colonel Booth, who died 23rd December, 1851.” 
 
 Arms, Gules, on a fesse, or, three bells sable, all within a bordure engrailed 
 argent, charged with eight pellets. 
 
 Dr. Porter was, eminently, a Christian as well as a physician. The 
 quiet, unobtrusive life which he passed, for so many years, in this city, 
 was characterized as that of a benevolent and good man, one who sought 
 to benefit others, and especially the poor who required his aid 
 professionally, and to whom his hand and heart were ever open. His 
 death was a source of universal sorrow in Bristol, where his name will 
 long be had in remembrance. 
 
 Sir Piobert Ker Porter was born at Durham in 1780. In early life 
 he manifested great talent as an artist, and about 1790, studied at the 
 Pioyal Academy, under Mr. West. In 1798 he painted a picture of 
 Moses and Aaron for the altar-piece of Shoreditch Church; another, of 
 Christ iii a storm, for the Roman Catholic Chapel at Portsea; and a 
 third he gave to St. John’s College, Cambridge, of John preaching in 
 the Wilderness. At twenty-two years of age he painted three large 
 pictures—the Storming of Scringapatam, the Siege of Acre, and the 
 Battle of Agincourt. In 1804 he was invited to Russia, and appointed 
 historical painter to the Emperor. He married, in 1811, the Princess 
 
 * This lady and Dr. William Ogilvie Porter were buried in St. Paul’s Church¬ 
 yard, Portland Square. 
 
HIST0KY OF BKISTOL. 
 
 117 
 
 Mary, daughter of Prince Theodore von Scherbatoff, of Russia. He 
 died as stated, the princess surviving him. 
 
 Miss Jane Porter, who was an amiable and accomplished lady, was 
 born at Durham in 1776. In 1803 she published “Thaddeus of 
 Warsaw,” which was soon translated into several Continental languages; 
 and for which work the writer received many compliments. She was 
 elected a lady chanioness of the Teutonic Order of St. Jouchim; and a 
 relative of Kosciusko sent her a gold ring containing his portrait. 
 General Gardiner, who was British Ambassador at the Court of 
 Stanislaus, was, with difficulty, persuaded to believe that any other than 
 an eye-witness could have described the scenes and occurrences in the 
 earlier chapters. In 1809 appeared the “Scottish Chiefs” and two 
 other tales, “The Pastor’s Fireside,” and “Duke Christian of 
 Luneburgh;” the authoress, besides this, being an indefatigable 
 contributor to the periodicals of the day. In 1842 she went to 
 St. Petersburgh, but, on the death of her brother, returned to Bristol, 
 where she died. 
 
 Miss Anna Maria Porter was an enthusiastic admirer of the fine arts, 
 herself practising modelling, in which her skill was very great. As a 
 writer she had a particular delight in pourtraying the domestic affections, 
 with their reciprocal duties. In all her works, her fables, characters, 
 incidents, situations, even her scenery, are dramatic. Her state of 
 health, which was delicate, induced her to make a tour in the provinces 
 for change of air, when in the month of June, 1832, she arrived in 
 Bristol a fit subject for cholera and fever, 'which had, at that time, 
 infected all parts of the city, and to which she fell a victim on the day 
 mentioned on the tablet. 
 
 The mother of the above talented family was Jane, youngest daughter 
 of Peter Blenkinsopp, of Durham, who was descended from the noble 
 houses of Auckland and Henley. After the death of her husband she 
 removed to Edinburgh, where her daughters received their early 
 education. She subsequently retired to Esher, in Surrey, where 
 she died. 
 
 Beneath the above memorial is a plain mural tablet of Carrara 
 marble, by Tyley, bearing a profile likeness and an inscription, 
 as follows:— 
 
118 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 “ In memory of 
 
 The Rev. John Eagles, A.M., Oxon, 
 
 Scholar, Painter, Poet, 
 
 Loving and beloved. 
 
 In lowliness of mind he esteemed others 
 better than himself. 
 
 Born at Bristol on the 8th of October, 1784, 
 
 Died at Clifton on the 9th of November, 1855, 
 
 Buried in the Churchyard of 
 St. John the Evangelist, 
 
 In the same Parish. ” 
 
 Mr. Eagles received his early education under the Rev. Samuel Seyer, 
 author of the “ Memoirs of Bristol,” &c., and soon after he attained his 
 twelfth year he went to Winchester, and subsequently entered Wadham 
 College, Oxford, where he took his degree and entered the church. 
 For the space of about thirteen years he was curate of Halburton, 
 Devonshire, during five years of which his rector was the Rev. Sydney 
 Smith. He afterwards removed to the curacy of Winford, near this 
 city, but resigned it in 1841, relinquishing, at the same time, all stated 
 duty. As a writer he was graceful, pointed, and facile, and when 
 politics and public spirit ran high, his epigrammatic pen was frequently 
 employed in the war of parties ; but his wit, however keen, was always 
 tempered with taste, and ever free from malice. He was a man of no 
 common genius; highly gifted with intellectual power, of great classical 
 attainments, his writings possess great freshness and vigour, with an 
 easy simplicity of style, and are evidently the result of no laborious 
 effort. 
 
 The poetical compositions of Mr. Eagles may, perhaps, be ranked 
 amongst the highest of his literary labours. Deep thought and feeling, 
 perfect truth in natural description, melodious versification, grace and 
 playfulness, characterize his poetry. As a painter he was profoundly 
 versed in the philosophy of art; and, as an earnest follower of nature, 
 his paintings, which resulted from observation, were, from his cultivated 
 taste, dignified and noble in character as works of art. One very fine 
 painting, by Mr. Eagles, has found a permanent situation in the 
 University galleries, at Oxford, as well as two of his inimitable sketches 
 in water colours. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 119 
 
 A little farther eastward is an elegant monument, by Bacon, inscribed— 
 
 “ Sacred 
 to the Memory 
 of 
 
 Mrs. Elizabeth Draper, 
 
 In whom 
 
 Genius and Benevolence 
 Were united. 
 
 She died August 3rd, 1778, aged 35.” 
 
 “Genius and Benevolence are represented by two beautiful female 
 figures, in which the sculptor has exerted his utmost skill.” It is 
 certainly most delicately carved, the figures leaning pensively on an urn, 
 decked with exquisitely sculptured flowers, &c., tasteful and somewhat 
 touching. The lady to whose memory it was erected is known as 
 “Sterne’s Eliza”—in reality, the wife of Daniel Draper, Esq., a 
 Counsellor at Bombay, and in 1775, Chief of the Factory of Surat—a 
 man greatly respected. To her the well known author of “Tristram 
 Shandy” addressed some letters, not much, it is said, to the advantage 
 of either party. Her husband is believed to have been brother to 
 Sir William Draper, whose seat was Manilla Hall, Clifton, where she 
 probably died. 
 
 Near the tomb of Mrs. Draper is a very neat mural monument, by 
 Tyley, of very fine statuary marble, with the following:— 
 
 “ I will make mention of thy righteousness, even of thine only.” 
 
 —Psalm lxxi, 16. 
 
 “ Sacred to the beloved memory of 
 Mary Anne Schimmelpenninck. 
 
 To rich gifts of genius and acquisitions of study, consecrated to the service of 
 Her writings bear public and abundant testimony; [God, 
 
 But the graces of her character could be appreciated only in private life. 
 Led in early childhood to seek after God, 
 
 She was brought from doubt and darkness to the light of the Gospel; 
 When nourished continually by the Divine Word 
 She imparted to many the treasures of wisdom. 
 
 With advancing age the fair endowments of her mind and nature, 
 Suffered no decay but shined forth more brightly to the glory of the Giver, 
 Full of years, 
 
 Rejoicing in God her Saviour, she rendered up her spirit, 
 
 And her last breath was praise. 
 
 She was born at Birmingham, 25th November, 1778 ; 
 
 She entered into rest at Clifton, 29th August, 1856. 
 
 In joyful and unclouded hope of eternal reunion 
 This tablet is erected by grateful love.” 
 
120 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 This lady was married, in 1806, to Mr. Lambert Scliimmelpenninck, 
 of Berkeley Square, in this city. He belonged to a branch of the noble 
 Dutch family of that name, the head of which, the late Count 
 Scliimmelpenninck, was, for many years, Stadthokler of Holland. 
 Mr. Scliimmelpenninck died at Harley Place, Clifton Down, in 
 June, 1840. 
 
 In the south transept is a handsome tablet 
 
 “ To the memory of the Officers, Non-Commisioned Officers and Soldiers of 
 the Second Battalion Military Train, who during the Rebellion in India in the 
 years, 1857, 1858, 1859, while serving as Light Cavalry, fell on the Field of 
 Battle; Died of their Wounds, or of Sickness consequent thereon.” 
 
 It is composed of marble, and inscribed with the words 
 
 “Lucknow, Alumbagh, Azimgkur, Jugdespore, India. This tablet was 
 erected by then - Comrades of all Ranks serving in the Military train.” 
 
 There is also near it a military memento of white marble, by Tyley. 
 On a flag, unfurled, is 
 
 “Peninsula, Roleia, Vimiera, Vittoria, Pyrennees, Nivelle, Orthes; The 
 Prince of Wales Volunteers. To the Memory of Daniel Stratton Collings, Esq., 
 late Captain in the 82nd Regiment, eldest son of Daniel Harson Collings, Esq., 
 of Clifton Pai-k, who died at Malta, January 29th, 1855,” &c., &c. 
 
 Beneath is another monument in white marble, by the same artist, to 
 the memory of the three children of R. Walwyn, Esq., of Clifton, which, 
 notwithstanding the plagiarism observable in the composition, is very 
 nicely executed. 
 
 The next inscription, interesting because of its associations, is on the 
 south wall of this transept, 
 
 ‘ ‘ In Memory of 
 William Phillips, 
 
 Subsacrist of this Cathedral 
 45 years; 
 
 Obit 2nd April, 1849, JE. 79.” 
 
 He was preparing to attend to his duties on the morning of his 
 death, having done so on Sunday, the day previous, in his usual good 
 health; when, in the act of dressing, he fell dead at his bedside. 
 Mr. Phillips was formerly in the service of Mrs. Hannah More and her 
 sisters, when they kept a boarding-school in Park Street, in this city. 
 During the riots in October, 1831, when the mob had destroyed the 
 bishop’s palace by fire, he was instrumental in saving the cathedral from 
 the same fate, by preventing the intrusion of the rioters into the sacred 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 121 
 
 edifice; from one of whom he succeeded in wresting an iron bar, and 
 routing the assailants. For this act of heroism the Dean and Chapter 
 presented him with a silver cup, bearing a suitable inscription in 
 reference to the circumstance for which it was given, with the word 
 “Grip” beneath the upper extremities of two persons in the act of 
 contending for the possession of the weapon in question. 
 
 To those who visited the cathedral, either as artists or otherwise, 
 Mr. Phillips was most obliging, no matter what creed they professed, 
 or to what party they belonged. As a Churchman he maintained his 
 own peculiar views without being offensive, while to those who differed 
 from him he was always most liberal; and the writer feels pleasure in 
 bearing testimony to his very kind and obliging conduct when seeking 
 admission into the church for purposes of antiquarian research and 
 investigation, or for that of sketching the building. 
 
 Near this tablet is one 
 
 “ To the Memory of 
 The Rev. John Surtees, 
 
 Thirty six years canon of 
 This Cathedral, 
 
 Who died at Frenchay 
 December 23rd, 1857, 
 
 Aged 73.” 
 
 Although in robust health at the time of his death, that sad event 
 occurred in a sudden and very unexpected manner; Mr. Surtees being 
 seized with illness, of an apoplectic character, at twelve o’clock at noon, 
 and expiring in about an hour afterwards. The deceased was a near 
 relative to the late Countess of Eldon, who was a Miss Surtees, of 
 Newcastle, and subsequently married to the great Lord Chancellor, by 
 whom the canon was early patronized. Mr. Surtees rarely, if ever, 
 appeared in the pulpit, though he occasionally officiated in the service 
 of the cathedral. In public he was little known, even as a clergyman, 
 for he took no part whatever in matters that related to the people. 
 Besides the canonry of this cathedral, he held the rectory of Barham, 
 Norfolk, worth about £850 a year; and the rectory of Fakenham, in 
 the same county, worth £300. Altogether, his church preferments are 
 believed to have been worth £1900 a year, all obtained through his 
 relative, Lord Chancellor Eldon, who, when a young barrister, eloped 
 with Miss Surtees. For all his preferments he did next to nothing! 
 
122 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 On a very neat tablet of white marble, with grey border of the same 
 material, by Tyley, is inscribed : — 
 
 ‘ ‘ To the Memory of 
 William Edwards, Esq., 
 
 Late Captain in H.M. 17th Regiment of Infantry, 
 
 Who died 18th December, 1853, in the 35th year of his Age. 
 
 He served as extra Aide-de-camp to the late 
 Lieutenant-General Sir Charles Napier, G.C.B. 
 
 During the Campaign against the Mountain and Desert Tribes 
 On the right bank of the Indus, early in 1845, 
 
 And subsequently as assistant 
 On the trigonometrical survey of Scinde. 
 
 Whilst thus employed his health suffered severely 
 By the climate, from the effects of which he 
 never recovered. 
 
 His remains are laid near this spot. 
 
 Eccles., chap. IX., verses 11 & 12.” 
 
 The last tablet on this wall which I shall notice, has the following:— 
 
 ‘ ‘ Sacred to the Memory of 
 Mr. George Rogers, solicitor, 
 
 Who died the 12th day of July, 1840, 
 in the 73rd year of his age. 
 
 For upwards of fifty years he faithfully discharged 
 the duties of Chapter Clerk 
 To the Dean and Chapter of this cathedral. 
 
 Also 
 
 To the Memory of Elizabeth Jelf, 
 wife of the above, who departed this life 
 on the 7th day of July, 1834, Aged 62 years. 
 
 Oh! from the grave may holy lessons rise, 
 
 And careless triffers, as they read, grow wise.” 
 
 On the floor in the south-west corner of the transept, is inserted a 
 small stone, inscribed :— 
 
 “HEARE LYETH THE 
 BODY OF THOMAS 
 TVRNER. SEXTON 
 ... OF THIS .... 
 
 C H V R C H, WHO 
 DECEASED THE . . . 
 
 .APRIL 
 
 .DNI. 
 
 1614.” 
 
 Against the wall of the south aisle next the Newton Chapel, is a 
 large marble monument, of good workmanship, inscribed in Latin, 
 which, translated, is— 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 123 
 
 “ Jacob Elton 
 
 was the second son of Sir Abraham Elton, Bart. 
 
 At an early age 
 he entered the Royal Navy, 
 and was Captain of a British man of war while 
 yet but a young man. 
 
 Before he had completed his thirty-second year 
 he engaged in a naval encounter with 
 the French, in which he lost his life, 
 prematurely indeed, 
 but in a most glorious 
 manner. 
 
 He died March 29th, A.D., 1745. 
 
 What suavity of manuers he possessed as a friend, 
 
 How humane and kind he was as a sailor, 
 
 What intrepidity and bravery he showed,— 
 
 Let the day 
 
 above-mentioned remain on record 
 as more than sufficient proof. 
 
 This Monument, as a slight token of her own affection and loss, 
 
 His son-owing widow, 
 
 Caroline, daughter and co-heir of Charles Yate, 
 of Coulthorpe, in the county of Gloucester, 
 caused to be erected. ” 
 
 “On the 29th of March, 1745, the ‘Anglesea,’ of 40 guns and 250 
 men, commanded by Captain Elton, cruising in the channel, fell in with 
 ‘ L’Apollon,’ a French ship, of 50 guns and 500 men, which being 
 mistaken, by Captain Elton, for an English vessel, he made no 
 preparations for an engagement till the enemy began to fire on the 
 ‘ Anglesea.’ The ship was not cleared for action, and the crew were weak 
 and not well disciplined. Captain Elton, convinced of his error, made 
 the utmost exertions to animate his crew, and to recover them from the 
 confusion into which an incident so unexpected had thrown them. A 
 severe action ensued, in which the captain and his first lieutenant fell, 
 and above sixty of the crew were killed and wounded.” * 
 
 Arms.—Paly of six gules and or, on a bend sable three mullets of the second. 
 
 In the Newton Chapel is a tablet to the memory of the youngest 
 son and a daughter of Bishop Gray; and one to Frances Anne, 
 Charles, and Arthur, children of the Very Rev. Dr. Lamb, Dean of 
 Bristol. Against the west wall is also a beautiful marble monument, 
 containing a basso-relievo, by Westmacott, R.A., representing an angel 
 conveying the departed to heaven, and an inscription as follows :— 
 
 * The British Trident, vol. i., p. 275. 
 
 K 2 
 
124 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 “ Sacred 
 
 to the memory of 
 Elizabeth Charlotte Stanhope, 
 
 youngest daughter of the late Philip Stanhope, Esq., of London, 
 and of Lympsfield, in Surrey; 
 
 Who departed this life 13th June, 1S16, at the Hotwells. 
 Born October 13th, 1798. 
 
 Two handsome tombs of freestone and alabaster stand on the south 
 side of this chapel, where they were erected to the memory of members 
 of the family after whom the structure has been named. On one lie 
 extended, at full length, the effigies of a man in armour, and his wife; 
 beneath them two sons and four daughters kneeling, and above them 
 this inscription:— 
 
 “ Here lyeth S 1- Henry Newton of Barrs Court in the County of Gloucester, 
 Knight, who Married Katherine, the Daughter of S r Thomas Paston of Norfolk, 
 Knight, by whom He had 2 Sons, & 4 Daughters: and when He had Lived 
 Full 70 Years Religiously towards God, Loyally towards his Prince, And 
 Virtuously towards Men, ended his life in the Year of Grace, 1599. 
 
 In assured hope of a Glorious Resurrection. 
 
 Gurney, Hampton, Cradock, Newton, last, 
 
 Held on the measure of that antient line 
 Of Baron’s Blood ; full Seventy Years he past. 
 
 And did in Peace his Sacred Soul Resign ; 
 
 His Christ he Lov’d, he Lov’d to feed the Poor, 
 
 Such Love assures a Life, that Dies no more.” 
 
 Arms.—Argent, on a chevron azure, three garbs or; impaled with those of 
 Paston, Azure, six fleur de lis, 3, 2, and 1, argent, a chief indented or. 
 
 On the second tomb, which support the effigies of a warrior only, 
 bearing a truncheon in his right hand, are two tablets, inscribed as 
 follows:— 
 
 “ Here lieth the Body of 
 Sir John Newton, 
 
 Son of Sir Theodore Newton, 
 
 & his Lady Grace, Daughter of 
 ■—■ Stone, Esq., who died 
 without issue, 
 
 1661. 
 
 Arms of Newton, as above, impaled with those of Stone, per pale, or and 
 gules, an eagle with two heads displayed sable. There is also a shield charged 
 with 24 quarterings belonging to the Newtons. The Cradock arms were the 
 same as those borne by the Newtons. 
 
 Attached to a pillar, at the corner of the Newton Chapel, in the south 
 aisle, is a tablet to the memory of Rice Wasborough, “late organist o 1 
 
 He was a Man 
 of great Coinage 
 
 & the Greatest Loyalty to his Prince, • 
 and Honour to his Country. 
 
 A Credit and Noble Ornament 
 to his Name and Family.” 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 125 
 
 this cathedral,” who died April 11th, 1802, aged 54 years; also his 
 wife and son, who are interred beneath. 
 
 Towards the east, in the south wall of this aisle, is a tablet with the 
 following inscription :— 
 
 “ Sacred to the Memory 
 of the Eev. Samuel Love, A.M., 
 
 Fellow of Baliol College, Oxford, 
 and one of the Minor Canons of this Cathedral, 
 who died 18th October, 1773, Aged 29. 
 
 When worthless grandeur fills th’ embellished urn, 
 
 No poignant grief attends the sable bier; 
 
 But when distinguished excellence we mourn, 
 
 Deep is the sorrow, genuine the tear. 
 
 Stranger ! shouldst thou approach this awful shrine, 
 
 The merits of the honour’d dead to seek ; 
 
 The Friend, the Son, the Christian, the Divine, 
 
 Let those who knew him, those who lov’d him, speak, 
 
 Oh ! let them in some pause of anguish say, 
 
 What zeal inspir’d, what faith enlarg’d his breast; 
 
 How soon th’ unfettered spirit wing’d its way 
 From earth to heav’n, from blessing to be blest! 
 
 This Monument is erected 
 by some intimate Friends of the deceased, 
 as a Testimony 
 
 of His Worth and Their Esteem.” 
 
 Hannah More. 
 
 Mr. Love was a man of considerable talent as a preacher, and his 
 character gave great promise of intellectual as well as clerical eminence. 
 By persons of all sects and parties he was universally beloved, many 
 thousands of citizens, of all religious creeds, attending his funeral at the 
 cathedral, where, by his own desire, he was interred. His amiable 
 disposition, purity of morals, and attention to his duties, secured for 
 him the love and esteem of all who knew him; while the sincerity of 
 his friendship, his scholastic attainments, and his perfect pulpit oratory, 
 won the affection of all with whom he became acquainted. He lived a 
 practical Christian, and died regretted by the pious of all denominations, 
 who mourned for their irreparable loss. His last illness was an 
 affection of the brain, which totally deprived him of reason; during 
 which, not only clergymen of the Church of England, but Dissenting 
 ministers, with their congregations, offered up prayers for his recovery. 
 Towards the close of life, reason returned, and, with his latest breath, 
 he was permitted peacefully to resign his soul into the hands of his 
 Maker, in sure and certain hope of a glorious resurrection to life eternal, 
 
126 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 through the merits of his great Redeemer. Funeral sermons were 
 preached in many churches and chapels on the occasion, to numerous 
 and attentive audiences. 
 
 There are some lines, composed by Mr. Love, which though, perhaps, 
 known to many, ought to have a place in this work. They were 
 written on observing a robin frequently perch himself on one of the 
 pinnacles of the organ in this cathedral, during divine service, and there 
 carol his melodious strains in company with those of the instrument 
 and the choristers. This he was observed to do for the long space of 
 fifteen years, being daily fed and cared for by the sub-sacrist, until 
 1787, when he is believed to have died. 
 
 “ Sweet social Bird ! whose soft harmonious lays 
 Swell the glad song of thy Creator’s praise— 
 
 Say, art thou conscious of approaching ills ? 
 
 Fell winter’s storms—the pointed blast that kills ? 
 
 Sliun’st thou the savage north’s unpitying breath ? 
 
 Or cruel man’s more latent snares of death ? 
 
 Here dwell secure; here with incessant note, 
 
 Pour the soft music of thy trembling throat. 
 
 Here, gentle Bird, a sure asylum find, 
 
 Nor dread the chilling frost, nor boist’rous wind. 
 
 No hostile tyrant of the feather’d race, 
 
 Shall dare invade thee in this hallow’d place ; 
 
 Nor while he sails the liquid air along, 
 
 Check the shrill numbers of thy cheerful song. 
 
 No cautious gunner, whose unerring sight 
 Stops the swift eagle in his rapid flight, 
 
 Shall here disturb my lovely songster's rest, 
 
 Nor wound the plumage of his crimson breast. 
 
 The truant school-boy who in wanton play, 
 
 With viscid lime involves the treacherous spray, 
 
 In vain shall spread the wily snare for thee, 
 
 Alike secure thy life and liberty. 
 
 Peace then, sweet warbler, to thy fluttering heart, 
 
 Defy the range of hawks, and toils of art; 
 
 Now shake thy downy plumes, now gladlier pay 
 Thy grateful tribute to the rising day ; 
 
 While crowds below, their willing voices raise, 
 
 To sing, -with holy zeal, Jehovah’s praise. 
 
 Thou, perch’d on high, shall hear th’ adoring throng, 
 
 Catch the warm strain, and aid the sacred song, 
 
 Increase the solemn chorus, and inspire 
 
 Each tongue with music, and each heart with fire.” 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 127 
 
 A few years ago another robin was seen, on a Sunday, to occupy the 
 summit of the pulpit of the cathedral, where, as regular as the day 
 came, he was wont to raise his cheerful note of praise during the whole 
 time of the delivery of the sermon, to the no small annoyance of the 
 preacher, and the amusement of the congregation. In autumn and 
 winter he wholly resided here, and was daily fed by the late sub-sacrist, 
 Mr. William Phillips. On the return of spring he disappeared until 
 Sunday came round, when he took his accustomed position on the pulpit. 
 
 A mural tablet, under the east window of this aisle, has a Latin 
 inscription, which, translated, is— 
 
 ‘ ‘ In the burial ground of this church lies interred 
 Robert Booth, D.D., Dean of Bristol, 
 son of George Baron Delamere and brother of 
 Henry Earl of Warrington. 
 
 His father and brother now mentioned were distinguished 
 for their excellence and for their extraordinary fidelity 
 to their country during times of trial, and 
 This son (deceased), was not less illustrious, 
 
 for he reflected upon the Church more honour than he had received from it. 
 
 Amongst his many excellencies, 
 
 His profuse liberality to the poor was especially conspicuous,— 
 
 An excellence which so well become as priest one who is 
 truly a Christian and a gentleman. 
 
 He was born A.D. 1661; and died 1720; chosen Dean of Bristol, 1708.” 
 
 The next monument worthy of record is by E. W. Bailey, R.A. (a 
 Bristolian), and represents, in beautiful sculpture, the deceased dying- 
 in the midst of his family, with an inscription in Latin, thus translated— 
 “William Brame Elwyn, LL.D., 
 
 lived 69 years, 2 months, 8 days, and died on the 27th of May, A.D., 1841. 
 
 His great learning was graced by a life truly holy. 
 
 His kindness conciliated the affections of all 
 so that he died lamented by all, whether known to him or not, 
 
 And by none was he more lamented than by his dear children 
 and by me, his wife, (alas ! that I have survived him). 
 
 Burdened with sorrow I have erected this marble to the memory of my 
 much lamented husband. ” 
 
 Adjoining this memorial is a cenotaph by Chantry, representing a 
 seated female figure, very finely executed, in white marble, personifying 
 Resignation. It is to the memory of Maria Elwyn, the first wife of 
 the above William Brame Elwyn, who died March 28th, A.D. 1818, 
 and lies interred in the crypt of the church of St. Michael, in this city. 
 
 Dr. Elwyn died at York Terrace, Regent’s Park, London. For many 
 years he was recorder of Deal, in Kent, and a magistrate for the County 
 
128 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 of Middlesex. His father was Thomas Elwyn, Esq., an alderman of the 
 city of Canterbury, whose eldest son he was. He finished his education 
 at Queen’s College, Oxford, and graduated B. and D.C.L. in 1805; and 
 in the same year was called to the Bar at the Inner Temple. 
 
 On the same side of this aisle, westward, is a monument 
 
 “ To the memory of William Gore, Esquire, 
 formerly Major in the xxxiii. Regiment of Foot 
 and engaged in active and honourable service 
 during ten campaigns in America. 
 
 In the Revolutionary war with France 
 When the Royal Bristol Volunteers took up arms in MDCCXCVII, 
 he was appointed Lieutenant-Colonel of that Regiment; 
 and when it was revived after a short interval of peace he was 
 again unanimously elected to the same Command in MDCCCHI. 
 
 By his spirit and military knowledge he eminently contributed 
 to its high reputation for skill and discipline ; 
 and having preserved it in harmony and order, 
 until finally disbanded in MDCCCXIV amid the triumphs of our country, 
 he soon after closed an honourable life, respected and lamented. 
 
 This Monument was erected at the joint expence 
 of the whole Regiment, Officers, Non-commissioned Officers, and Privates, 
 in public and unanimous testimony of esteem for his character 
 as a Soldier and a Gentleman. 
 
 Deceased July V., A.D. MDCCCXIV., 
 aged LXIII.” 
 
 On each side of this monument, above the inscription, are statues of 
 a Grenadier and Light Infantry soldier, supporting a medallion bust of 
 the deceased, in the centre of the composition. 
 
 A tablet at the western extremity of this aisle is inscribed as 
 follows:— 
 
 “ Near this Spot are interred the Remains 
 of 
 
 Martin Whish, Esq., 
 
 Late Chairman of the Board of Excise. 
 
 He had filled this Situation for a Period 
 of nearly Forty Years, 
 
 And it is not too much to say 
 that He discharged its important Duties 
 with Ability, Zeal, and Integrity. 
 
 He died at Clifton on the 26tli of October, 1S26, 
 at the advanced age 
 of Eighty Three Years.” 
 
 On the south-western pillar of the ante-choir is a monument, on 
 which is represented a Roman senator kneeling before an altar, with an 
 inscription in Latin, which, translated, is— 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 129 
 
 “Sacred to the Memory of 
 Anthony Augustus 
 Henderson. 
 
 A most excellent youth, 
 
 A most dutiful son.” 
 
 Beneath is the following: — 
 
 “ In a Tomb near the Altar of this Church 
 is deposited all that was mortal of Antony A ugustus, 
 
 Son of Antony Henderson, Esq., Member of Parliament, 
 
 And of Sophia his wife. 
 
 As to his Immortal Spirit, his friends are 
 fully persuaded that it blooms in Heaven. 
 
 He died Anno Domini M.D.CCCVII, aged XVII years. 
 
 He was uncontaminated by vice, of a noble spirit, and 
 
 Most affectionate to his Parents. His Abilities, his Character, his Suavity, 
 his Modesty, his Kindness were extraordinary. 
 
 What limit can there be to grief for so dear a Son ! 
 
 The Hope, begotten by Religion, that they themselves also should be esteemed 
 The Grace of the Most High. [worthy by 
 
 At length to be numbered with the blessed. 
 
 And to enjoy for ever the friendship of their Son, 
 
 Is a sweet Solace to the Grief of his Parents.” 
 
 Also the following:— 
 
 ‘ ‘ Close to the Son above mentioned are interred the 
 Remains of Antony Henderson, Esq., Member of Parliament, 
 
 Who died Anno Domini, 18l0, Aged 48 years. 
 
 Pie was adorned 
 
 with great mental endowments and was deemed 
 to be worthy of note for his acute and strong abilities, 
 his great sagacity and also for 
 his clear judgment.” 
 
 Oil the south side of the choir is a Latin inscription, thus translated— 
 
 “ Sacred to the Memory of 
 
 Nathaniel Foster, D.D., late Prebend of this Church and sometime 
 Fellow of Corpus Christi College, Oxford. 
 
 He was a truly excellent man, and should be held up as one entitled to 
 approbation on many accounts. In integrity of moral character, and 
 in soundness of religious belief, which so well become the Christian, he 
 was faultless ; in the knowledge which imparts excellence to the 
 Theologian, he was most learned; in accurate acquaintance with Art, he 
 was unrivalled. He aimed especially at attaining an intimate 
 knowledge of tongues, in order that he might fully realize the 
 characteristic genius of any nation, that he might with greater certainty 
 elicit the mode of thought peculiar to each writer ; and that he might 
 obtain from the fountain itself, the pure simplicity of the Holy 
 Scriptures. Moreover, since he was naturally shrewd, and by learning 
 a skilled investigator of the human mind, he excelled in marking and 
 distinguishing the Schools of ancient Philosophy ; and by a certain 
 peculiar power of communicating his opinions, he could detect those of 
 them which were in accordance with his own sentiments, and those 
 which had adopted different shades of opinion, and the subtleties of 
 
 L 
 
130 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 the schoolmen. Moreover also he did not, as it often occurs, merely 
 skim lightly over the deep sayings of his favourite author Plato, hut 
 he did that which might have been expected from an old friend and 
 companion of Plato, for as a faithfid interpreter he brought his opinions 
 before the reader, stripped of their specious word-clothing. 
 
 Fearing that posterity would not have so great a man sufficiently before 
 their eyes, his surviving widow has erected this monument in token of 
 her Grief and Sorrow.* 
 
 He died October 20th, 1757, Aged 39.” 
 
 On the same side of the choir, nearer the east end, is a canopied 
 altar-tomb, on which is extended a female figure, with her hands raised 
 in the attitude of prayer; beneath her, in front of the monument, are 
 four sons and four daughters represented kneeling at desks; and above 
 her is the following inscription:— 
 
 “ Here lyeth the bodies of Sir John Yovng, Knight, and Dame Joane 
 his wyfe. By him she had yssue Sir Boberte, Jane, and Margaret. 
 
 She was fyrste marryed to Sir Giles Straingewayes, Knight. By 
 wliome shee had yssue John, Edward. George, Nicholas, Ann, and 
 Elizabeth. She was davghter to John Wadham, Esqvier. And Shee 
 departed this mortall lyff, the 14th of June, 1603, aged 70 yeeres.” + 
 
 “On Saturday, the 14th of August, 1574, our gracious Queen 
 Elizabeth, in her progress, came to this city.” After parading which, 
 “ they brought Her Highness unto Mr. John Young, his house (now 
 Colston’s Hospital) on St. Augustine’s Back, where she lay seven days, 
 (and) on the day of her departure hence, she made five knights,” of 
 whom Mr. Young was one. j: 
 
 Against the north-east end of the choir is another inscription in 
 Latin, which, rendered into English, is, 
 
 “ Sacred to the memory of 
 Henry George Prettyman, 
 a youth of very superior parts, 
 and the younger son of 
 John, the Reverend 
 the Archdeacon of Lincoln, S.T.P. 
 llis talents were both seen and approved; 
 
 He was adorned with a mind ready and well-balanced, 
 with a judgment keen and exact, 
 and with manners winning, open-hearted and sincere. 
 
 By kindness he attached to himself his friends, 
 and by courteousness, strangers. 
 
 t A beautiful piscina, 
 monument. 
 
 * Appendix XIX. 
 
 &c., appears to have been destroyed to make way for this unsightly 
 * Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 245. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 131 
 
 While he relied to a reasonable extent in the strength of his 
 natural abilities, he did not despise study, and would 
 have been a noble example of learning, eloquence, 
 and moral excellence, had he lived. 
 
 His Christian faith was of such a kind that 
 He had intended devoting himself to the study of the 
 Holy Scriptures had his life been continued; 
 he sickened however, and then 
 sought in them comfort only; and when he had 
 declared that he was becoming happier day by day, 
 though his sickness increased, 
 with a countenance lit up with superhuman beauty, 
 as though he had looked upon some one in a more propitious duty — 
 he expired October 16th, 1807, 
 
 Aged 17 years and 22 days. 
 
 This monument his parents have determined to erect, mourning 
 the removal of such (a son), and 
 acknowledging with thankfulness and submission, 
 what had been given them through 
 the goodness of a merciful God.” 
 
 Iu the north aisle of the church is a handsome marble tablet, the 
 inscription on which indicates, that 
 
 “ Underneath are deposited the remains of 
 Colonel Lord John Thomas Henry Somerset, 
 seventh son of Henry, Fifth Duke of Beaufort, 
 
 Born XXX August, MDCCLXXXVII, Died October III, MDCCCXLVI. 
 
 At Talavera in the Peninsula, and on the Field of Waterloo, 
 
 He displayed the hereditary valour of his race. 
 
 He resided for some years at Bristol, as Inspecting Field Olhcer of the District, 
 Where the Kindness of his Disposition, the Courteousness of his Manners, 
 And the warmth of his Heart, made him universally beloved. 
 
 His friends in this Neighbourhood, both Military and Civil, 
 
 Dedicate this Tablet in testimony of tlieir regard for his Memory, 
 
 And their Grief at his loss.” 
 
 Near this memorial is also one “ To the Right Honourable and 
 Reverend Lord William George Henry Somerset, sixth son of Henry, 
 Fifth Duke of Beaufort,” and another to his Lady. 
 
 Within the screen that separates the north aisle of the ante-choir 
 from that of the choir of the cathedral, on the south wall, is a monument 
 inscribed as follows, to the memory' of 
 
 “ Mary the daughter of 
 William Sherman of Kingston 
 upon Hull, Esq. and Wife of 
 The Rev. William Mason 
 Died March the XXVII, 
 
 MDCCLXVTI, aged XXVIII. 
 
 L 
 
 9 
 
132 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Take lioly Earth ! all that my soul holds dear ; 
 
 Take that best gift, which Heaven so lately gave; 
 
 To Bristol’s fount I bore with trembling care 
 Her faded form; she bow’d to taste the wave 
 And dy’d. Does youth, does beauty read the line ? 
 
 Does sympathetic fear their breasts alarm ? 
 
 Speak, dead Maria ! bi-eathe a strain divine; 
 
 Ev’n from the grave thou shalt have power to charm : 
 
 Bid them he chaste, be innocent like thee; 
 
 Bid them in duty’s sphere as meekly move; 
 
 And if so fair, from vanity as free, 
 
 As firm in friendship, and as fond in love; 
 
 Tell them, though ’tis an awful thing to die, 
 
 (’Twas ev’n to thee) yet the dread path ouce trod, 
 
 Heav’n lifts its everlasting portals high, 
 
 And bids ‘ the pure in heart behold their God.’ ” ' 
 
 W. Mason. 
 
 Mason “ chose his wife for her taciturnity, but, however much he 
 may have abhorred pretentious women, he must have been mortified 
 when his unpoetical bride crumpled up and thrust into her pocket a 
 copy of complimentary verses with which he presented her on the 
 morning of their marriage.” She is described as being a “ pretty, 
 modest, innocent, interesting figure; ” and when, after a brief union of 
 eighteen months, she died of consumption, the sorrow of her husband 
 testified to her worth. It has been said that “ this celebrated epitaph 
 must have owed its fame to the concluding stanza, for the only fine line, 
 in the previous portion, is the invocation to his dead Maria to speak 
 from the tomb, and this concluding stanza is now known to have been 
 the production of Gray .”—“ The longer these lines are meditated, the 
 more their beauty is felt; they have every merit which is proper to the 
 kind of writing. Nothing can be finer than the eulogy on the deceased, 
 implied in the brief parenthesis, “’Twas e’en to thee.’ Nothing more 
 rich in sublime consolation than the sentence which follows; nothing 
 more severely simple in expression. Nor is the stanza a mere memento 
 to the individual—it speaks, as it professes to do, to the hearts of all 
 the world.” * 
 
 Close to Mrs. Mason’s monument is another, the inscription on 
 which states that 
 
 Quarterly Review, 1853, p. 39. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 133 
 
 “ Near this Place are deposited the Remains of 
 Elizabeth Anne, the only Daughter 
 of John and Elizabeth Anne Fydell, 
 who after a long and painful illness, 
 which she bore with truly Christian resignation, 
 exchanged this Life for a better, at Clifton, 
 on the 3rd day of January, 1805. 
 
 O’er these loved Relicks, Stranger, drop a tear, 
 
 For Youth with Beauty join’d lies buried here: 
 
 How good she was, and what her Virtues were, 
 
 Seek Heav’n’s high Portal, thou mayst learn them there: 
 
 The wounded Heart that this sad tribute pays, 
 
 Too exquisitely feels to speak her praise; 
 
 Yet wouldst Thou know the spotless life She led, 
 
 How oft for Others Woes her Heart has bled; 
 
 Her duteous Love, her patience, meekness, sense, 
 
 Her piety, her Virgin Innocence: 
 
 How thro’ the Path direct She firmly trod, 
 
 That thro’ domestic Virtue, leads to God, 
 
 Her sorrowing Friends shall gratify thy Ears, 
 
 Some tell with Words, but More with silent Tears. 
 
 Born September the 7th, 1787.” 
 
 Against a pillar in this aisle is a tablet devoted 
 
 “ To the Memory of 
 Elizth Wastfield, who died at the 
 Hot Wells, the 28th Deer 1770, Aged 00, 
 
 Wife of Robert Wastfield, Esqr, 
 of Mile-End near London. 
 
 This Monument from a just Sense 
 of her Merit and his own Loss 
 is erected by her disconsolate Husband. 
 
 Dear shade, adieu! the debt of Nature’s paid! 
 
 Death’s threaten’d stroke we parry’d but in vain; 
 
 The healing spring no more could lend its aid, 
 
 Med’cine no more could mitigate the pain. 
 
 See by her dying form mild Patience stand, 
 
 Hope, Ease, and Comfort, in her train she led: 
 
 See! gentle spirits, waiting the command, 
 
 Hush her to Silence on the mournful bed. 
 
 In vain with heartfelt grief I mourn my friend, 
 
 Fair Virtue’s meed is bliss without alloy: 
 
 Blest change! for pain, true pleasure without end, 
 
 For sighs and moans, a pure seraphic joy! 
 
 When Death shall that new scene to me disclose, 
 
 When I shall quit on earth this drear abode, 
 
 Our freed congenial spirits shall repose 
 Safe in the bosom of our Saviour—God.” 
 
 Nearer the east end of this aisle, on a raised tomb of alabaster and 
 freestone, richly gilt, beneath a canopy supported by marble pillars, 
 reposes the recumbent effigy of a man in armour, resting on his left 
 
134 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 elbow, and grasping, with liis right hand, a short truncheon. Above 
 him is the following inscription in Latin:— 
 
 “ Sacred 
 
 to tlie Memory and in honour of 
 
 a truly excellent man, whose remains lie mouldering here, Sir Charles Vaughan, 
 Knight, son and heir of Walter, also of equestrian rank. He was sprung from 
 the very ancient British family of the Vaughan’s. He lived about forty-seven 
 years ; and after he had surpassed his contemporaries in excellence, in erudition 
 the most learned, and those of whom he had learned ;—after he had been an 
 example to most in religion ; had afforded a pattern of Conjugal affection; had 
 discharged public duties most creditably ; had wisely managed his private 
 concerns, and above all consulted his Spiritual health,—he at length died of a 
 wasting consumption, February lGtli, 1G30, 1 wait until my change shall come. 
 Job xiv. All tilings change, nothing perishes.” 
 
 On two tables under him, also in Latin, are inscribed his alliances in 
 marriage, thus: — 
 
 “He married first Frances daughter of Sir Robert Knolles, Knight. She was 
 distinguished for her family, her beauty and her excellence; but still being 
 mortal, she departed this life (by which means she the sooner enjoyed eternal 
 life with Christ), in the ‘24th year of her age, 1G14. 
 
 He next married Dorothy, daughter of Sir Robert Meller, Knight. She 
 laments her excellent husband, and would not willingly have survived him, had 
 not God so ordered it. She took care to have this monument which you see, 
 erected at her own expence, to preserve his memory as long as possible.” 
 
 Arms.—Sable a chevron between three children’s heads couped at the 
 
 shoulders argent, the peruques or, -enwrapped about the neck with as 
 
 many snakes proper. 
 
 Motto (Translated) “The service of Christ is true liberty.” 
 
 Next to the last-named monument is one with an elegant Latin 
 inscription, which, in English, reads, 
 
 ‘ ‘ In the hope of the Gospel. 
 
 Thomas Coster, Esq., 
 
 Illustrious for the excellence alike of his 
 Public and Private Character, 
 
 Excelling his Cotemporaries in zeal and affection, 
 
 He showed Kindness to men of all conditions, 
 
 And attended to the duties of religion 
 with exemplary piety. 
 
 His knowledge was of a varied character, 
 
 Especially was he s kill ed in machinery and with metals. 
 
 His intelligence was bright; 
 
 By his industry 
 
 He gained for himself wealth, and by 
 His high moral excellence 
 He obtained honour. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 135 
 
 He was raised to the dignity of 
 A Seat in the Senate by the 
 Inhabitants of Bristol, 
 
 Without any bribery or ill-will, and held that honour 
 With the greatest credit to his Native City, 
 
 And for the good of the whole State. 
 
 He was bom December 20th, 1684, 
 
 And died a much regretted death September 30th, 1769. 
 
 His loss was felt by all those 
 To whom he was known, 
 
 But by far the most keenly by her who, 
 
 Mindful of her excellent Father,— 
 
 Of his virtues (of which he may be an example 
 To posterity to the end of time !)—desires 
 To perpetuate his memory by 
 Erecting this Marble.” 
 
 On tills gentleman’s election to serve in Parliament, as Member for 
 Bristol, two petitions were presented against liis return, “which being 
 thought, afterwards, unjust and ill-grounded, were withdrawn.” Mr. 
 Coster “ was a very unexceptionable candidate, a sensible and worthy 
 man, and resident in Bristol.”—“He married Astrea, daughter of 
 Sir John Smyth, of Long Ashton, Bart.,” * and died at his house in 
 College Green. 
 
 At the east end of the north aisle there was once a very beautiful 
 Perpendicular English altar, of rich workmanship, very little of which 
 remains to show in what its graceful embellishments consisted, it having 
 been apparently destroyed to make way for a very inelegant monument 
 of freestone, bedizened with gold and colour of the reign of James I. 
 Here a man in armour, and his lady, are represented kneeling at a desk, 
 under a canopy supported by angels, and beneath them are seven sons 
 and eight daughters in the same attitude, with an inscription in Latin, 
 from which we learn that it was erected 
 
 “ To the most noble lord Bobert Codrington, 
 of Codrington in the coimty of Gloucester, renowned by the representations 
 of his friends, and highly respected for his fidelity and uprightness of conduct. 
 
 He was freed from life’s prison February 14th, 1618, aged 46. 
 
 His excellent wife lady Anna Codrington, begat him 
 8 sons and 9 daughters. 
 
 In consequence of her tender affection and respect for him she 
 erected this tomb and monument.” 
 
 There is so much of the anagram about the remainder of the 
 inscription, that a correct translation of it could not, perhaps, be given; 
 
 Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, pp. 299, 698. 
 
136 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 and as it is over-loaded with fulsome panegyric, is, perhaps, as well 
 omitted altogether. 
 
 Against the same wall is a tablet inscribed as follows:— 
 
 “ Sacred to the Memory 
 of 
 
 The very Reverend Charles Peter Layard, D.D., 
 
 Dean of this Cathedral,* 
 
 Fellow of the Royal Society, & of the Society of Antiquaries. 
 
 An eminent Divine and accomplished Scholar, 
 
 And a good Man, who in arduous times discharged 
 the Duties with an exemplary faithfulness. He closed 
 a life dear to his Family and Friends, valu¬ 
 able to the Community, and most important 
 to the Interests of the established Church, 
 at the Deanery House Bristol on the tenth 
 day of April in the year of our Lord 
 One Thousand Eight Hundred 
 and Three, and in the Fifty fifth year 
 of his age. ” 
 
 At the east end of the pavement, before the steps in this aisle, is a 
 finely executed female figure, in marble, by Baily, R.A., in a kneeling 
 attitude, on a pedestal of the same material, with this inscription: — 
 
 “ Sacred to the Memory of Harriet Isabella 
 ■wife of John Middleton, of Clifton, Esquire, 
 and daughter of John Venour of Wellsbome in the comity of Warwick, Esquire, 
 
 Who died the 13th day of May 1826, and whose remains are interred in the 
 Burial ground of this Church, by the side of her Mother. 
 
 She was a woman of artless manners and unaffected piety, 
 Exemplary in the discharge of every social and relative duty, 
 
 The fervour of her faith was tempered by deep humility ; 
 
 Her devotion, which was habitual, sustained her in the hour of her dissolution; 
 
 And the calmness of her death, as an evidence of the sincerity of her religion, 
 Animated her surviving Friends with the consolatary hope 
 That she is numbered among the blessed which die in the Lord.” 
 
 On a pedestal of marble chiselled after the manner of the Perpendicular 
 style of English architecture, is placed a remarkably fine bust of the late 
 poet laureate, Robert Southey, the work of his fellow-citizen, E. H. Baily, 
 R.A. Beneath the bust, which is of white marble, wrapped in most 
 graceful folds of drapery, is, on the pedestal, this inscription in Old 
 English characters:— 
 
 “ Robert Southey 
 Born in Bristol 
 October IV., MDCCLXXIV, 
 
 Died at Keswick 
 March XXL, MDCCCXLIII.” 
 
 ’It was this gentleman who, in 1812, sold the brass eagle presented to the cathedral, in 
 1683, by the Rev. George Williamson, B.D., the sub-dean, to raise a sum of money for the 
 purpose of making an addition to the sacramental plate ; it is now in the church of St. Mary-le- 
 Port, in this city. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 137 
 
 Robert Southey was born at No. 11, Wine Street,* in this city', 
 August 12th, 1774; here his father carried on business as a linen 
 draper. He was early sent to school, and was, at six years of age, 
 under the tuition of Mr. Foote, a Baptist minister, from whom he was 
 removed to the care of Mr. Flower, at Corston, near Bath. He was 
 next placed with a Welshman named Williams, until, in 1788, he was 
 sent to Westminster School, and finally, in 1792, to Baliol College, 
 Oxford, with the design of his entering the Church; but to this it was 
 soon found that his religious opinions were adverse, he having imbibed 
 those of the Socinians. He accordingly left Oxford in 1794, published 
 his first poem, and in the following year (November, 1795), settled in 
 life by marrying Miss Fricker, of Bristol, whose sisters were united to 
 Coleridge, the poet, and Robert Lovell, author of “Bristol; a Satire,” 
 and other poems. Southey’s poem of “Joan of Arc” appeared in the 
 winter of the same year, when he removed from Bristol, and entered 
 himself of Gray’s Inn, London, where he resided, having previously 
 visited Fortugal. For a short time afterwards he located himself in 
 Ireland, but returning to England, took up his final residence, until 
 his death, at Keswick, in Cumberland. In 1813 he was appointed poet 
 laureate, and in 1821 had the degree of LL.D. bestowed upon him by 
 the University of Oxford. It is known that a baronetcy and a 
 seat in Parliament were several times offered him, but both were steadily 
 refused. Dr. Southey had been, for three years before his death, in a 
 state of mental imbecility, not having the power to recognize his dearest 
 friends and old companions—not even his wife. Excessive labour and 
 toil of the brain in almost every branch of polite learning, continued 
 from year to year, without relaxation, had broken his spirit, and 
 obscured the intellect which had so long cast a glory upon the 
 literature of the age. Fie was a very exemplary character while living, 
 and deservedly lamented at death, which happened at the age of sixty- 
 eiglit years. His remains were interred in the burial-ground attached 
 to the parish church at Crosswaite, Cumberland. + 
 
 Against the north wall of this aisle is a tablet with this inscription— 
 
 * “'Wine Street below the Pump, the street wherein I was born.” 
 Southey’s Life anil Correspondence, vol. iii., p. 32. 
 
 t Arms.—Sable a chevron argent, three cross crosslcts of the same. 
 
 M 
 
138 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 “ Sacred 
 
 To the Memory of Harriet 
 
 Youngest Daughter of the late G. G. Ducarel, Esq., 
 of Exmouth Co. Devon, 
 and Wife of C. March Phillips, Esq., 
 of Co. Leicester, 
 
 Who died at Clifton 24th September, 1813, 
 
 JEt XXIII. 
 
 If haply here by contemplation led, 
 
 Some Pilgrim seeks the lessons of the dead. 
 
 Where many a storied Urn to sorrow just, 
 
 Claims a brief notice of its treasured Dust; 
 
 Oh! that this Tomb, which Harriet’s virtuous grave, 
 
 (The last sad tribute which her Phillips gave,) 
 
 How might he mourn the short-lived hopes of youth. 
 
 The charms of Sense, Simplicity, and Truth; 
 
 The warmest feelings, with a soul resign’d. 
 
 The softest nature, and firmest mind, 
 
 Perfect, the social Charities to blend, 
 
 The Wife, the Daughter, Sister, and the Friend ; 
 
 Taught by the Word, its saving truths to know. 
 
 And young in years, yet old in grace to grow, 
 
 That only Solace, cheered the long delay, 
 
 E’er pale Consumption claimed her for his prey; 
 
 Shewed her, renewed by Faith, or pray’r to rise, 
 
 (That golden chain of union with the Skies,) 
 
 Her raptured vision caught the blest abode. 
 
 Where wants are heaven, and where desires are God ; 
 
 Weaned from the world, She gave th’ Example high ; 
 
 Which youth had taught to live, and age to die.” 
 
 On tlie same wall is a pyramidical monument, on which is the figure 
 of an angel, w T ith a medallion portrait of the deceased, and the following 
 inscription from the pen of G. Coleman:— 
 
 “ William Powell, Esq., 
 one of the Patentees 
 of the 
 
 Theatre Royal, Covent Garden, 
 died the 3rd of July 1769, 
 
 Aged 33 years, 
 
 his Widow caused this Monument 
 to be erected 
 as well to perpetuate 
 his Memory 
 
 as her own irretrievable Loss 
 of 
 
 the best of Husbands, Fathers, and Friends. 
 
 Bristol! to worth and genius ever just, 
 
 To thee our Powell’s dear remains we trust, 
 
 Soft as the streams thy sacred springs impart 
 The milk of human kindness warm’d his heart; 
 
 That heart which every tender feeling knew, 
 
 The soil where pity, love, and friendship grew : 
 
 Oh ! let a faithful friend with grief sincere 
 Inscribe his tomb, and drop the heartfelt tear, 
 
 Here rest his praise, here sound his noblest fame. 
 
 All else a bubble or an empty name.” 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 139 
 
 Inserted in the pavement of this aisle is a slab with the following 
 translated inscription:— 
 
 “ Here is deposited. Richard Towgood, B.D., prebendary of this Church by 
 the gift of Charles I; and also popular lecturer of the parish of St Nicholas. 
 He was so skilled in Theology both as a Science and an Art, that you scarcely 
 knew whether to admire him the more for his learning, or for the clearness with 
 which he communicated what he knew. He was driven from his Church by 
 the Excited Citizens in the Civil War, and because he displeased the faction 
 (and no man could lawfully obey them) he was cast into prison, but was 
 recalled on the Restoration, and subsequently raised to the dignity of Dean, 
 which office he exercised with the greatest prudence and discretion ; for he was 
 satisfied in having obtained a position as priest. During the remaining portion 
 of his life he conducted himself most honourably both towards the Deity, the 
 King, the Church, and his Country. He departed this life an old man and 
 much lamented, April 21st, Aged 89, A.D. 1683. During GO years he diligently 
 and successfully expounded the Holy Scriptures in this State. 
 
 Elizabeth his wife lies buried in the same tomb. She died November 22nd, 1685”*' 
 
 On an adjoining slab is (in Latin):— 
 
 “ Richard Towgood A.M. prebendary of this Church, son of Richard Towgood, 
 Dean of the same Church, who is buried close at hand adorned with the praise 
 and rewards which are his due. He, so to speak, inherited the excellencies, the 
 piety, the fidelity, and the consistency, of his father. During the whole period 
 of his life he was a man of integrity and uprightness. He died Oct. 11th, 
 A.D. 1713, aged 59. By his side his wife Elizabeth lies entombed. She died 
 August 19th, 1726.” 
 
 At the north-west corner of the cloisters is inscribed:— 
 
 ‘ 1 Beneath this stone 
 are deposited the Remains 
 of Edward Bird, Esq., R.A. 
 who departed this Life 
 Nov. 2nd, 1819, Aged 45. 
 
 And of Martha his Widow 
 Who died May 25th, 1846. 
 
 Aged 66. . 
 
 Their Children caused this 
 stone to be placed as a 
 Tribute of Affection 
 To the Memory of 
 Their Beloved Parents.” 
 
 Mr. Bird was a native of Wolverhampton, in Staffordshire, but was 
 for many years a resident in Bristol, where he was well known as a 
 highly gifted genius, and a generous, kind-hearted, and philanthrophic 
 man. An hypochondriacal affection, of some years standing, preyed 
 upon his otherwise apparently strong and vigorous frame, and long 
 before his death, all that medical skill could do for him was confined to 
 
 M 
 
 2 
 
 Appendix XX. 
 
140 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 the alleviation of bodily suffering, without at all removing the cause of 
 it, until, at last, he was deprived, by increasing debility and continuous 
 pain, of the pleasure he had so long enjoyed in the occupation of his 
 favourite art—that of an historical painter, in which he was very 
 successful. In early life he is believed to have exercised his talent in a 
 very inferior branch of art, which, however, taught him to execute, in 
 after time, the mechanical part of his compositions with accuracy and 
 dispatch; and to his own almost unaided genius he appears to have 
 been indebted for his after proficiency in the art in which he obtained 
 so much eminence. He was early patronized by Mr. West and the 
 Marquis of Stafford; liis pictures, too, were viewed by the public, at the 
 annual exhibition, with marked partiality; and had his health continued 
 good, it appears probable that he would have amassed a large fortune 
 for the benefit of his bereaved family. For Lord Bridgwater he painted 
 “The Debarkation of the King of France,” and also the “Embarkation,” 
 for which he was liberally rewarded by that munificent patron of art. 
 For the Prince Begent he painted “The Psalm Singers” in a country 
 church, and had a commission for a companion picture, which, however, 
 he did not live to execute. His picture of “ Chevy Chase” procured 
 him the appointment of historical painter to the Princess Charlotte; 
 and at his death, Prince Leopold presented his picture of the “ Surrender 
 of Calais,” with a purse of one hundred guineas, to his family, for their 
 benefit. The Freemasons of Bristol, the ceiling of whose hall he finely 
 embellished with the results of his genius, performed a funeral dirge at 
 his decease, and by them, as well as by numerous private citizens, his 
 memory will be long held in respectful remembrance. 
 
 The last inscription I shall notice in connection with the cathedral, 
 is one in the adjoining burial-ground: it has been removed from its 
 original position, and is as follows:— 
 
 “ Here lyeth the Body of Margaret 
 the davghter of Sr John Yovng & 
 
 Wife to Nicholas Butler Esq. Shee 
 deceased the 27 of Jvne, 1642 
 Aged 74 yeares.” 
 
 The number of sepulchral memorials contained in this cathedral and 
 its cemetery, exclusive of tombs to the founder and family, the abbots 
 and warriors described in these pages, is, in the transepts, 186 ; ante- 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 141 
 
 choir and aisles, 92; choir, 24 ; north aisle, 60; Elder Lady Chapel, 
 25; south aisle, 111; Newton Chapel, 3; cloisters, 1; burial-ground, 
 86; total, 588. 
 
 The school connected with the cathedral is held in the cloisters, one 
 side of which is occupied by a substantial structure, erected for the 
 purpose of educating the chorister boys and others who attend for 
 instruction. Here the history of the Abbey and Cathedral Church is 
 brought to a close, and the reader’s attention is requested to some 
 account of the church of St. Mark, once belonging to the Hospital of 
 the Gaunts already described. 
 
 THE COLLEGIATE CHURCH OF ST MARK was sometimes 
 called “the Gaunt’s of Billeswyck, from the original founder and the 
 name of the manor in which it was built, and with part of which it was 
 endowed.” * Originally it was the church or chapel of the Gaunts, and 
 belonged to the hospital of that name, which we have already noticed. 
 At the Reformation this church was granted, by King Henry VIII., 
 to the mayor, burgesses, and the commonalty of Bristol, for public 
 uses; but it does not appear the civic functionaries availed themselves, 
 at this time, of the privilege of worshipping in their own church, for 
 we find them continuing to attend divine service at the cathedral. In 
 1721 the chapel of the Hospital of the Gaunts, which had hitherto 
 been used, since the dissolution of the house, as a place of religious 
 worship, by French Protestant refugees, was fitted up and appropriated 
 to the sole use of the corporation of the city, since which time it has 
 obtained its present designation of “the mayor’s chapel.” 
 
 This edifice is not built as churches commonly are, east and west, 
 but rather nearer to the north and south; for which peculiarity some 
 assign as a reason that it was intended the structure should point to 
 Berkeley Castle, the residence of the joint founders and their ancestors ; 
 others, that it should direct its altar end towards the lands with which 
 it was endowed. 
 
 A great portion of this church is so completely surrounded by other 
 buildings, that much of it is necessarily hidden from view; and the 
 entire fabric has, since 1829, undergone so thorough a restoration, that 
 
 Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 343. 
 
142 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 scarcely any difference between the old and the new work can, in many 
 parts, be discovered; it may, therefore, be spoken of rather as a whole, 
 than referred to in detail. Of the original structure little is apparent, 
 with the exception, on the north and south sides,* of a range of corbel 
 heads, and some Early English windows with columns and capitals 
 inside, which show that the roof is raised on the original walls. The 
 west front is adorned with a large Catherine wheel window, occupying 
 much of that end of the building. There is also a very beautiful 
 Decorated English window to the aisle at this end of the church, 
 entering which, the visitor is charmed with the elegant vestibule into 
 which he is ushered, and with the chaste columns and capitals supporting 
 the fan-groined roof on which rests the organ; and where, also, an 
 elaborate screen divides the entrance from the nave and chancel. It is, 
 however, entirely eclipsed by the gorgeous interior into which it 
 conducts him. On passing the entrance he finds himself at once 
 within an apartment which displays, in every portion of it, an 
 uncommonly fine specimen of late Perpendicular English architecture, 
 in attempting to pourtray w'hich, in language, any terms in the English 
 vocabulary would be found wholly inadequate. 
 
 It is scarcely possible to know T where to commence a description of 
 this splendid interior. The east end, in its design and workmanship, 
 is most delicate, being wrought with niches and tabernacle work, and 
 the whole of the most singular embellishment. The great window is 
 filled with ricldy painted glass, and so, also, are others on both sides of 
 the structure. The English oak roof is of the reign of Henry VII., and 
 is divided into square compartments; its bosses, spandrils, mouldings, 
 corbels, and demi-angels, all being in high preservation, and richly gilt. 
 The mayor’s seat, together with those appropriated to the corporation, 
 are surmounted with elegantly carved canopies and other rich adornments, 
 with shields of arms, &c. The Painswick stone pulpit, and the organ 
 screen which divides the vestibule from the chapel, and to which 
 reference has already been made, are elaborately wrought in tracery of 
 the most costly description. In short, the whole of this glorious 
 interior is most sumptuously ornamented, and is full of tabernacles, 
 
 * The reader will observe, that in speaking of this structure I do so as if it 
 stood, as most other such edifices do, facing the cardinal points in the heavens. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 143 
 
 canopies, pedestals, carved work, and curious devices, all finished with 
 exquisite delicacy, and charged with armorial bearings in burnished 
 gold and colours of the most gorgeous hues; these, assisted by the 
 painted glass in its storied windows, when the rays of a brilliant sun 
 fall upon them, pour a dim religious light over a structure which, if 
 not so extensive as many others, is scarcely exceeded, in beauty and 
 worth, by any structure erected in the style of building to which it 
 belongs. 
 
 The only aisle belonging to this costly church may, with propriety, 
 be described as consisting of two portions, that next the vestibule to 
 the building being considerably higher than that towards the altar. 
 The oak roof of the former, which describes a pointed arch, is divided 
 into squares, the line of intersection being adorned with gilt bosses. 
 Over the entrance to the latter portion of this aisle is a stained-glass 
 window, by Pearson, which is said to represent, in full canonicals, 
 Miles Salley, Bishop of Llandaff, a founder; but this must be an error, 
 as he bears the pastoral staff of an archbishop, and not the crosier of a 
 prelate of inferior rank. It is, therefore, more probably intended for 
 the turbulent Thomas a’Becket, with whom it seems to be more like, in 
 a haughty bearing as well as in expression of countenance. It was 
 formerly in Fonthill Abbey, and was purchased by the corporation at 
 Mr. Bcckford’s sale; it being a copy of a painting by Benjamin West, 
 late President of the Royal Academy; and contrasts finely with the 
 sombre character of that portion of the structure it now occupies. 
 Beneath this window the interior portion of this aisle is entered by an 
 obtuse or Perpendicular English arch, the soffit of which is adorned 
 with panelling. The oak roof is nearly flat, and is divided, by diagonal 
 lines, into numerous compartments, the intersections being ornamented 
 with gilt devices. The window's are composed of stained glass, and, 
 with the niches in the structure, are in the same style of architecture as 
 the arch of entrance, and are rich in embellishment. In the left-hand 
 corner is a squint made in the thickness of the wall to enable persons in 
 that part of the building to see when the Host was elevated at the 
 High Altar. 
 
 The tow'er of this edifice was erected in 1487, and has been, of late 
 years, well restored. Beyond it is a small mortuary chapel, now used 
 as a vestry, which, in its composition and detail, is one of the most 
 
144 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 elegant models of the Perpendicular English style of architecture 
 remaining, being rich, but not overloaded with ornament. This 
 “Chapel of Jesus” was erected by Sir Robert Poyntz, of Iron Acton, to 
 receive the remains of himself, and wife, and others of his family, who 
 chose to be interred therein; for which purpose he richly endowed it. 
 His will is dated October 19th, 1520, but the date in the east window 
 is 1536. Under the floor is a large vault which, in 1730, fell in and 
 exposed to view the supposed founder, and Dame Margaret, his lady, 
 who was richly habited in white satin. 
 
 This beautiful little structure appears to have been left unfinished at 
 the death of Sir Robert Poyntz, but it was completed by his son, 
 Sir Anthony, and probably the date in the window records that 
 circumstance. The interior is extremely chaste, having an elegant fan- 
 groined roof, formed of compartments, in which the ribs, springing from 
 one point, branch out in all directions, so as to form a nearly semi¬ 
 circular sweep, in the centre of which two massive stones are suspended, 
 the under surface of one being carved with the arms of King Henry 
 VIII. and Katharine of Arragon, the patrons of the Poyntz family; and 
 the other with those of Sir Robert Poyntz quarterly, impaled with those 
 of his lady’s, who was a natural daughter of Anthony Wideville, Earl 
 Rivers, and consequently a niece of the queen of Edward IV. On the 
 left side of this apartment was a confessional, which is indicated by two 
 arches still remaining; and round the structure are eight finely wrought 
 shrine work niches. In the windows is some good painted glass, and 
 beneath that, opposite the entrance, appear the remains of an 
 unfinished altar. The floor is composed of encaustic tiles enriched with 
 armorial bearings, curious scroll-work, and a variety of other devices in 
 tolerable preservation. The entrance is by an elaborately wrought arch, 
 the soffit of which is divided into fan-groined panelling similar to the 
 roof, and the spandrils of the door-case are embellished with foliage and 
 pomegranates, in the midst of which appears the rebus of the founder, 
 a clenched fist (Poing). The whole of the enrichments of this costly 
 chapel are disposed with a judicious as well as munificent hand, and 
 extreme lightness is united with a solidity necessary to an effect which 
 is both august and fascinating. It is scarcely possible to picture a more 
 charming sight than an edifice like this, in which the great efforts of 
 the architect and sculptor have been bestowed in producing an effect in 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 145 
 
 architecture seldom realized but through the lavish munificence of 
 superstitious wealth. It is the chapel of King’s College, Cambridge, in 
 miniature. 
 
 The Mayor’s Chapel, which is an ecclesiastical gem in the midst of 
 Bristol churches, was restored, as already observed, in 1829, under the 
 supervision of the late Thomas Garrard, Esq., then chamberlain; who 
 purchased the beautiful painted window over the altar-piece, on behalf 
 of the corporation, at the sale of the effects of Sir Paul Bagot, in 1820. 
 In the centre of the exquisitely beautiful altar-piece is a highly finished 
 painting, by John King, Esq., of Clifton, representing a “Dead Christ 
 surrounded by his sorrowing disciples.” 
 
 The SEPULCHRAL MEMORIALS in this church are both 
 numerous and interesting. The first which claims attention is that of 
 an altar-tomb jilaced in the inner portion of the aisle, on which lie the 
 effigies of two crusaders—one supposed to represent Maurice Berkeley 
 de Gaunt, the founder of this structure, who was interred here in 1230; 
 and the other, Robert de Gourney, his nephew, who died in 1260. 
 
 Arms of Gaunt, Barry of eight or and azure a bend gules. Arms of Gourney, 
 Paley of six or and azure. 
 
 The next sepulchral memorial to be noticed is that of the effigy of a 
 man said to represent Sir Henry de Gaunt, but as his dress is not that 
 of an ecclesiastic, and the tonsure or shaven head of the priest is 
 wanting, no good reason appears why it should be assigned to that 
 personage, unless it be in his lay character of a knight, or master of the 
 hospital. The altar-tomb upon which this effigy is extended is of the 
 Decorated English style of architecture; modern in construction, but 
 good in imitation. He is represented as arrayed in a short close-fitting 
 coat or doublet, laced down in front, and having tight sleeves. The coat, 
 which reaches to the middle of the thighs, is girt horizontally about the 
 hips by an ornamented belt or bawdrick buckled a little on the right 
 side. On the thighs and legs are worn hosen-like pantaloons, fitting 
 tight to the shape, and on the feet are embroidered high shoes. Over all 
 a long cloak or mantle is thrown, which falls, in graceful folds, to the 
 ankles, and this is fastened by a cordon to a button on the right 
 shoulder, and what appears to be a loop on the left. 
 
146 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 It was very unusual to represent cumbent figures of males, except 
 those of royal personages and ecclesiastics, before the commencement of 
 the fourteenth century, otherwise than in armour; and the dress of this 
 effigy so closely resembles that worn by the higher ranks of society in 
 the reign of King Edward III., as to lead to the conclusion that it 
 belongs to that period. That it is not the effigy of an ecclesiastic is 
 certain, and I think it equally clear that it refers to a date at least lialf- 
 a-century later than that affixed to the death of Sir Henry de Gaunt. 
 The probability is that it represents some other person, with whose 
 name we are unacquainted. 
 
 On the north side of the chancel is a highly wrought recessed tomb, 
 w T liich is usually ascribed to Sir Thomas de Berkeley, of Stoke Gifford, 
 who died in the 35th year of the reign of King Edward III., 1361, 
 aged twenty-seven years; and whose effigies, with those of Catherine, 
 his wife, daughter of John Lord Bottetourt, who died in 1379, and 
 whose second husband was Sir John de Thorpe, are said to be represented 
 on it; but there are sundry objections to this statement which appear 
 to me to be incontrovertible. First, we are told that this tomb was erected 
 in 1361,* if so, it must have been constructed in the reign of Edward 
 III., who died in 1377—sixteen years after this monument, it is said, 
 was put up. This, however, is an error, for the style of architecture 
 prevailing in the Third Edward’s time, and throughout the whole of 
 his reign, was the Decorated English, which continued to be practised 
 until about the year 1380, when it began to be superseded by the 
 Perpendicular English style, then coming into use; or, rather, being 
 gradually invented. An examination of this tomb will show that it was 
 erected when the latter style was not only fully adopted but in general 
 practice, and this, too, when it had obtained permanence with those 
 engaged on ecclesiastical structures. The front of this' tomb is 
 elaborately wrought with canopied niches, buttresses, and other 
 architectural detail; the ogee arched testoon is richly adorned with a 
 series of elegant crockets, and the whole is crowned with a finial of great 
 beauty. The panelled tracery, shields for armorial bearings, vine leaves 
 and fruit, and the Tudor flower which crowns the whole, clearly refers 
 the erection of this monument to a much later period than that of the 
 
 Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 350. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 147 
 
 year 1361, and directs us, with greater certainty, to a date not earlier 
 than the middle of the fifteenth century. 
 
 Another objection to the date assigned to this tomb is to be found in 
 the armour in which the male figure is represented, as well as in the 
 attire in which the female figure is arrayed—the former not being worn 
 earlier than the reign of Henry V., and the latter most certainly not 
 being the fashion before the fifteenth century.* To these objections it 
 is almost needless to add that a very strong one is found in the fact that 
 this lady had married a second husband, and surely it will not be 
 contended that she was likely to be buried with one with whom death 
 had long severed all connection, in preference to one with whom she had 
 subsequently united herself. 
 
 The next tomb, in order of time, is that of Miles Salley, Abbot of 
 Abingdon, then of Eynsham, near Oxford, and lastly Bishop of Llandaff, 
 in the reign of Henry "VII., to whom it is believed this church is greatly 
 indebted for its present form, and much of its elegance, for in that 
 king’s reign several of the English prelates were eminent encouragers 
 of that species of minute and highly embellished architecture so 
 prominent in this building. The effigies, in full pontificals, of the 
 bishop, lie upon the slab beneath the canopy. 
 
 This tomb, as already intimated, is contemporary with that last 
 described; “ and one proof of its having been erected by him (Bishop 
 Salley) in his lifetime is, that there is no inscription or legend which 
 was at first placed upon the tomb, and no injunction in his will 
 respecting it. The name only is subsequently added. I have examined 
 Bishop Salley’s will, by which he bequeaths ‘his best chalice and missal 
 to the High Altar in Gaunt’s Chapel, with a sewte (suit) of vestments 
 which he had ordered for the Master, Bichard Tylar, his executor,f in 
 London, and the furniture of his best bed for the same purpose.’ From 
 
 * “ It has been attributed to Sir Thomas de Berkeley of Stoke Gifford (1361), 
 to whom the patronage of the Hospital had descended from the founders ; but as 
 the escutcheons were originally blank, and the armour of a later date, I would 
 rather consider it as having been erected by Bishop Salley at the same time 
 with his own, and as a completion of his plan. If my suggestion be correct, the 
 armed effigy must be intended to represent Sir Maurice Berkeley, his grandson, 
 who died in 1464.”—Callaway’s Notices of Ancient Church Architecture, p. 28, 
 
 t Mr. Barrett says that he died in 1515, one year before the bishop, whose 
 death is recorded in 1516, which must be incorrect. Hist, of Bristol, p. 373. 
 
 N 2 
 
148 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 which circumstance T think it may be fairly inferred, that having 
 completed the architecture, he left a testamentary provision, that the 
 necessary ornaments and furniture should be also supplied.” * 
 
 In the only aisle belonging to this church is a low altar tomb, 
 adorned with shields without charge, and quatrefoils, having no 
 inscription whatever, or heraldic device, by which to convey an idea as to 
 whose memory it was erected. From the initials J. C. appearing upon it, 
 the person interred beneath is presumed to be John Carr, the benevolent 
 founder of Queen Elizabeth’s Hospital, in this city, whose will is dated 
 April 10th, 1586. That this excellent man may be buried beneath it, 
 I will not dispute, but the tomb itself was doubtless constructed 
 as early as the reign of Edward IV. His widow was subsequently 
 married to Robert Redwood, whose name will be again mentioned, in 
 connection with the City Library. She died in November, 1606, and 
 was interred in the church of St. Werburgh, where also John Carr’s 
 father and mother were buried. 
 
 Taking the remainder of the most prominent monuments in this 
 church as they are placed before us, the first worthy of notice is one 
 inscribed with “ An Ode (in Latin) of Lord Richard Berkeley, by 
 profession a soldier, monitory of his death.” It may be thus rendered 
 into English:— 
 
 “Though all men may desire to know my name and race, yet no man 
 (may desire to know) my mind. If any one should take up the enquiry 
 as to who I am, reply, I know not, but let me advise that man to know himself. 
 
 Epitaph: - 
 
 Whom yovth covld not corrvpt, nor change of dayes 
 Add anything but years, he full of them 
 As they of knowledge, what need this stone prayse 
 Whose Epitaph is writt in the heartes of men. 
 
 That did this world, & her child Fame despise 
 His sovle ((! God, loe here his coffin lyes. 
 
 Obiit: 
 
 Aprilis: xxvi: Ano. Domini: 1604. 
 zEtatis svae 
 
 71." 
 
 A full length figure of the deceased, in armour, is represented in 
 alabaster, lying on this tomb, with his hands upraised as if in prayer, 
 and over him the above inscription, with the arms of Berkeley of 
 Cobberley. 
 
 Dallaway’s Notices, &c., pp. 27, 28. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 149 
 
 Another memorial is inscribed with— 
 
 “ This tablet is erected * 
 
 By a few private friends to the memory of 
 James Gibbs, Esquire; 
 
 one of Her Majesty’s Justices of the Peace for this City, 
 
 And who served the office of Mayor in the year 1842. 
 
 He died the 24th of February, 1853, in the 63rd Year of his age, 
 Faithful, Humane and Judicious in the discharge of his Public duties; 
 
 Of a sincere, liberal, and courteous disposition; 
 
 Of good sense and strict integrity; 
 
 He stood high in the respect and regard of his fellow-citizens; 
 
 While by those, who enjoyed his personal friendship. 
 
 His honourable, generous and affectionate nature 
 Will ever be held in deep remembrance.” 
 
 Mr. Gibbs was descended from a family of great respectability, who 
 resided near Devizes, in Wiltshire; at a proper age he was articled to 
 an eminent Bristol chemist—the late Mr. Fry, of Union Street, with 
 ■whom he subsequently entered into partnership, and also with Mr. 
 Ferris; shortly after which Mr. Gibbs was placed at the head of the 
 firm, by the withdrawal of the first-named gentleman. Subsequently he 
 was connected, in a similar way, in a wholesale business in Bath Street, 
 the firm being Gibbs and Browne; in which, as in all his undertakings, 
 his character for upright and honourable conduct won for him the 
 respect and esteem of his fellow citizens. When the Municipal 
 Corporation Act passed he was elected to the office of Town Councillor, 
 which position he continued to hold till the time of his death, with the 
 exception of one year only. As mayor his conduct was unobtrusive, yet 
 dignified; characterized by a modest, unassuming bearing towards all, 
 witli an absence of all pompous display, as far as the nature of the 
 office would admit, blended with a courteous demeanour befitting the 
 chief magistrate of a large and influential city. He was, subsequently, 
 Chairman of the Bristol and Exeter Bailway, and also of the Bristol 
 and South Wales’Junction, and a Director of the Great Western; to a 
 meeting of the latter of which, in London, he was travelling, when he 
 met with his death, on the day recorded on his monument, at Ealing, 
 near the Metropolis. As a magistrate and a citizen his character was 
 above reproach. 
 
 A marble bust, by Tyley, of which the likeness to the original is 
 excellent, the drapery in exquisite taste, and the workmanship 
 unexceptionable, stands on a suitable pedestal of the same material, 
 which records the memory of 
 
150 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL, 
 
 “ Sir John Kerle Haberfield, Kt. 
 six times Mayor of Bristol. 
 
 Bom 23 Oct: 1785. Died 27 Dec: 1857.” 
 
 This gentleman was bom at Plymouth, where his father, Mr. 
 Andrew Haberfield, was a wine merchant; and he received his education 
 at the Grammar School of that town, under Dr. Bidlake. When 
 seventeen years of age he came to Bristol, and being destined for the 
 legal profession, was articled to a well known and much respected 
 citizen, then in a very large practice, the senior Mr. Jarman. Subsequent 
 to this his father, having amassed considerable wealth, settled in this 
 city, in the parish of St. Mary Redcliffe, where also the son resided; 
 the latter marrying, on the 29th of March, 1828, Sarah, daughter of the 
 late Major Dupont, who survives him. 
 
 When commencing practice on his own account, Mr. Haberfield 
 secured the countenance and support of a large number of the most 
 influential members of the Society of Friends; in fact, nearly the whole 
 of that body, resident in Bristol, consulted him on legal matters. 
 Besides which he was very extensively employed by numerous wealthy 
 and important clients engaged in manufactures, so that in a few years 
 he became a rich man. When chosen chief magistrate for the first time, 
 in 1837, he declined to accept the salary pertaining to the office. He 
 was again chosen in 1838, 1845, 1848, 1849, and for the sixth and last 
 time, in 1850, when he was knighted; and in 1851 he was presented with 
 a magnificent service of plate of the value of six hundred pounds, 
 subscribed for among his brethren of the Town Council and his 
 numerous friends in the city, in token of their esteem for him. 
 
 Besides the above public services of Sir John Kerle Haberfield he 
 was Governor of the Corporation of the Poor for the space of seven 
 years, over which he presided, as well as in the Council Chamber at the 
 Guildhall, so as to secure the personal regard of all its members. At 
 the time of his death he was one of six members only, of the Town 
 Council, who were elected on the passing of the Reform Bill. The day 
 of his funeral was observed as one of general mourning. 
 
 To another gentleman once connected with the corporation of 
 Bristol, a full length figure, in marble, is represented in the act of 
 examining a scroll, beneath which is inscribed, 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 151 
 
 “ In Memory of 
 
 Henry Bengough Esquire, Alderman of this city 
 Who died 10th April 1818, in the 80th year of his age. 
 
 He was an eminent solicitor, deeply experienced in the Law, and 
 gained general esteem by his integrity, talent, and independence. 
 
 He acquired by patience, vigilance and economy, great 
 wealth. He was of strong intellect, and his mind was eminently 
 stored with historical and biographical anecdotes. In his life 
 time he gave an estate of considerable value, for the purpose 
 of endowing an almshouse in this city for poor men and 
 women of all religious denominations. He took a zealous and 
 active interest in the welfare of the city, and particularly in the 
 rights and privileges of its corporation. His remains, at his own 
 request, are interred in this chapel, and his funeral was 
 attended by the Mayor and Aldermen, from respect to 
 his Memory.” 
 
 By liis death, society in general, as well as the magistracy of Bristol, 
 sustained a heavy loss, for in him were combined extraordinary talents 
 with strict integrity. He was deservedly honoured by the corporate 
 body as one of their brightest ornaments; and as greatly respected 
 because of his extensive usefulness, as well as for his public and private 
 worth. He practised in this city for a great number of years, where 
 his character was most appreciated, and his almost unrivalled talents as 
 a lawyer were best known; for he was profound, discriminating, sound in 
 judgment, and of inflexible integrity. He had long retired from active 
 duty in his profession, but having been raised to the dignity of the 
 magistracy, he continued to be useful to gentlemen holding that office 
 likewise, on all occasions of doubt and difficulty. He died greatly 
 lamented. 
 
 Near the entrance to the church, on the right hand, in the style of 
 the period, which is Elizabethan or Debased English architecture, 
 having a canopy supported by pillars, is inscribed above an altar-tomb, 
 in Latin: — 
 
 “William Bird died 
 October 8 auno 1590. 
 
 (He was) Illustrious, wealthy, wise, careful of the flock of Christ 
 and attentive to his station in fife, to his mode and manner of living. 
 
 He sleeps in this tomb but his spirit has gone to heaven. Bristol 
 has hardly produced in recent times a man in all respects his equal 
 whether you look at his excellence or at any of his other qualities. 
 
 In his civil capacity he deserved his country’s thanks; to his friends he was 
 agreeable; and great credit is reflected on him by the family he has left behind.” 
 
 Beneath the above inscription is represented a civic sword, sheathed, 
 he having been mayor of Bristol in 1589. He was by trade a draper, 
 
152 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 and he liberally gave the sum of £500 towards endowing Queen 
 Elizabeth’s Hospital. 
 
 At the back of the last mentioned tomb, in the aisle, is the figure of 
 a man in aldermanic robes, kneeling at a desk, the attitude so often 
 occurring on monuments of this period; and beneath him is inscribed, 
 
 “ This monument was erected for Thomas James, Merct. twice 
 Mayor of this City and Parliament man for the same in the 
 reigns of Queen Elizabeth and King James the first. He died 
 in the year 1613. 
 
 Also here lyeth the body of Thomas James of Bristol, Esq., 
 
 Barrister at Law and son of the said Thomas James 
 who died in ® year 1665. 
 
 Also here lyeth y body of Alexander James of 
 Tydenham in the county of Gloucester Esq., son of the 
 said Thomas James, Junior, Esq. He died in the 
 year 1717.” 
 
 The name of Thomas James, the merchant, occurs as mayor first in 
 1605, and then in 1614, which must be a mistake of Mr. Barrett’s, as 
 he died in 1613. As member of Parliament, also, he is said to have 
 represented Bristol in 1597, 1603, and 1614.* He is spoken of as a 
 very judicious man. 
 
 Extended at full length on his side, resting his head on his right 
 hand, his elbow on a cushion, and his left arm a-kimbo, in the stiff 
 attitude of the time, is represented, in armour, the effigy of the deceased, 
 with a Latin inscription— 
 
 “ To the undying memory of George Upton Esq., an excellent and cultivated 
 man; after a well spent life of 55 years he quietly fell asleep Jany 25 (his own 
 birth-day) A.D. 1608.” 
 
 Then follow several lines, of which the following is a free translation— 
 
 “The day which first brought thee forth, the same also took thee away; 
 wherefore though thou art unable to live on earth yet thou shalt survive in heaven. 
 His life was without blemish, his death was peaceful, his affections were 
 fixed on Christ. These things will cause his memory to reach beyond his tomb. 
 
 In sorrow Edward Bisse erected this.” 
 
 Beneath a canopy, the curtains of which two male figures are 
 represented as drawing aside, is a female figure kneeling, and resting 
 
 Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, pp. 156, 688. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 153 
 
 her head on her right hand • underneath is the following inscription in 
 Latin: — 
 
 “ Sacred to the memory of an illustrious woman (whose remains lie here) 
 Lady Maria, relict of Lord Edward Baynton, lately of Bromham in the county 
 of Wiltshire. She was a lady of simple and agreeable manners, of unblemished 
 life, adorned with piety, beauty, and with every maternal grace and female 
 excellence. In her mode of life (though alas! her stay here was too brief and by 
 no means free from troubles) she was frank, religious, tin sty, modest, chaste, 
 eminent for hospitalities and affection, and ennobled by well nigh every virtue; 
 all men and especially the poor were the objects of her regard. Her removal 
 from this life occasioned great grief and sadness to all of either sex to whom she 
 was known, either by report or by sight. She changed this for a happier scene 
 and sweetly fell asleep in Jesus in the 44th year of her age, A.D. 1602. Her dust 
 is on the earth, her spirit has passed to heaven. Her bones lie interred here.” 
 
 There are many other monuments with inscriptions of an equally 
 eulogistic character in this church. One to the memory of John 
 Aid worth, who was a “merchant and sheriff of this city, and sometime 
 treasurer of the Orphan Asylum. He died December 18th, 1615, aged 
 51. Also Francis his son, a youth of great promise, who died 
 September 5th, 1623, aged 24. He changed earth for heaven, sweetly 
 resting in Jesus.” Then follow several lines of poetry in fulsome Latin, 
 which inform us (as far as they can be made out), that “the father and 
 son lie buried in the same tomb. The former enjoyed considerable 
 substance, also, too, a bright hope. He was upright and prudent, and 
 cultivated piety and rectitude, and believed that his son would follow 
 the example of his father. When the one had reached the vigour of 
 manhood, and the other had approached old age, they passed to reign 
 with Christ peacefully hi their Father’s home.” 
 
 I shall conclude this notice of the principal inscriptions in the 
 Mayor’s Chapel with the following, on a marble tablet, near the Upton 
 tomb:— 
 
 “ Sacred 
 to the Memory 
 of Thomas Clark, Sculptor, 
 who executed the Greater Part of 
 The Carving and Masonry 
 of this Chapel 
 and other Works of Art 
 in this City. 
 
 He departed this Life May 16th, 1829, 
 aged 55.” 
 
154 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 In the restoration of this beautiful church Mr. Clark was much 
 indebted to the good taste and judgment of the late Thomas Garrard, 
 Esq., before mentioned, who for many years filled the office of 
 chamberlain or treasurer to the city, and was, for more than half-a- 
 century, connected with its corporation. He retired, a few years since, 
 into private life, and died at Bath, December the 18th, 1859, aged 72. 
 
 “At the entrance (to this church) on the 22nd of August, 1680, was 
 buried Captain William Bedlow, without any memorial or inscription, 
 though he deserved to be chronicled for the particulars of his life. He 
 is said to be concerned in the Ryeliouse plot in Charles 2d’s time, 
 and with Titus Oates pretended to discover the authors of the death of 
 Sir Edmundsbruy Godfrey, 1678; and on the oaths of these two many 
 were executed, who all denied the charge with their latest breath. 
 Bedlow was buried near the great door next the (College) green, and 
 his funeral expenses are said to have been discharged by the chamber 
 of the city, his goods having been seized and carried out of the house 
 for the large debts he had contracted.”* 
 
 The Collegiate Church of St. Mark, as well as the Cathedral of this 
 city, is situated in the parish of St. Augustine, which is bounded on the 
 west and north by Jacob’s Wells, Berkeley Place, the Queen’s Road, and 
 Park Row, &c., continuing to the Stone Bridge at the end of the Quay, 
 where the boundary line is marked by the Floating Harbour which 
 compasses it on the east and south sides to Limekiln Dock. The 
 purchase of the land for the purpose of constructing this trench or haven 
 for the accommodation of the shipping visiting Bristol, has been noticed 
 already.f The land so procured “extended under the name of St. 
 Augustine’s Marsh from the mouth of the Froom (at the Stone Bridge) 
 to the end of the Abbot’s Park (now College Street) and of Canon’s 
 Marsh.” % 
 
 THE PARISH OF ST. AUGUSTINE is situated, generally 
 speaking, on very uneven ground, that conical elevation known as 
 Brandon Hill forming a considerable portion of it. This hill, sloping 
 on one side towards the floating harbour, and on another towards Clifton, 
 
 * Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 348. t Ante, p. 34. 
 
 J Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 14. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 155 
 
 lias been much built on of late years, on that side which approaches the 
 city; so that where St. Brandon’s chapel is said to have afforded shelter 
 to a single hermit,* whole streets have been constructed, and many 
 large mansions have succeeded the abode of the silent and the solitary. 
 In 1770 College Street was erected at its base, in the Bishop’s Park; 
 and five years subsequent to this Park Street was commenced; higher 
 up, Great George and Charlotte Streets were added; in ten years more, 
 Berkeley Square was begun, and Queen’s Parade built. Orchard Street 
 and neighbouring thoroughfares, at the bottom of this hill, had many 
 years occupied the site of the orchard and the cloisters where the 
 brethren of Gaunt’s Hospital once dwelt; Culver Street had, perhaps, 
 as long stood where the pigeon-house of the brotherhood was once 
 erected; and Gaunt’s Lane, for ages, on another part of the domain of 
 that religious fraternity. 
 
 On the spot once occupied by the chapel of St. Brandon, “a windmill 
 was erected (in 1565) by Mr. Read, the town’s attorney;” and in 
 1625, “By an act of common council Brandon Hill was adjudged to 
 the mayor and sheriffs, but the citizens were allowed to dry clothes 
 there.” f During the Civil War in the reign of Charles I. this hill was 
 possessed by the Royalists, who planted six pieces of cannon upon its 
 summit, which is now occupied by two Russian guns taken in the 
 Crimean War, and presented to the city by Her Majesty’s Government. 
 
 From Brandon Hill, which is about 250 feet in perpendicular height, 
 the visitor obtains one of the noblest inland views in the kingdom. 
 Built on undulating ground beneath, his eye rests on the spires and 
 domes of a vast city, and a host of turrets and towers seem buried by 
 factories in almost impenetrable smoke, and this, as far as he can see, 
 towards Bath. On the right the Floating Harbour stretches out before 
 him, in which ride safely the ships of all nations. Clifton, too, is not 
 far distant, with its matchless terraces and noble crescents; and beyond 
 a vast array of beautiful woods, bounded only by the hills and vales of 
 Somerset. Brandon Hill is a favourite resort with the Bristol people; 
 it is laid out with pleasant walks, and seats, at intervals, are placed for 
 their convenience and comfort. 
 
 * Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. GO. 
 
 + Ibid, p. 688. Although Mr. Barrett records Mr. Bead’s name here, he 
 omits all mention of it in his list of Town Clerks at page 116 of his “History.” 
 
156 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 THE CHURCH OF ST. AUGUSTINE-THE-LESS was built by 
 the abbots of the neighbouring monastery of that name, for the 
 accommodation of the inhabitants in its vicinity; and as the arms of 
 Abbots Newland and Elyott appear in the structure, we may infer that 
 they were contributors towards the building, the foundation of which 
 appears to have been laid about the year 1480;* a previous fabric 
 having occupied its site, which was built by the abbot and brethren in 
 1235, “for the accommodation of persons dwelling within the precincts 
 of the abbey, whose communication with the town was about to be 
 interrupted by the new trench” or floating harbour, t 
 
 The present edifice is divided into centre and side aisles by columns, 
 capitals, and arches, in the Perpendicular style of English architecture; 
 and in beautiful keeping with that fine and commanding mode of 
 building. The roof, which is pointed, appears to be of oak, panelled, 
 having richly carved bosses at the intersections; it is difficult, however, 
 for the spectator to determine of what it is composed, because of the 
 white lime which covers it. On the roof of the chancel, in six ovals, 
 are representations of as many Scripture characters, which greatly mar 
 the beautiful simplicity of this part of the structure. The east window, 
 as well as those on the north and south sides of the chancel, are filled 
 with stained glass; as is also that at the east end of the south aisle. The 
 remainder of the windows of this church have plain glass; they are, 
 however, beautifully symmetrical, with the exception of those of a 
 circular character, which cannot be commended for their elegance. The 
 removal of the side galleries, and organ (now sold) which was placed at 
 the west end of the church, has added greatly to the interest of the 
 interior. They were all given by the late Henry Cruger, Esq., M.P. 
 for the city. A new organ is placed at the east end of the north aisle. 
 
 In the last-named aisle of the church is an inscribed tablet which 
 records that— 
 
 “William Pinney of this 
 Parish Gent. & Chvrch 
 warden for the same 
 yeare did at his owne 
 P.P. Costs & Charges 
 pave all this Western 
 end of y body of this 
 Chvrch An° Domi 1674.” 
 
 * William Wyrcestre, p. 116. + Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 157 
 
 Great alterations in the internal arrangements of this structure took 
 place in 1843, when a new pulpit and reading desk, and an elegant 
 marble font were substituted for the old ones, by three parishioners, 
 Messrs. Rogers, Jeffery, and Staples. In 1849 the whole was again 
 remodelled, when the seats were lowered, and the poor better 
 accommodated. 
 
 The tower of this church, which was built by the voluntary 
 contributions of the parishioners, is extremely pleasing, being 
 surmounted by an open trefoil parapet and octagonal turret, in 
 exceedingly good Perpendicular English architecture. 
 
 The only monumental inscription in this church which is presumed 
 to be of interest to the general reader, is against the east wall of the 
 south aisle, and is as follows:— 
 
 “ Sacred 
 
 to the Memory of 
 Edward Shiercliff 
 son of 
 
 Samuel & Catherine Shiercliff, 
 
 Descended 
 
 From an ancient family 
 Long seated in the Comity of York; 
 
 Born at Whitley Hall near Sheffield 
 14th May 1727, 
 and died in this City 
 1st Feby 1798. 
 
 Possessing in an eminent degree 
 Every social virtue that can adorn 
 Private Life; 
 
 Versed in polite Literature; 
 
 Skilled in the Liberal arts; 
 
 Whilst his brilliant talents recommended 
 General respect; 
 
 His engaging manners and unassuming modesty 
 Secured him universal esteem.” 
 
 Mr. Shiercliff kept a Circulating Library on St. Augustine’s Back, 
 opposite the Drawbridge, and in 1789 published the first “Bristol & 
 Hotwell Guide,” which has passed through several editions, some of 
 the later under the auspices of “ The Society of Booksellers.” 
 
 On the south side of the burial ground of this church is a small 
 stone which records that 
 
 “ Here lies the remains 
 of Clara Ann Smith 
 who was Poisoned by 
 Mary Ann Burdock 
 
158 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Oct. 26th, 1833, 
 who was Executed 
 for the same 
 In this City 
 the loth April, 
 
 1834.” 
 
 This heartless murder by poison was committed in Trinity Street, in 
 this parish, the unfortunate victim lodging with the murderess, who 
 rented the house, No. 17. It was calculated that not less than 60,000 
 persons were present at the execution, the prisoner having first confessed 
 her guilt.* 
 
 A second church has been erected in this parish,f dedicated to 
 St. George, its situation being on the north-west side of Great George 
 Street, Brandon Hill, from whence it is approached by a long flight of 
 stone steps, which have a very imposing effect. The style of this church 
 is Roman Doric; it is entered by a portico which, from its elevated 
 position, is commanding; and it contains, within its walls, nine hundred 
 free sittings. The Sunday and Day Schools, in connection with this 
 church, are situated on the south side of Brandon Hill, and were erected 
 by the voluntary offerings of the congregation. 
 
 ST. MARY’S CHAPEL, under the bank, belongs to the Roman 
 Catholics, and was opened and consecrated by the late Bishop Baines, 
 July 7th, 1843. It is of pure Grecian architecture, standing out boldly 
 by the side of the Floating Harbour, and forms a very prominent object 
 in the neighbourhood. It is calculated to hold six hundred persons. $ 
 
 There are chapels, the BETHESDA, in Great George Street, and 
 SALEM, in St. Augustine’s Place, belonging to the “Brethren,” whose 
 ministers are maintained, and their places of public worship supported, 
 by the free-will offerings of their people, no stipulated sum being paid 
 for seats in either. The pastors of these chapels are the Rev. George 
 Muller § and the Rev. Henry Craik, who is a native of Scotland. 
 
 * Appendix XXI. 
 
 t This building was originally (in 1823) a Chapel of Ease to St. Augustine- 
 the-Less; but the parish was subsequently divided for the purpose of making 
 this structure parochial. 
 
 £ This building was erected by a body of Christians, calling themselves 
 “Members of the Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church” (Irvingites), and 
 cost about £13,000, but was sold by them to the Roman Catholics for £5,000. 
 § Appendix XXII. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 159 
 
 LODGE STREET CHAPEL, which belongs to the Independent 
 Nonconformists, is situated at the eastern extremity of this parish, and 
 was opened for divine worship August 17th, 1831, having been erected 
 at a cost of £4,500, raised by voluntary contributions; and will 
 accommodate about fifteen hundred persons. It affects to be built in 
 the Perpendicular English style of architecture, but it is an indifferent 
 example, wanting detail. 
 
 THE CITY GRAMMAR SCHOOL is situated in Unity Street, 
 College Green, and owes its foundation to Robert Thorn, Esq., whose 
 executors, “by licence from King Henry 8th. anno regni 24, purchased 
 the house (called St. Bartholomew's Hospital), with all the lands, &c., 
 thereto belonging, and conveyed them to the mayor, burgesses, and 
 commonalty of Bristol, for erecting a free grammar school, in pursuance 
 of the will of the said Robert Thorn.” * The sons of the founder, 
 Robert and Nicholas, were also great benefactors to this school. To 
 conduct it were to be appointed “one schoolmaster, and one or two 
 ushers, as need or occasion thereafter should be, to teach and bring up 
 youth in learning and virtue, and especially in grammar and other good 
 literatures, for the better education and bringing up of children, and 
 other who will resort thither, for learning of grammar and understanding 
 of the tongues,” &c. The school was to be held “within the said 
 house, called the Bartilmews, for ever;” and the masters were “to 
 teach grammar within the said school to all children, and other that 
 would repair to the said school for learning and knowledge of the Latin 
 tongue, and other good learning (&c.), and that freely, without anything 
 to be taken, other than four-pence only, for the first admission of every 
 scholar into the same school.” 
 
 In process of time “ the master exacted the sum of £4 on the 
 admission of each boy into the school,” instead of the four-pence 
 directed by the founder ; “ and had charged for books and stationary,” 
 although, by the rules of the charity, “ the master was to be at the 
 expense of providing the necessary books and stationary for the use of 
 the school.” In 166G it was “ordered that each scholar, being the son 
 of a burgess, and dwelling in the city, should, on his first admission, pay 
 5s., half to the master, and half to the usher;” yet, by degrees, the sum 
 
 Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 432. 
 
160 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 of four pounds was exacted as above stated; which, on the election of 
 the Rev. John Joseph Goodenough, D.D., to the office of head master, 
 January 16th, 1812, was confirmed; it being “ordered that every 
 scholar, being the son of a freeman, dwelling within the city, or within 
 one mile thereof, should be admitted on paying that sum;” it being 
 held “ that the difference between £4 and 5s. was probably not more 
 than the change of time justified.” This sum was “ to be divided 
 between the master and usher, in such proportions as the governors 
 might from time to time direct.” 
 
 The salaries of the head master and usher seem to have originally 
 been, early in the reign of James I., £20 and ,£10; but afterwards they 
 were increased to double that amount: this was in 1629, the fifth of 
 Charles I., and the salaries continued to be £40 and £20 per annum 
 until the year 1757, when “the upper master was paid £80 a-year, and 
 the under master £60.” In 1803, by an order of Common Council, the 
 under master’s salary was raised to a level with that of the upper 
 master, by being also made £80 a-year. When Dr. Goodenough was 
 elected, he received £80 a-year salary from the corporation, and 
 £ 1 6s. 8d. from the same source, called “ hat money,” which, although 
 paid for a number of years, cannot be traced to its origin. The usher 
 “ had a salary of £60, with an annual gratuity of £20 from the 
 corporation, and his hat money, being 13s. 4d., as above mentioned.” 
 
 “ The masters are appointed by the mayor, burgesses, and commonalty, 
 in common council assembled. In virtue of a standing order of the 
 common council, the head master must be of the Church of England, a 
 master of arts of one of the two English Universities, of two years’ 
 standing as such, at least, and well learned in the Latin, Greek, and 
 Hebrew languages.”* 
 
 There are two fellowships of thirty pounds per annum each, at St. 
 John’s College, Oxford, attached to this school, and also two exhibitions 
 of ten pounds each, two of six pounds, and one of five pounds each, 
 yearly. 
 
 In 1783 the FREE GRAMMAR SCHOOL, which until then was 
 conducted at St. Bartholomew’s Hospital, in Christmas Street, was, “for 
 the encouragement of the master (who had luckily married an 
 
 * Manchees’ Bristol Charities, vol. i., pp. 29, 40. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 161 
 
 alderman’s daughter),* and better accommodation of boarders, (and lie is 
 allowed to take some) tlie house at the Bartholomew’s being old, dark, 
 and in a low, inconvenient situation, was exchanged for the more airy 
 and spacious hospital of Queen Elizabeth, in Orchard Street.” By this 
 exchange, “ the orphan or poor city boys were sent to occupy the said 
 ancient school at St. Bartholomew’s, henceforth to remain and be called 
 Queen Elizabeth’s Hospital,” which was afterwards confirmed by act of 
 Parliament; and the more fortunate “ citizens’ sons ” became the 
 occupants of the spacious and airy premises in St. Augustine’s parish, 
 which they have ever since held. The result of this transfer of the 
 property of “ the orphan or poor city boys, for the encouragement of 
 the master and better accommodation of boarders,” may be partly 
 gathered from a report made in 1831, just previous to the passing of 
 the Municipal Preform Act:— 
 
 “ There are four or five free scholars now upon the foundation. The number 
 varies a little, but there does not appear to have been more than ten for many 
 years, though there is no positive limitation to the number. It is considered as 
 open to all the sons of freemen within a mile of the liberties of the city of Bristol. 
 As the school has not, at any time, for these many years, been full, there have 
 been no vacancies to announce; but the master (Dr. Goodenough) states his 
 belief, that it is a matter of general notoriety in Bristol, that the school is open 
 to the sons of any freemen who feel disposed to send them. He considers himself 
 bound only to teach the learned languages, or what is considered as coming 
 within the description of classical literature, to such as accept the benefit of the 
 foundation. He has private pupils to the number of about 35, who board with 
 him; he receives also some day boarders, which, with some of the freemen’s 
 sons, who pay for extra instruction, may make the total number about 50. For 
 an additional sum of £10 16s. he puts the foundation boys upon a footing with his 
 private pupils as to all branches of education.” 
 
 “ It is stated by the master, that when any person keeping a shop, 
 or carrying on a retail business in Bristol, applies to have a son received 
 upon the foundation, the restricted purposes of the school are made 
 known to him, that he may judge whether it will be consistent with his 
 
 * The lady referred to was the daughter of Alderman Dampier, and it was to 
 please her the change in the schools, subsequently spoken of, was effected. 
 
 O 
 
1G2 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 object to send his child, and that at the same time he declares his 
 willingness to receive him.” * 
 
 On coming into the hands of the Charity Trustees when the Municipal 
 Corporation Act was passed, a large amount of property belonging to 
 this school, but which had been alienated from the charity for the long 
 period of nearly two hundred years, was recovered; and this excellent 
 institution, in which boys from eight years of age and upwards, able to 
 read and write, and residing within two miles of the Exchange, no 
 matter whether thicr parents obtain the means of paying the foundation 
 fee by “keeping a shop, or carrying on a retail business,” are eligible 
 for admission, on payment of a fee, in advance, of £6 for the first year, 
 and, afterwards, every quarter in advance. The school, under the 
 present management, was re-opened January 24th, 1848, with upwards 
 of 200 day scholars, f 
 
 QUEEN ELIZABETH’S HOSPITAL, another noble Bristol 
 charity, owes its origin to John Carr, Esq., who by will dated April 
 10th, 1586, bequeathed his manor or lordship of Congresbury, &c., to 
 found a school wherein poor children and orphans of this city and of 
 the manor of Congresbury, might be boarded, clothed, and educated; 
 the corporation being constituted perpetual governors thereof; the 
 institution thus established was under their control, to be conducted, 
 and the lads clothed, according to the hospital of Christ Church, in 
 London. “The great capital messuage or mansion house of the late old 
 hospital (which, with the cloisters, was taken down), called St. Mark’s 
 of Belliswyck or the Gaunts, then inhabited by Gabriel Bleek, Esq.; 
 and granted among other things to the Corporation by Henry 8th, was 
 fitly appropriated to this use for its healthy situation.” J The hospital 
 
 * Manchees’ Bristol Charities, vol. i., p. 40. It is notorious that this was 
 done in such a way that parents were deterred from, rather than encouraged to 
 avail themselves of, the advantages of the school, as intended by the founder; 
 but if induced to send their sons for instruction on the foundation, it was soon 
 ascertained that the treatment they received was such as to oblige them to 
 withdraw from the institution. 
 
 t An attempt again to allow boarders to be taken ‘ ‘ for the encouragement 
 of the master,” was heard in the Rolls Court, London, March 21st, 1S60, when 
 the application was very properly dismissed by the master, Sir John Romilly. 
 
 4 Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 376. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 163 
 
 was opened in 1589; numerous additions were made to the bequest of 
 the founder; and the structure itself, for the accommodation of the 
 recipients of the charity, was rebuilt in the year 1702. In 1783, as 
 before stated, the inmates were removed to St. Bartholomew’s Hospital, 
 Christmas Street, which was subsequently called Queen Elizabeth’s 
 Hospital, where they remained until September 27th, 1847, on which 
 day they were removed to the new castellated building purposely 
 erected for them on the west side of Brandon Hill. This structure, 
 with large playgrounds, etc., for the boys, stands upon about four acres 
 of ground nearly thirty feet above the level of the road, and raised upon 
 a terrace extending the whole length of the principal front, which is 
 reached by ascending a flight of forty steps in the centre. Everything 
 relating to this magnificent building is worthy of the object of its 
 munificent founder; its situation is healthy, and its interior arrangements 
 are replete with every accommodation for a large establishment of the 
 kind; school-rooms, dormitories, and lavatory; with baths, swimming 
 and foot, hot and cold; wardrobe room, dining hall, class rooms, and a 
 suite of rooms appropriate to the sick and convalescent, all of which are 
 heated by hot air. 
 
 In 1G59, when the number of boys maintained in Queen Elizabeth’s 
 Hospital was twenty-eight only, the council increased them to forty, 
 which appears to have been the average number provided for until the 
 charity came, by the Municipal Corporation Amendment Act, under the 
 administration of the Charity Trustees. The state of this hospital, 
 when Mr. Barrett wrote, in 1789, was such, “The corporation had been 
 so provident, and the estates the Orphan School (as this hospital was 
 sometimes called) was endowed with had been so carefully managed, 
 and the revenues so improved, that the boys might then have been 
 increased, and one hundred well and sufficiently supported therein, as 
 recommended by Queen Elizabeth’s charter; but forty-four alone (he 
 continues) are maintained here;”* yet when the Charity Trustees 
 took possession of the same estates and revenues some forty years 
 afterwards, there was an alleged debt chargeable upon the hospital 
 of upwards of seventeen thousand pounds, and only thirty-eight boys 
 were maintained by the institution! and these were simply taught 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 379- 
 
1G4 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 reading, writing, and the first four rules of arithmetic, with the Church 
 Catechism. Since that time, however, so greatly have the finances of 
 the charity improved, that, besides cancelling the debt chargeable upon 
 the estates, and building a magnificent new hospital, the number of boys 
 educated in this, the noblest of Bristol schools, has been increased to 
 180, who are well grounded in mathematical and classical knowledge; 
 and it is in contemplation to add to the number until it amounts to 
 200 ! On leaving the charity £10 is allowed to place each boy in a 
 position to learn any trade of his own choosing. 
 
 THE BEDMAJDS’ HOSPITAL, another noble charity in this 
 parish, was founded by Alderman John Whitson, “who by his will 
 dated March 27th, 1G27, left many and great benefactions to the city, 
 among the rest an endowment out of his manor of Burnet, for the 
 educating and maintaining of 40 maidens, who were some to learn 
 reading and needle-work, some household business and other employment 
 to fit them the better for service; and the first 12 maids chosen out of 
 12 parishes were, by order of common council, placed in a house the 
 4th of October, 1634, situate near the College Green, on the site of the 
 Gaunt’s Hospital or house of St. Mark’s.”* On the 3rd of April, 1G55, 
 it was proposed to erect “an hospital for maids adjoining to the house 
 hitherto used according to Alderman Whitson’s gift,” and the city 
 surveyors were consulted “how the work should be fully carried into 
 execution according to the intent of the founder and for the honour of 
 the city.” After the Civil War in the reign of Charles I., on tranquillity 
 being restored, the house or hospital seems to have been built—a 
 “ lasting advantage to the poor girls, and general good of the community.” 
 
 The estates left for the maintenance, clothing, and educating the 
 inmates of this hospital, have so increased in value under the Charity 
 Trustees, that they have been enabled to erect a new building, at a cost 
 of £6000, for the accommodation of the girls, in Denmark Street, and 
 augment their number to one hundred and twenty, with four mistresses 
 to educate them. The girls are clothed in red, from whence they take 
 their name; and such of the citizens who choose it employ them in 
 needlework, which they execute witli great taste.f 
 
 * Barrett’s History of Bristol, p. 415. 
 
 + In this building is a finely carved chimney-piece, removed from Alderman 
 Whitson’s house, St. Nicholas Street. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 165 
 
 The architecture of the school is Debased English or Elizabethan, in 
 style. The front, in Denmark Street, is of freestone; in the back of 
 the building that material is used only in the window-frames, Ac., 
 brick being chiefly the article of which it is constructed. The interior 
 is fitted up with every reference to convenience in so large an 
 establishment, and the whole is heated by a warm water apparatus. 
 
 COLSTON’S HOSPITAL is a third noble charity, standing upon 
 a site once occupied by the convent of the Carmelites, which, 
 after its dissolution, was granted, by purchase, to the corporation 
 of the city, who afterwards, in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, sold it to 
 Thomas Chester, Esq. The convent appears then to have been pulled 
 down, for in the year 1600, ‘‘the 41st of Elizabeth, the house on 
 St. Austin’s Back then new built and called Sir John Young’s lower 
 house, in occupation of dame Joan Young, his widow, (was sold) to 
 Nicholas Strangeways, of Bradley, in the county of Gloucester, Esq.” 
 Here Queen Elizabeth kept her court when visiting Bristol in 1574. 
 “In 1642 (the house) was inhabited by Sir Ferdinando Gorges, and 
 was offered by him for entertaining the Marquis of Hertford here at 
 that time. It was afterwards purchased by Mr. Lane, and converted 
 into a sugar house, till Mr. Colston, in the year 1708, bought it to erect 
 a school for a master, two ushers, and 100 boys to be clothed, 
 maintained, and instructed in reading, writing, and arithmetic, and in 
 the church catechism, from seven years old till they are fourteen, when 
 they are to be placed out apprentices, he allowing ,£10 to each at their 
 going out; the expence of erecting and endowing this school compleatly 
 finished by him in his life-time was £40,000, the estates in lands and 
 ground rents he gave for endowing it produced then £1318 15s. 6d. per 
 ann., and the charge of fitting up the school and dwelling-house, &c., 
 amounted to about £11,000.” * 
 
 The Society of Merchant Venturers are the principal governors of 
 this institution, which was established by the admission of the boys in 
 July, 1710, when the day “ was observed as one of thanksgiving and 
 rejoicing, and a special service was performed at the cathedral.” t 
 
 * Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 414. 
 t Garrard’s Edward Colston, the Philanthropist, p. 414. 
 
1G6 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 With the sale of “all that house or site of the late dissolved house of 
 Friars Carmelite, commonly called the White Friers,’’ the Red Lodge, 
 “the gardens, orchards, on Stoney Hill, &c.,” passed into other hands. 
 The Red Lodge stands near one of the entrances to the ornamental 
 grounds belonging to the mansion erected by Sir John Young, mentioned 
 above, being of the age of Queen Elizabeth, when it was undoubtedly 
 built: here once stood the dove-house of the Grey Friars. The principal 
 room or saloon is full of rich caning peculiar to the time in which its 
 erection took plane, and will well repay a visit to the lodge, now used 
 as a “Reformatory School for Girls,” which was established hi 1854, 
 “for the reformation and restoration to society of girls who have cut 
 themselves off from it by dishonest practices.” 
 
 THE BRISTOL INSTITUTION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT 
 OF SCIENCE, LITERATURE, AND THE ARTS, at the foot 
 of Park Street, was commenced in 1820, by shares of £25 
 each; the establishing of the Institution itself not being effected 
 until 1823. The subscription of two guineas per annum admits 
 to the reading rooms, which are well supplied with newspapers 
 and English and Foreign periodicals; to the Museum; to all gratuitous 
 lectures; and to the Philosophical and Literary Society which is 
 appended to the Institution. The Museum is probably the best out of 
 London. 
 
 COLLEGE GREEN was first laid out in public walks, planted with 
 young trees, and railed in, somewhere about the middle of the year 
 1709. Since then it has been much improved by substituting iron for 
 wooden rails, and re-gravelling the walks, which has made it one of the 
 most pleasant promenades in the city. The modem civic cross, before 
 mentioned, * has since been improved by a statue of King Edward III. 
 being placed in one of its niches. 
 
 ST. GILES’S BRIDGE, or as it is more generally called, the Stone 
 Bridge, which separates this parish from that which is next to be 
 described, is situated at the head of the Quay and the Floating 
 Harbour, as before intimated; the first stone of which was laid 
 
 Ante, p. 73. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 107 
 
 April 1 Otli, 1754, and it was erected at a cost of <£1825 14s. “In 
 1319 the chapel of St. Giles was pulled down, and in 1331 it was 
 wholly annexed to the church of St. Leonard.” * 
 
 THE PARISH OF ST. MICHAEL is bounded on the west and 
 north by the elevated ground of Tyndale’s Park, and part of 
 Kingsdown; on the south by the Queen’s Road and Park Row, taking 
 the centre of Lodge Street; on the east by Horfield Road, passing down 
 Terrel Street, across Maudlin Street, along Johnny Ball Lane to St. 
 John’s Bridge, thence by the River Froom to within a few feet of St. 
 Giles’s Bridge: the whole parish thus standing on sloping ground. 
 
 During the Civil War, Brandon Hill Fort, as already stated, was held 
 by the Royalists, from whence the line of fortifications passed down the 
 hill straight towards the Royal Fort, through a field called Bullock’s 
 Park, on which Berkeley Square now stands, The line then proceeded 
 up the hill, on the top of which they built Windmill Fort : but when 
 in 1644, Prince Rupert and Lord Hopton were governors, it was made, 
 pentagonal, and called the Great Fort or the Royal Fort, and 22 guns 
 were mounted on it; and in 1650, during Cromwell’s Protectorate, w r alls 
 were made about it by order of Parliament, who gave <£1000 towards 
 the work. The Windmill Fort was probably erected in 1642, and the 
 Royal Fort in 1644. This fort being now demolished, its site is 
 occupied by houses and pleasure gardens. The first mention I can find 
 of Mr. Tyndale’s house and Park is in 1797, when it is spoken of as 
 “the House of the late Thomas Tyndale, Esq., in the Fort, which is a 
 capital Mansion, built of Stone, with three good fronts towards the 
 Park.” f “ This is all which I have been able to collect concerning the 
 Royal Fort, although I dwelt in the gate-house for 20 years: so 
 completely is it demolished, and the memory of it passed away.” ^ 
 Kingsdown was so named because here the king’s troops, in the castle, 
 were accustomed to exercise. The Old Park was then called the Little 
 Park, and was not built on. 
 
 THE PARISH CHURCH, DEDICATED TO ST. MICHAEL 
 THE ARCHANGEL, stands on an eminence of considerable altitude, 
 
 * Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, ]>. 507. 
 t Heath’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 166. 
 t Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., pp. 303, 304. 
 
168 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 on the north side of Bristol. The tower (the only portion of the old 
 church remaining) has on each face of the two upper stages, a very good 
 Perpendicular English window; those on the west and south sides of the 
 lower tier have been despoiled of their tracery, but that on the north 
 front is good. Over a modern west door of entrance is a -window of 
 three lights, of but moderate pretensions to beauty. This tower is 
 surmounted at the south angle by an octagonal turret, and gargoyles of 
 good design remain on each side of it. 
 
 The former church consisted of two small aisles barely sufficient to 
 accommodate the parishioners: these becoming decayed, and somewhat 
 ruinous, were surveyed by order of the authorities, and on its being 
 ascertained that the foundation was not carried down to the solid 
 rock, it was regarded as necessary to re-erect and also to enlarge the 
 building. This decision was acted on with commendable zeal and 
 energy, so that in a short time the friends of the church raised by 
 voluntary subscriptions, with the assistance of the corporation, who 
 gave them £300, and of the Merchants’ Hall, who presented them with 
 £150, no less a sum than £2,200 and upwards, with which to 
 commence the present structure, the foundation stone of which was 
 laid by the Rev. Samuel Seyer, the rector, a brass plate being fixed to 
 it with this inscription:— 
 
 ‘ ‘ Tlie foundation stone 
 of this new Church 
 built by 
 
 Voluntary Contributions 
 was laid 
 
 July 3rd, 1775.”* 
 
 The church being completed, was opened on Sunday, June 22nd, 1777, 
 the mayor and corporation attending on the occasion, when an excellent 
 sermon is said to have been preached by the new rector, the Rev. 
 George Wilkins. The addition to the structure seems to have been 
 greatly indebted for its erection to the activity of a gentleman to whose 
 memory, and that of his wife, a marble tablet, in the church, is 
 inscribed as follows: — 
 
 * The plate was engraved and intended for this day, when too late to be 
 altered to the 4th, on which day the foundation stone was actually laid. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 169 
 
 “ Near this place 
 are deposited the remains of 
 Samuel Lowder of this Parish 
 (A principal promoter of rebuilding this edifice) 
 who died the 26 t!l day of April, 1793, 
 
 Aged 72 years. 
 
 Also of Lucy relict of the said 
 Samuel Lowder, 
 
 who departed this life the 19th day of August, 1812, 
 
 Aged 93 years,” 
 
 The body of this structure is a nondescript, belonging to no order or 
 style in architecture whatever. The roofs of the aisles are flat, that of 
 the centre is circular, at the east end of which a small chancel is entered 
 by a pointed arch, apparently intended to be of the fifteenth century ! 
 The whole is supported by eight columns and as many pilasters, which 
 are positively indescribable.* 
 
 There are numerous monuments in this church, yet but few of 
 interest to the popular reader. Against the wall in the north aisle, 
 under sculptured military trophies, is inscribed the following:— 
 
 “ In memory of Richard Twine Seyer, Esquire, 
 Lieutenant-Colonel of the Bengal Army, Commander of 
 The Aurangabad Division of the Nizam’s Regular troops, 
 
 Who died 20th of April, A.I). 1833, vEtat 4S. 
 
 His brother Officers in testimony of their affectionate regard 
 For his sterling worth, talents, and urbanity, have erected a monument 
 Over his remains at Aurangabad, and caused this tablet to be placed 
 In the church of liis native parish.” 
 
 This gentleman was a son of the Rev. Samuel Seyer, M.A.,f author 
 of the “Memoirs of Bristol and its Neighbourhood,” published in 1823. 
 His grandfather was rector of the parish, and master of the Grammar 
 School. 
 
 A flat stone in the churchyard is inscribed: — 
 
 ‘ ‘ To the Memory of 
 William Isaac Roberts, 
 
 Son of 
 
 William and Anne Roberts, 
 
 Born May 5th, 1786, 
 and died 
 
 December 26th, 1S06. 
 
 His amiable and friendly disposition, 
 steady character and powers of genius 
 displayed themselves at a very 
 early period of life, 
 and continued to its final close, 
 endearing him to his disconsolate 
 parents, relations and friends, 
 who will long lament his loss.” 
 
 Appendix XXI. 
 
 t Appendix XXII. 
 
170 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 This young man was the author of a volume of Poems and Letters, 
 published in 1811. “His earliest poetical attempt ivas excited by the 
 naval victory obtained by Lord Duncan on the 11th of October, 1797. 
 While the family were engaged in preparing for the celebration of this 
 achievement, he surprised them with some appropriate lines, to which 
 the animating occasion had given birth.” On leaving school at 
 Kingsdown, where he made great proficiency in a commercial education, 
 he was received into the employment of the respectable house of 
 Messrs. Worrall, Blatchley, & Co., bankers in this city, the learned 
 professions being unhappily beyond his reach. There were few 
 occupations less congenial than this to an indulgence in the fond visions 
 of a poetical imagination, and he soon found that the cultivation of 
 poetry was not compatible with the study of pounds, shillings, and 
 pence, nor calculations on rates of interest. “I have trembled and 
 wept (he says) for the sacrifice. But this sacrifice is not yet made, nor 
 shall it be. The feelings which Heaven has given me shall not be 
 checked by interest. That independence of mind which I value as my 
 birthright, shall never be sold for a mess of pottage.” Thus did Roberts 
 decide that the literary spirit was not to be depressed by adverse 
 circumstances, nor to be subdued by inimical occupation. Difficulty 
 only served as a stimulus to exertion, and contrast increased the 
 enjoyment of leisure. Days of labour were compensated by nights of 
 study, and seclusion from the beauties of nature only rendered the 
 renewed vow of her votary more ardent and sincere. His constitution, 
 naturally delicate, seems to have been first oppressed with disease in 
 1806, when, in the month of February in that year, it was clearly of a 
 consumptive character. He continued to linger on, alternating betwixt 
 hope and fear of recovery, until, “worn to the last thread of existence, 
 he at length quietly resigned his breath unperceived even by the eye of 
 maternal affection, that with unwearied solicitude watched over his 
 couch.” * 
 
 At the south-west corner of the churchyard is the rectory house, now 
 inhabited by the sexton of the parish; it contains some good remains 
 of interior decoration, apparently of the reign of James I., yet nothing 
 deserving a special description. 
 
 Appendix XXIII. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 171 
 
 TRENCHARD STREET CHAPEL, in this parish, is the oldest 
 Roman Catholic place of worship in the city. In the lobby which 
 forms the entrance is a marble tablet inscribed— 
 
 “ Here lie 
 the remains of 
 Mr. Patrick Cotter O’Brien, 
 a native of Kinsale, 
 in the Kingdom of Ireland. 
 
 He was a man of gigantic stature, 
 exceeding 8 feet 3 inches in height, 
 and proportionably large. 
 
 His manners were amiable and unoffending, 
 and the indexible integrity of his conduct 
 through life, 
 
 united to the calm resignation 
 with which he awaited the approach of death, 
 proved that his principles 
 were strictly Virtuous. 
 
 He died at the Hotwells, 
 on the 8th of September, 1S06, 
 in the 46th Year of his Age. 
 
 Requiescat in Pace.” 
 
 The deceased, who always entertained the utmost abhorrence lest his 
 remains should be exhibited after death to the gaze of the multitude, 
 as in life, by the anatomist, specially directed that his body should be 
 interred, and so secured in its last resting place, that curiosity itself 
 should be foiled in any attempt to possess it; he was accordingly 
 buried in the solid rock at the depth of twelve feet, and so secured with 
 iron bars as to render removal impossible. 
 
 HIGHBURY CHAPEL, in this parish, was built by the Independent 
 body of Nonconformists, and opened for public worship, July 7th, 
 1SI3. It may be more correctly described as standing partly in the 
 parish of St. Michael, and partly in that of Westbury; its erection 
 being certainly on a most interesting spot, for here, for conscience sake, 
 suffered some of those “ Of whom the world was not worthy.” * The 
 foundation stone of this chapel was laid October 3rd, 1842, the ground 
 being given by Richard Ash, Esq., and nearly £3000 raised by voluntary 
 contributions, so that when finished and opened on the day stated above, 
 every pecuniary obligation was fully met and discharged. 
 
 This chapel, which will accommodate about seven hundred persons, 
 is built in the Perpendicular English style of architecture, with an open 
 
 Ante, p. 81. 
 
172 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 roof of English oak, a stone pulpit, a stained glass window at the back 
 of it, nine others round the structure, of plain glass, but in good 
 architectural keeping with the rest of the detail, and the pews are 
 without the obstruction of doors; forming, altogether, an interior of 
 great general harmony and simple beauty. The school-room adjoining 
 is conveniently adapted for the accommodation of two hundred children; 
 added to which is a vestry for the minister. 
 
 THE BISHOP’S COLLEGE, opposite Berkeley Square, in the 
 Queen’s Road, offers “to the youth of Bristol and the surrounding 
 counties, an education of the highest order, both classical and 
 mathematical.” It is based on the model of King’s College School, 
 London; and besides being healthy and convenient, will accommodate, 
 by day, a goodly number of students. 
 
 In the west wing of the Bishop’s College is located the Bristol 
 Library Society’s collection of books, consisting of about 17,000 
 volumes. This society was originally founded in 1772, and the 
 corporation permitting its members the use of the building in King 
 Street, known as the City Library, the latter was soon made a 
 subscription Institution, and everything was done “that woidd exclude 
 the poor student and the humble citizen from its use, and render it a 
 public library to those only who could afford to pay for its 
 accommodation.”* This state of things continued till 1855, when the 
 Town Council, again becoming possessed of the property in King 
 Street, the Library Society moved to its present situation, and in the 
 spring of the following year was increased by a collection of books 
 belonging to the Bristol Medical Library. 
 
 THE ASYLUM, OR SCHOOL OF INDUSTRY FOR THE 
 BLIND, near the last-named building, is a spacious structure, having 
 an episcopal chapel attached to it; the erection of this edifice took place 
 a few years ago, the asylum having been instituted in 1793, and 
 incorporated in 1832. Here male and female blind applicants are 
 received from all parts of the kingdom, and are taught to maintain 
 themselves by basket making and kindred employments. Their musical 
 performances are surprising. 
 
 Tovey's Bristol City Library, p. 22. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 173 
 
 A DEAF AND DUMB INSTITUTION was established in Park 
 Row in 1841, and a new building has been recently erected for the 
 accommodation of its inmates, who are received from all the 
 neighbouring counties, and from South Wales. Park Row was, during 
 the last century, a sort of “ merchants way,” that is, it was their street 
 or place; for here many of them had their counting-houses and then- 
 residences together, as tradesmen now have their house and shop 
 contiguous, or as the great mercantile firm of Thomas Daniel and Son 
 still have in Berkeley Square. 
 
 There is a school in this parish, at the entrance to Fort Lane from 
 St. Michael’s Hill, built by John Elbridge, Esq., in a part of his own 
 garden, and in his lifetime, which, at his death, he endowed with the 
 sum of £3000. In it 24 girls were to be clothed once a year, and 
 taught reading, writing, arithmetic, and sewing. In 1748 the trustees 
 built for the master and mistress the present commodious dwelling 
 house, at a cost of £287, and the charity, as a whole, appears to be on 
 a very respectable footing. 
 
 There is, too, in this parish, situated in the Old Park, a National 
 School for boys, and also an Infant School; the building in which the 
 latter is held was erected for the purpose of a school by the late 
 Rev. H. H. Hayes, in 1837. The former was built by voluntary 
 contributions, and both are supported by the free-will offerings of the 
 people. So, also, are the British Schools in Upper Maudlin Street, 
 belonging to Lewin’s Mead Unitarian Congregation. 
 
 The almshouse erected by John Foster, in Steep Street, in this 
 parish, has been already noticed,* and, therefore, requires little remark 
 here. It was rebuilt, as I there intimated, in 1702, and now receives 
 fourteen inmates, who are allowed each four shillings per w’eek; and 
 other liberal gifts are made to them out of the funds applicable to that 
 purpose. It is in contemplation still further to enlarge it. 
 
 COLSTON’S ALMSHOUSE, on St. Michael’s Hill, is agreeably 
 situated, airy, and spacious. It is composed of three sides of a 
 quadrangle, the space before it being cultivated or laid out in grass 
 plats, and it has an appearance very like a college in miniature. In the 
 centre of the building is a small but neat chapel, where the prayers, &c., 
 
 Ante, p. 63. 
 
174 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 of the Church of England are read daily. The almshouse was built, in 
 1691, by Edward Colston, Esq., for the reception of twenty-four poor 
 persons, and for whose comfort he made a provision. Over the central 
 doorway is a tablet inscribed :— 
 
 ‘ ‘ Edward Colston 
 Son of 
 
 William Colston 
 late of this City, Merchant, 
 did in his life time erect this 
 Alms House 
 And endowed it with a 
 Maintenance for Twelve 
 Poor Men and Twelve 
 Poor Women. 
 
 Anno Do mini 
 1G91.” 
 
 In this parish, at the bottom of Queen Street, stand the remains of 
 St. Bartholomew’s Hospital,* which, on being vacated by the boys 
 belonging to Queen Elizabeth’s Hospital, was variously occupied as a 
 place of business, but at length converted into a lodging house or 
 establishment for poor families, which it still continues to be. In this 
 parish, too, stood the Nunnery of St. Mary Magdalen; and in Johnny 
 Ball Lane is a burial-ground belonging to the Bristol Royal Infirmary, 
 but which has not been opened for some years, and contains no 
 inscriptions. 
 
 Among the improvements effected in this parish is the opening of 
 Rupert Street, a thoroughfare leading from St. Giles’s, or the Stone 
 Bridge, to that of St. John’s, in January, 18o9. It was probably so 
 named because in this locality the troops of Prince Rupert (who was 
 besieging the city at the time), entered it, but not without loss, being 
 fired upon by the people from the windows of their houses. The 
 Royalists were led on by Colonel Washington, who, making a breach in 
 the line, forced a passage through the hollow way between Brandon Hill 
 Fort and the Royal Fort, towards Froom Gate, which they succeeded in 
 reaching, but not without the loss of five hundred soldiers on the king’s 
 side, who were killed, as already said, by being fired upon from the 
 houses, as they passed by them, particularly in Steep Street, f 
 
 * Ante, p. 58. 
 
 t Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 404. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 175 
 
 Another improvement in this parish is that effected in the widening 
 of the upper steps in Queen Street, leading from Christmas Street to 
 St. Michael's Hill, in October, 1855. The circumstances connected 
 with the formation of this street are thus recorded on an old tablet 
 surmounting some circular-headed ^ niches on the west side of these 
 steps: — 
 
 ‘ ‘ This Streete was s . . . . pered * done 
 & Finished, September, 1669. 
 
 The Right Worpfl Thomas Stevens, 
 
 Esqr then Mayor, Hvmphry Little, 
 and Richard Hart, Sherriffes. The 
 Right WorpA Robert Yeamans, 
 
 Knt. & Barronet, Mayor Elect, Charles 
 Rowell and Edward Horne, Sherriifes 
 Elect of this Citty. 
 
 By and at The cost of Jonathan 
 Blackwell, Esqr Formerly Sherriffe 
 Of this Citty, and afterwards 
 Alderman of the citty of London, 
 
 & By Ye said Sir Robert Yeamans, when 
 Mayor and Alderman of this Citty, 
 named, Qveene streete.” 
 
 There is a tradition that the circular-headed niches or recesses 
 mentioned above, belonged to the hospital of St. Bartholomew, situated 
 at the bottom of this street, but this is untrue, that building being 
 several centuries older; in fact, they never formed any part whatever of 
 that structure, nor did they exist at all until erected with the inscription 
 above given, with the tablet bearing which they formed a part of the 
 original design. There does not appear to have been any thoroughfare 
 at all here, until Queen Street was opened, “By and at the cost of 
 Jonathan Blackwell;” there would not, therefore, have been any of the 
 recesses spoken of existing; in fact, they were placed there when the 
 street itself was made, and not before. 
 
 Steep Street, in this parish, was originally called Stype Street, where 
 was a stone cross, and a covered well of water for public accommodation; 
 it is mentioned as early as 1252 as an inhabited part of the old town of 
 Bristol. Host Street was called Horstrete by William Wyrcestre, in 
 14G0, being a corruption of Ilore Street; from which the transition to 
 its present designation was easy, it being said that it was a custom to 
 carry the Host in procession through this street, hence its name ; this, 
 
 * Probably “ steppered.” 
 
176 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 however, is not peculiar to one street more than another, for when 
 desired by a person in dying circumstances, it was conveyed to him in 
 procession through any street. In 1490 Bristol began to be paved; 
 Horstrete being one of the first thoroughfares selected to enjoy that 
 advantage. Host Street stands partly in the parish of St. Michael and 
 partly in that of St. Augustine. 
 
 THE PARISH OF ST. JAMES lies next to that of St. Michael, 
 from which it is divided by part of the Horfield Road, Terrel Street, &c., 
 on the west. On the north it is bounded by Kingsdown, on the south 
 by the river Froom, and on the east by North Street, Barr’s Street, Old 
 King Street, and Merchant Street, to which it gradually inclines from 
 the north. 
 
 THE PARISH CHURCH has already been shown to be of a 
 remote date; * notwithstanding which it presents a less amount of 
 general interest than many other of our sacred structures. To the 
 common observer there is little in it to invite attention, but to the 
 antiquary it possesses no ordinary attractions. The west front exhibits 
 a very remarkable specimen of Anglo-Norman architecture, which, in 
 point of singularity, has no parallel; here is seen the Pointed arch 
 blending with that of the Anglo-Norman style in the same arcade, and 
 this not by accident, but by design; the whole being ornamented with 
 the zig-zag moulding, and rising from shafts, surmounted by the simple 
 cushioned capital peculiar to the latter mode of building. Only two 
 Pointed arches, however, appear in this arcade, one at each extremity; 
 but they are so decided in their character as to render mistake in their 
 form impossible. I have noticed already t the very early specimen of 
 the Pointed arch, in the vestibule to the chapter room of the monastery 
 of St. Augustine, but these on the church of St. James are of a prior 
 date, and deserving a more special notice. We shall therefore devote a 
 brief space to an enquiry as to the date of their erection, as this example 
 of the Pointed arch appears to have escaped the notice of all those who 
 have written upon the origin of that feature in architecture, with a view 
 to fix the time when it was introduced into the buildings of this 
 country. 
 
 Ante, p. 27. 
 
 + Ante, p. 48. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 177 
 
 I mentioned before that Robert, Earl of Gloucester, when building 
 Bristol Castle, is reputed to have devoted a tithe of the stone prepared 
 for that erection to construct the Priory of St. James, the commencement 
 of which was therefore coeval with the fortress. Its completion, too, 
 is ascertained with an equal amount of certainty, for in the deed already 
 quoted, we learn that this occurred when Benedict was abbot of 
 Tewkesbury, who filled that office from 1124 to 1137, when he died— 
 one year before the completion of the castle. Moreover, it would be 
 fair to presume that the priory was finished before the castle, if we had 
 no evidence of it; for the latter, which embraced a very extensive and 
 formidable pile of buildings, with a magnificent keep, encompassed 
 with walls of great strength and considerable magnitude, occupied about 
 eight years in its erection; and we find it was scarcely finished in 1138, 
 when it was besieged and taken by King Stephen. If, then, the castle 
 was completed in eight 3 'ears, it is highly probable that the priory was 
 erected in less time, having a primary claim as a sacred edifice; but 
 allowing it to have occupied as much time in building as did the castle, 
 it would then have been finished in 1138. 
 
 It is clear from the remarks advanced, that this church was, with the 
 priory to which it belonged, in the course of erection when the burial- 
 ground was consecrated, in 1129, and that its completion may be fixed, 
 with tolerable certainty, not later than 1138. The date of the 
 commencement of this structure was, therefore, twelve years before that 
 of the monastery of St. Augustine, and the time of its completion at 
 least ten years before that of the latter building; consequently, the 
 Pointed arches on the west front of the church of St. James are so 
 many years older than those in the vestibule to the chapter room of the 
 monastery, and are, I believe, the earliest examples anywhere existing. 
 
 In a line with the arcade of arches extending across the west front of 
 this church, is, on the north and south sides, the clerestory of the 
 building, which, however, is hidden from view, on the exterior of the 
 church, by other erections, and can be seen only by ascending a 
 staircase leading from the interior to the roof, and attaining the leads 
 by means of one of the windows. This clerestory is, on the exterior, a 
 most interesting object for the examination of the inquirer, and presents 
 to view an arcade of arches extending the entire length of both sides of 
 the church. In these arches, which are supported by the common 
 
 r 
 
178 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 cushioned Anglo-Norman capital and column, we observe no uniformity 
 of design; those opening to the windows, and which afford light to the 
 interior of the edifice, are circular-headed, while those on either side are 
 pointed, and others are almost elliptical. These arcades present an 
 interesting corroboration of the fact that Pointed arches (and of varied 
 construction, too), were known in this country much earlier than the 
 time usually assigned to their invention; and as those in question 
 undoubtedly form a portion of the original building, and are contemporary 
 with the west front, we have in them additional evidence of the early 
 use of the Pointed arch by English artists, and of their claim to its use 
 in constructing their buildings before that of any other people. 
 
 The original west entrance to this church still remains, but is much 
 dilapidated and built up, having been closely surrounded and 
 hidden from view, until a few years since, by houses erected early 
 in the seventeenth century. The circular window near the summit of 
 this gabled west front is both rare in design and elegant in execution. 
 In it is seen the germ of those beautiful and elaborate Catherine-wheel 
 windows, one of which, I have noticed, is inserted over the entrance to 
 the Mayor’s Chapel, College Green, in this city. Barrett describes that 
 in St. James’s Church as “a pretty Gothic window,”* an expression 
 which naturally leads to the inference that it is constructed in the 
 Pointed or English style of architecture; instead of which, on 
 examination, it is found not to possess one feature of that beautiful 
 mode of building, but is, in every particular, decidedly Anglo-Norman. 
 
 The interior of this church is divided into nave and side aisles by a 
 range of Anglo-Norman arches, supported by massy circular clustered 
 columns of the same character. These, with the clerestory openings 
 above them, are the only portions of the interior belonging to the 
 original building worthy notice, the roof of the nave and the east end 
 being subsequent erections. The former was discovered a few years 
 ago by the removal of a modern ceiling, when extensive alterations were 
 made in this structure, and though not remarkable for its beauty, is, 
 nevertheless, interesting as an example of mediaeval effort in construction; 
 and the latter, though of very recent date, is a good imitation of Anglo- 
 Norman workmanship. The pulpit and reading-desk are also modern 
 
 Hist, of Bristol, p. 3S7. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 179 
 
 erections, but both are in harmony with the restored chancel and the 
 new font. The original south aisle was removed in 1698, when a 
 larger one was erected for the accommodation of an increasing 
 congregation; since then the unsightly side galleries and cumbrous 
 high pews, which disfigured the interior of this church, have been 
 removed, and low-backed pews and free seats substituted on the floor 
 of the building only, thereby increasing the number of sittings for 
 worshippers. The addition of the present south aisle, its open roof, 
 and windows, is said to be intended for Perpendicular English 
 architecture, but it is, at most, only a sorry imitation. The alterations 
 here spoken of were all effected by means of voluntary contributions. 
 
 There once were three chantries in this church, but these were 
 suppressed either by Henry VIII. or his son Edward VI. The first 
 was founded by John Stone, in the reign of Henry IV., for a monk to 
 celebrate mass, daily, for his soul, at the altar of St. Thomas. The 
 second by John Spicer, sheriff’ of Bristol, in the nineteenth of Henry VI.> 
 1440, for a priest and seven monks to sing mass, for ever, for the repose 
 of his soul and that of his w ife Avis, and for all the faithful; and the 
 third by William Ponam, who, by will, 1454, gave several tenements 
 for a chantry at the altar of the Virgin Mary, to be celebrated for his 
 and his wife Edith’s souls, and for his obiit the 9tli of February. * 
 Among the most interesting monuments in this church, the first to 
 be noticed is beneath an arch in the south aisle, where is represented a 
 figure lying at full length upon a low T altar-tomb. It was discovered in 
 the month of January, 1818, concealed by plastering and pews, and is 
 pourtrayed habited in a long garment reaching to the ancles. On being 
 discovered it was at once set down as the effigy of the founder of the 
 priory, Robert, Earl of Gloucester, and a brass plate, with the following 
 inscription, was accordingly jilaced on the w 7 all beneath the arch, and 
 just above the figure: — 
 
 “ Within this tomb was interred, 
 
 Robert, son of King Henry I., 
 
 Earl or Consul of Gloucester 
 Lord of Bristow, 
 and Builder of its Castle ; 
 
 * Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 389. A new church in Union Street, in this 
 parish, dedicated to St. Bartholomew, was consecrated by the Bishop of 
 Gloucester and Bristol, January 22nd, 1861. 
 
 P 2 
 
180 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 The Pious and Munificent 
 Founder of this Church, 
 
 And also the Priory of St. James, 
 He died xxxi Octr A.D. M.CXLVI1 
 /Etatis suae LVII or LVIII. 
 
 This tomb was repaired 
 A.D. MDCCCXIX.” 
 
 William Watson ) Church - 
 Peter Fry J wardens. 
 
 The arms of the earl are engraved on this plate—Gules, thr ee spear rests, or. 
 These arms were adopted by the priory itself. 
 
 Closely inspected, this figure will be found to bear a much nearer 
 resemblance to the gentler sex than to the warlike earl to whom this 
 inscription refers it, “not to mention that a solitary ring is placed on 
 the wedding finger, the statue holds the robe, which descends from the 
 shoulders, in sucli a lady-like way, as to render it difficult to believe we 
 behold that robust and redoubtable warrior—the terror of Stephen, and 
 the idol of the rude soldiery of those days. Though sometimes, we 
 believe, great men were represented in monk's habit on their tombs, to 
 denote that they died in the ‘odour of sanctity,’—we humbly conceive 
 in this instance that it is not the case.” * 
 
 Near the chancel end of the north aisle is a tomb to the memory of 
 Sir Charles Somerset, who is represented, in the armour of the period, 
 kneeling at a desk in the posture of devotion; on the opposite side his 
 wife and daughter are pourtrayed in the same attitude. Above them, 
 on a slab, is inscribed, 
 
 “ Sir Charles Somerset, Knight, the fifth sone of the Eight Honourable 
 
 Henry Earl of Worcester & Standard Bearer vnto Her Majttes Honourable 
 
 [Band of 
 
 Gentlemen Pensioners, who married Erne, widow to Giles Morgan, of Newport, 
 
 [Esq., 
 
 daughter and co-heiress to Henry Brayne, Esq., by whom he had one sole 
 
 [daughter, 
 
 first married to Katclilf Gerrard, Esq., and afterward to Edward Fox, Esq., 
 
 He deceased the 11th day of March, Anno Domini 1598, being of the age of 
 
 64 years, who lieth here entomed, with his wife Erne, who departed Anno 
 
 [Domini 1590.’ 
 
 Beneath the male figure is, in Latin, on a slab— 
 
 ‘ 1 Sacred to the memory and piety of 
 
 A'great man, Charles, who lies interred beneath this small monument. 
 
 He was great both on account of his fine form and illustrious family; 
 
 Ecclesiae Bristolianae, p. 2. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 181 
 
 But he was greater still (we may believe) for his fame, virtue, and honour ; 
 
 And greatest did he become when he climbed with ardent desire to Heaven. 
 
 In addition to this while he lived he was a Standard-bearer to the King, 
 
 And when he died a Standard-bearer to Christ his King.” 
 
 Another slab, placed beneath the woman, is inscribed in English— 
 
 “ My body earth, my breath was borrowed ayre, 
 
 My dated lease expired years of strife, 
 
 My soul with stamp of God, temple of prayer, 
 
 Dissolv’d by death mounted to glorious life ; 
 
 Life was but lent conditional to dye, 
 
 Death made the period of mortalitye, 
 
 And gave me entrance to eternitye.” 
 
 Close to the above is another marble monument, adorned with 
 military trophies, and thus inscribed— 
 
 “ Here lieth the body of James Kussell 
 K«t Late of Nevis, one of the first 
 Setters of that Island, who was ® first 
 Major & Colonel there & after by Com¬ 
 mission of King Charles the 24 (bearing 
 date ® 12th day of Sept 1 ' in y 13th yeere of 
 his reign) appointed Governor of the 
 Said Island & so continued till 1671 
 by whose wisdom and Valor (vnder God) 
 it was preserved when that & ® rest of 
 those Islands, were endangered by the 
 French & Dvtch in 1666, who after 
 obtaining leave of His Majesty to 
 come for England, here departed this 
 Life y 15tli day of November, 1674. 
 
 Aged 74 Yeeres.” 
 
 Still nearer to the chancel of the church, and at the extreme end of 
 this north aisle, eastward, is a fine bust, by Baily, of the late Rev. T. T. 
 Biddulph, to whom it bears a striking likeness. The bust stands upon 
 a Bible, which rests on a pedestal of veined marble, with the following 
 inscription: — 
 
 “ This Monument 
 was erected 
 
 as a Public Testimony of 
 Veneration 
 for the Memory of 
 The Rev. 
 
 Thomas Tregenna Biddulph, M.A. 
 
182 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Thirty-eight years 
 Incumbent of this parish, 
 the Pastoral Duties of which 
 He discharged with irreproachable 
 Zeal, Faithfulness, and Ability. 
 
 He Died the 19th May, 1838 
 in the 76th Year of his age.” 
 
 Mr. Biddulph died at liis house in St. James’s Square, in this city. 
 He was the son of the Rev. Thomas Biddulph, incumbent of Padstow, 
 in Cornwall, where he was born, July 5th, 1763. Little or nothing is 
 known of his early education, but as both his parents were pious 
 persons, it cannot be doubted that he was the child of many prayers, 
 and was early trained in a knowledge of the holy scriptures. On the 
 23rd November, 1780, he matriculated at Queen’s College, Oxford, 
 where he graduated B.A. in 1784, and M.A., in 1787. He was 
 admitted to deacon’s orders by Dr. Ross, Bishop of Exeter, September 
 26th, 1785; and to those of a priest by Dr. Barrington, Bishop of 
 Salisbury, May 18th, 1788, so that the term of his ministry, from his 
 admission to full orders, was exactly half-a-century. He preached his 
 first sermon at Padstow, but the scenes of his early ministry were 
 Ditchett, in Somersetshire; Wansborough, in Wiltshire; Bengeworth, 
 in Worcestershire; and, at a much later period, Congresbury, in the 
 first-named county, and but a few miles from Bristol. Not long after 
 his marriage with Rachel, daughter of Zachariah Shrapnel, Esq., of 
 Bradford, Wiltshire, he removed to Bristol, where he became assistant 
 to the Rev. W. Tandy, then minister of St. Mary-le-Port. In 1793 he 
 was instituted to the perpetual curacy of Bengeworth, close to the town 
 of Evesham, of which his father had previously been incumbent. He 
 continued, however, to reside at Bristol, and, in 1803, he resigned 
 Bengeworth, having become the Sunday evening lecturer at St. 
 Werburgli’s, in this city, in the early part of the year 1796, that being 
 the first church in Bristol in which evening service was conducted, and 
 Mr. Biddulph the first minister who performed it. On the 21st 
 September, 1799, he was instituted to the incumbency of St. James, 
 which he held till his death. 
 
 Mr. Biddulph was a most attached member of the Church of England. 
 He held very high views of the apostolic character of the church and 
 its ministry, employed his pen in the elucidation of her formularies, 
 and was ever found in the foremost rank of her defenders. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 183 
 
 As a preacher he was, throughout the whole course of his ministry, 
 very effective. His style was peculiarly impressive, but it owed its 
 power, not to any laboured rhetorical arts, but to soundness of 
 doctrine, perspicuity of thought, felicity of illustration, and gravity of 
 diction. As a writer, too, he rendered great service to the cause of 
 vital religion, as well as to the Established Church. His sixteen short 
 sermons have been translated into fifteen languages. 
 
 On a tablet erected against the west end of this church is inscribed— 
 
 “ Here lyeth the body of Andrew 
 Hooke of this parish Brewer who 
 departed this life the 20th day of Fe- 
 brvary Anno Domini 16S7 
 
 in the 72 Yeare of his age.” 
 
 Mr. Hooke was the author of a work which he announced in 1748, 
 entitled “Bristollia; or, Memoirs of the City of Bristol, Both Civil and 
 Ecclesiastical;” part of which only appeared at the above date, 
 “ wherein Mr. Camden’s Opinion, of the late Rise of that Antient City, 
 is shewn to be not only contradictory to general Tradition, and the 
 Opinion of all the Antiquaries before him; but also inconsistant with 
 his own Authorities, as well as other positive and authentick Testimonies.” 
 Mr. Hooke published nothing further. 
 
 Against the south wall is a tablet inscribed to the memory of 
 
 “John Noble, Esq., one of the Aldermen of this City, who died the 11th 
 March 1768, Aged 58.” 
 
 Mr. Noble served the office of sheriff of Bristol, in 1759, and that of 
 mayor, in 1762. He was the first merchant who imported the produce 
 of Turkey directly from thence to this port. 
 
 In the easternmost porch, on a marble tablet, is inscribed— 
 
 ‘ ‘ Near this place lie the Remains of 
 George Daubeny Esq., late Alderman of this City ; 
 and formerly one of its Representatives in Parliament. 
 
 A man who supported his character 
 As a Senator, in a manner, Dignified, Indefatigable, & Independent. 
 
 As a Magistrate, Upright, Just, anil Merciful; 
 
 As a Citizen, possessed of Principles fixed and sound ; 
 with a Loyal and truly Patriotic Mind, 
 being a firm Supporter of Church & State. 
 
 A zealous and active Promoter of whatever might best conduce to the Advantage 
 & Prosperity of his native City of which He was one of the brightest Omani nts. 
 
 In all his domestic Duties, Tender, Affectionate, & Kind, 
 and in truth He was a Friend to each individual 
 who sought his Relief and Counsel. 
 
 His highest Praise is, He was a sincere Christian. 
 
 Obiit 26th May 1806, AEtat 63.” 
 
184 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Mr. Daubeny expired after a severe illness of three months’ duration; 
 in which time the deep concern and interest, manifested by all ranks, 
 could only be equalled by the merit which distinguished this gentleman 
 through life; as husband, parent, and friend, he was uniformly 
 affectionate, indulgent, firm, and active; and his truly patriotic zeal, 
 prompt ability, and integrity in the duties of a senator and magistrate, 
 caused his native city to mourn the loss of one of its best friends. 
 
 In the churchyard is an altar-tomb, much mutilated, inscribed in 
 Latin, to the memory of the Rev. Samuel Bury and his wife, which may 
 be thus rendered into English: — 
 
 “Beneath is deposited 
 All that was mortal 
 of 
 
 The Reverend Samuel Bury. 
 
 A man eminently gifted 
 
 With the powers of intellect, 
 
 Which he dedicated to the successful discharge 
 of all the duties of the Christian ministry. 
 
 He was distinguished by 
 Kindness to his relations, 
 
 Fidelity to his friends, 
 
 And by the exercise of general benevolence. 
 
 In him 
 
 Affability and condescension 
 were united with 
 
 Seriousness of manners. 
 
 He died in 1729, in the 67th year of his age.” 
 
 ‘ 1 Here sleeps in peace 
 Elizabeth Bury, 
 
 The beloved and accomplished wife 
 Of the Reverend Samuel Bury. 
 
 She was eminently learned ; 
 
 But the cheerfulness 
 of her piety, 
 
 Furnished a model worthy of imitation, 
 
 And marked the whole of her progress towards 
 
 The regions of immortality. 
 
 She died in 1720, in the 76th of her age.” 
 
 “ An Account of the Life and Death of Mrs. Elizabeth Bury” was 
 written by her husband, and published in 1720, together “with Her 
 Funeral Sermon, Preach’d at Bristol, May 22, 1720. By the Reverend 
 Mr. William Tong, and Her Elegy by the Reverend Mr. J. Watts.” In 
 it we learn that she was born at Clare, in Suffolk, in the month of 
 March, 1644; her father being Captain Adams Lawrence, of Lynton, 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 185 
 
 in Cambridgeshire, by Elizabeth, daughter of Henry Cutts, Esq., of 
 Clare. She appears to have been an eminently pious woman, well- 
 skilled in Hebrew and French, and profound in her knowledge of 
 ancient and modern history. In fact, she excelled in almost every 
 branch of human learning—natural philosophy, mathematics, heraldry, 
 anatomy, and medicine, being among her favourite studies. 
 
 It is stated under date of 1601, that “This year the plague ceased in 
 Bristol, whereof dyed in all 2956 persons—of the plague, 2600, of other 
 diseases, 356,” and that in the preceding year “the sickness was very 
 hott in Bristol;” also, in 1665, “the plague was in Bristol.”* 
 “ Tradition relates that when that awful disease the plague committed 
 its ravages in Bristol, its victims were buried in a part of St. James’s 
 churchyard. Certain it is that the part, which is supposed to have 
 been appropriated to this purpose, is no longer used for interments; but 
 whether for this reason, or because it was never consecrated to this 
 object, according to the ceremonies of the national church, is in a certain 
 degree doubtful. If the disease had ever been interred here, it is 
 probable that its contagion is now extinguished.” t Since the above 
 was written, in 1816, the lower part of the churchyard spoken of has 
 been separated from the burial-ground by iron rails, and appropriated 
 to a market for the sale of hay, straw, and coal. 
 
 The Roman Catholics have a convent situated in Dighton Street, in 
 this parish, which they have named “ Our Lady of Mercy;” to which 
 a school has been recently built for the instruction of children. In this 
 parish, also, the monasteries of the Franciscans or Grey Friars, and that 
 of their black brethren, the Dominicans, have their sites. J 
 
 A HEW CHURCH, in connexion with the UNITED PRESBY¬ 
 TERIAN CHURCH OF SCOTLAND, has been recently erected on 
 St. James’s Parade. It was opened for public worship September 7th, 
 1859; the total cost, including purchase of ground, furnishing, &c., was 
 about £5 330, which sum was raised by voluntary contributions; and it 
 is proposed to erect schools by the same means, which it is expected 
 will cost £450 more. 
 
 * The Bristol Memorialist, pp. 122, 293. 
 t Rev. John Evans’s Hist, of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 248. 
 
 I Ante, pp. 61, 53. 
 
186 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 The 'west front is generally in good taste, the entrance being by a flight 
 of steps leading to a triple doorway enriched with columns and foliated 
 capitals; the style of the building being early Decorated English 
 architecture. Over the entrance is a window of five lights, and by its 
 side rises a tower terminating with a slender but lofty spire. The 
 interior is divided into nave and side aisles, and it would have been a 
 tolerably good church, but that wooden ribs or groins of darkly stained 
 oak are made to support an artificial stone roof of the fourteenth 
 century, which is inconsistent with truth, and conveys the idea of 
 meanness and poverty. Probably the better judgment of the architect 
 was over-ruled by an incompetent building committee. 
 
 THE BAPTIST MEETING HOUSE, BBOADMEAD. The early 
 members of this Christian church appear to have been subject to 
 “ bonds and imprisonments ” on account of their religious views, and to 
 have been obliged frequently to remove from place to place to avoid 
 persecution, before they were permitted to secure for themselves a 
 settled and permanent resting place in this parish. In Broadmead, 
 however, they seem to have succeeded in engaging four large rooms, 
 which, having converted into one, they took possession of, as a place of 
 worship, in the month of August, 1671, and on this spot then- 
 successors have continued to assemble to this day.* 
 
 There does not appear to be anything recorded as to the building of 
 the present Meeting House, which, for all that we know, arose, by 
 degrees, out of the above-named large room, into which four smaller 
 ones had been converted. It seems to have been enlarged in 1764, 
 which, it is intimated, is, at least, the second time of such enlargement; 
 and it underwent a similar process of augmentation in 1799. 
 
 On each side of the pulpit in this chapel are marble tablets inscribed 
 to the memory of several of its ministers during the last and the present 
 centuries, in the following order:— 
 
 “ In Memory of 
 The Rev. Barnard Foskett, 
 
 Pastor of this Church 34 years, 
 
 Died September 17th, 1758, aged 73.” 
 
 “ The Rev. Hugh Caleb Evans, A.M., 
 
 Pastor of this Church 23 years, 
 
 Died March 28th, 1781, aged 64.” 
 
 * Fuller’s Rise and Progress of Dissent in Bristol, p. 49. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 187 
 
 ‘ ‘ The Rev. Caleb Evans, D. D., 
 
 Pastor of this Church 10 years, 
 
 Died August 9th, 1791, aged 54. 
 
 The righteous shall be in everlasting remembrance. ” 
 
 “ The Rev. John Ryland, D.D., 
 
 Pastor of this Church 31 years, 
 
 Died May 25th, 1825, aged 72.” 
 
 “The Rev. Robert Hall, A.M., 
 
 Pastor of this Church 5 years, 
 
 Died 21st February, 1831, aged 66.” 
 
 “ The Rev. Samuel Summers, 
 
 Pastor of this Church 3 years, 
 
 Died 15th December, 1836, aged 46. 
 
 The memory of the just is blessed.” 
 
 The Rev. Bernard Foskett was previously settled over the Baptist 
 church at Henley, in Staffordshire. He was first invited to Broadmead, 
 November 22nd, 1719, “but did not finally conclude to accept the 
 invitation till August in the following year;” having done so, he entered 
 upon his labours in Bristol in the succeeding October.* In 1758 Mr. 
 Foskett was seized with paralysis, and after eight days of suffering he 
 died as stated above, very much regretted by the people of his charge, 
 to whom “ he was greatly endeared; being much beloved in his life, 
 his death was greatly and universally lamented.” f He was interred at 
 the Meeting House in Broadmead. 
 
 The Rev. Hugh Caleb Evans was invited to succeed Mr. Foskett 
 within a month after the decease of the latter, by the unanimous voice 
 of the church assembling at Broadmead. He seems to have been a 
 successful minister, but had long been in a declining state of health 
 prior to his death, which took place as stated on the tablet erected to 
 his memory. “ His pulpit compositions were clear, nervous, and 
 pathetic. His language was striking, his voice clear, and his elocution 
 manly. Nor did any preacher, perhaps, ever know better than he, 
 especially at some happy seasons, what it was to reign over his audience, 
 enlightening their understanding, convincing their judgment, and then 
 kindling all their noblest passions into a blaze of devotion. During his 
 declining state it is scarcely possible to describe his placid resignation 
 
 * Broadmead Records. 
 
 + Fuller’s Rise and Progress of Dissent in Bristol, p. 188. 
 
1S8 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 to the divine will, his meekness, and his affection to all around him. 
 Every passion seemed to be extinguished, hut love: with that he 
 overflowed, to his family, the church, and all his connections.” * 
 
 The Eev. Dr. Caleb Evans was the eldest son of the Rev. Hugh 
 Caleb Evans last mentioned, and was bom at Bristol in 1737. He was 
 early taught in the classics by his father, and was sent to complete his 
 studies at the Dissenting Academy at Mile End, London, about the year 
 1754, after which he preached for a short time at the chapel in Unicorn 
 Yard, Southwark. In 1759 he returned to Bristol, and was selected 
 by the Broadmead congregation as assistant preacher to his father, at 
 whose death he succeeded to the pastorate, and became also president of 
 the Baptist Academy, Stokes’ Croft. On the 23rd of May, 1791, he 
 was seized with paralysis, and though he languished for upwards of two 
 months, his death was somewhat sudden and unexpected. By the first 
 attack he was rendered incapable of discharging the duties of his office, 
 but his friends, nevertheless, began to entertain hopes of his recovery, 
 until on the 7th of August following, a second paralytic seizure 
 prostrated him so low as not only to render him speechless, but 
 insensible, and almost entirely motionless, in which state he continued 
 till he expired two days afterwards. He possessed an enlarged and liberal, 
 a benevolent and pious mind: and while those individuals belonging 
 to the communities with which he was more particularly connected 
 venerated his memory, and mourned his death, the sympathy of 
 society, wherever he was known, was excited, and his removal was 
 considered as a public loss, t He established Free Schools at Bristol, 
 Mangotsfield, and Downend, and he also superintended them himself. 
 At the latter place, too. he erected a chapel, and in this village he died. 
 
 The Rev. Dr. Ryland was bom at Warwick, January 29th, 1753, 
 where his father was pastor of the Baptist Church. He was well 
 s kill ed in the Hebrew language, and it is recorded of him that he could 
 read a chapter in the Hebrew Bible before he was five years old. At 
 the request of the church at Warwick he became an assistant to his 
 father, and he was ordained co-pastor with him in the year 1781. On 
 
 * The Rev. Dr. Rippon. 
 
 t Dr. Caleb Evans' father, grandfather, and great-grandfather, were all eminent 
 ministers of the Baptist denomination. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 189 
 
 the removal of his father to Northampton he became sole pastor, until 
 1793, “when he received an unanimous invitation to the joint offices of 
 president of the Bristol Education Society, and pastor of Broadmead.” 
 His reading was various and extensive ; he had a general acquaintance 
 with the principles of science; and his attainments in the Hebrew 
 language were profound. “ As he was extremely addicted to study and 
 meditation, so his mental opulence was much greater than his modesty 
 would permit him to reveal; his disposition to conceal his attainments 
 being nearly as strong as that of some men to display them.” * 
 
 Dr. Byland’s preaching was characterized by holy simplicity and 
 fervour. His style, though perfectly unadorned, was uniformly chaste and 
 vigorous; and he occasionally surprised and delighted his hearers with 
 sudden, unpremeditated bursts of impassioned eloquence. He died 
 with a composure and serenity that no language can describe.t 
 
 The Kev. Bobert Hall was the son of a respectable Baptist minister 
 bearing the same patronymic, settled over the church at Arnsby, in 
 Leicestershire. “When he was a little boy he was sent to the school of 
 Mr. Byland, at Northampton, the father of Dr. Byland, of Bristol;” $ 
 then to the Baptist Academy in this city, whence he proceeded to King’s 
 College, Aberdeen, in 1781. Two years afterwards he was invited to 
 return to the academy at Bristol, and to become assistant minister to 
 Dr. Caleb Evans, which invitation he accepted, and he continued in the 
 discharge of the duties thereof until 1791, when he removed to 
 Cambridge to take the oversight of the Baptist church there, on the 
 23rd of July in that year. Here he became known to, and admired by, 
 some of the most distinguished scholars of the age. The learned 
 Dr. Parr eulogised him thus—“In common with all men of letters, I 
 read, with exquisite delight, Mr. Hall’s Sermon on Modern Infidelity; 
 lie has all the eloquence of an orator, the fancy of a poet, the acuteness 
 of a schoolman, the profoundness of a philosopher, and the piety of a 
 saint.” In his last will, the doctor, in testimony of his love for this great 
 and extraordinary man, says, “ I bequeath a mourning-ring to the 
 Eev. Bobert Hall, as a mark of my reverence for his exemplary virtues, 
 and of my admiration of his sublime and hallowed eloquence.” When 
 
 * Rev. Robert Hall. 
 
 t Fuller’s Rise and Progress of Dissent in Bristol, pp. 201, 2. 
 t Greene’s Reminiscences of the Rev. Robert Hall, p. 93. 
 
190 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 at Cambridge, too, “Mr. Hall declined very high preferment in the 
 church from Mr. Pitt, and Dr. Barrington, Bishop of Durham.”* From 
 Cambridge Mr. Hall removed to Leicester about the year 1804, where 
 he became the pastor of the meeting in Harvey Lane, until invited to 
 succeed Dr. Byland, at Broadmead, in this city, which charge he entered 
 on in March, 1826, and continued to sustain until his death. 
 
 Mr. Hall's name stood prominent as one of the first pulpit orators of 
 the day; his oratory was not loud, forcible, and overpowering, and only 
 to be compared to the thunder of the cataract, but it was soft, 
 mellifluous, rich, deep, and fluent, like the flowing of a mighty river; 
 he was, too, fervent and impressive in delivery. From bad health he 
 was incapacitated, for several years, from preaching studied orations, or 
 even to think of them before he entered the pulpit. “When his health 
 was firm, his spirits good, and his theme congenial, no man ever rose to 
 higher and happier flights than he did in those purely extemporaneous 
 exhibitions.” His final sufferings were great, but his end was peacefully 
 triumphant. 
 
 The Bev. Samuel Summers, of London, was unanimously invited to 
 succeed Mr. Hall, as pastor of this church, the duties of which office he 
 entered on November 17th, 1833. He was not, however, permitted to 
 discharge them long, for “the period had arrived for their termination, 
 and the brief but distinguished career of his ministerial labours soon 
 closed, amidst the regrets and the disappointed hopes of an admiring 
 and bereaved church. He sleeps in the same tomb with venerable piety 
 and exalted genius—with former pastors of this Christian commimity, 
 who were among the most illustrious ornaments of our denomination, 
 and the brightest luminaries of the church of Christ.” f The death 
 of Mr. Summers took place at his residence, in Portland Square; it 
 was sudden, and caused by ossification of the heart; his remains were 
 interred at Broadmead chapel. 
 
 THE WELSH CALVINISTIC METHODIST CHAPEL is also 
 situated in Broadmead. It is erected on the site of an apartment called 
 Wesley’s room, because here the Bev. John Wesley used to preach, and 
 here he formed the first branch of the Wesleyan Methodist Society that 
 
 * Greene’s Reminiscences of the Rev. Robert Hall, pp. 27, 29. 
 f Funeral Sermon by the Rev. Dr. Steane. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 191 
 
 met in Bristol. The foundation stone of this room appears to have been 
 laid on the 12th of May, 1739; and it seems to have been used by the 
 followers of Wesley from the time of its erection until the opening of 
 Ebenezer Chapel, Old King Street, in 1795; when it was purchased by 
 David Evans, Esq., who was sheriff of Bristol in that year, and mayor in 
 1802 and 1803; that his countrymen (he being a Welshman), might 
 here have divine service performed in their own language. It is 
 described in 1797 as a “spacious Meeting House, with six Pillars of 
 Freestone, supporting Galleries, and a large dwelling house over the 
 Chapel,” * but the date of its erection appears not to have been 
 recorded. 
 
 EBENEZER WESLEYAN CHAPEL, Old King Street, is a 
 spacious building calculated to accommodate 2000 worshippers. The 
 interior is neat, light, and airy; having galleries on all four sides, with 
 an organ in that behind the pulpit. 
 
 THE UNITARIAN CHAPEL, Lewin’s Mead. This structure 
 stands upon part of the site of the Franciscan Friary; the old chapel, 
 a small building, constructed about the year 1705, with a number of 
 old houses, was pulled down in 1789, and the present commodious 
 place of worship, which is, on many accounts, the completest chapel in 
 Bristol, was erected in its room, It contains a monument to the 
 memory of its late pastor, the Rev. Lant Carpenter, LL.D., which bears 
 a truthful medallion likeness of that gentleman, with the following 
 inscription:— 
 
 “ Consecrated, 
 
 By his bereaved and sorrowing congregation, 
 
 To the Memory of 
 Lant Carpenter, L.L. D., 
 
 Their revered pastor, counsellor, and friend : 
 
 Who, with love that never cooled, and zeal that never wearied, 
 
 Guided the young, succoured the poor, comforted the afflicted, 
 
 And dedicated his life to the service of mankind; 
 
 A faithful preacher of the gospel, 
 
 And an enlightened advocate of Unitarian Christianity. 
 
 He devoted to the study of the Scriptures, 
 
 A mind ardent by nature, rich in learning, & versed in philosophy. 
 
 And by sanctity of life, as well as by force of reason, 
 
 Persuaded men to believe and to exemplify 
 The truth as it is in Jesus. 
 
 He was born at Kidderminster, September 2nd, 1780. 
 
 Commenced his ministry in this chapel, July 20th, 1817. 
 
 Was drowned off the coast of Italy, April 5th, 1840.” 
 
 Heath’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 74. 
 
192 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Dr. Carpenter was the third son of Mr. George Carpenter, a carpet 
 manufacturer of Kidderminster, and nephew of the late Rev. Benjamin 
 Carpenter, minister of the Unitarian Chapel at Stourbridge, in 
 Worcestershire. From an early age he was intended for the ministry, 
 and was sent, in 1797, to commence his studies for that purpose, to 
 Northampton, where he entered the Academy established for the 
 education of Protestant Dissenters, under Dr. Doddridge, and of which 
 afterwards the Rev. John Horsey became principal. In 1798 he 
 removed to Glasgow and entered the University, where he completed 
 his professional studies; and it is no mean tribute to his talents to 
 record, that at an earlier age than is usual, the University conferred 
 upon him the degree of LL.D., in reward for the diligence and credit 
 with which he acquitted himself. On leaving Glasgow he repaired to 
 Liverpool, to undertake the duties of a librarian at the Athenaeum in 
 that town, towards the close of the year 1802; but this he soon 
 relinquished to assume the pastorate of St. George’s Meeting, at Exeter, 
 having in the meantime refused four or five similar engagements 
 elsewhere. Here he laboured from 1805, until he removed to Bristol 
 in 1817, to join the Rev. John Rowe, as co-pastor of the congregation 
 meeting in Lewin’s Mead, where he remained until his death. 
 
 Dr. Carpenter was held in deservedly high esteem by the people of 
 his charge, and was greatly respected by all who had the pleasure of his 
 acquaintance. He was a warm-hearted, benevolent man, and took an 
 active part hi whatever he believed would be conducive to the interests 
 of his fellow-creatures. He, for many years, conducted a school in this 
 city with great success, and was largely engaged as a lecturer on various 
 topics in many towns in the country, where he was extensively known 
 and respected. In this locality, too, he was actively engaged in the 
 administration of the affairs of public schools and charitable insti¬ 
 tutions, in which he felt a lively interest. 
 
 In 1839 Dr. Carpenter was recommended to take a tour on the 
 Continent, on account of his health. He left London for Antwerp, 
 August 18th in that year, and travelled through Germany, Switzerland, 
 and Italy, in company with a medical friend. From Naples he 
 proceeded to Leghorn, by sea, having visited Milan, Florence, and Rome. 
 The French steamer “ Sully,” in which he sailed, was bound to 
 Marseilles, and it was believed the voyage would be beneficial to liim. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 193 
 
 He left the harbour in the afternoon of the fifth of April, 1840: at 6 
 o’clock he dined, and after conversing with some gentlemen passengers, 
 “ He was seen walking on the deck till about 10 o’clock that night, 
 and was subsequently observed standing on the cabin stairs, apparently 
 for the sake of fresh air, the rain being then too violent to allow .of any 
 one remaining above. This was the last time that he was seen; but it 
 appeared, the next morning, that he had retired to his berth, and had 
 unlocked his bag, and removed some of the contents, as if preparing to 
 go to rest. It is probable that, while thus engaged, sea-sickness 
 overpowered him, and that he went on deck:” while there, one of those 
 lurches occurring, which frequently happen to vessels at sea, “ when 
 he was leaning over the side, oppressed by sea-sickness, he lost his 
 balance and fell overboard.” * The vessel held on its course in the 
 dark, “ unconscious how much of pure and affectionate feeling, of 
 benevolence and usefulness, it had lost, and it was not till many weeks 
 had passed that the body was washed on the Italian coast. His watch 
 and seals, and several papers were found in his pockets.” 
 
 THE MORAVIAN CHAPEL, or church of the United Brethren, is 
 situated in Upper Maudlin Street, in this parish; it is a small, neat, 
 square structure, and was built in 175o.f Behind it is the burial- 
 ground, which nothing can exceed in neatness and regularity, every 
 grave being covered by a small flat stone, and laid in straight lines from 
 end to end, the intervening spaces being a beautiful greensward. Here 
 the high and low, the rich and poor, know of no distinction, the grave 
 stones being all alike, the same in size, and without the slightest 
 attempt at embellishment, the name of the deceased, and the day of 
 his death being all that is recorded. One of these simple but impressive 
 inscriptions is— 
 
 “ John Dawes Worgan, 
 aged 19, died 1S10.’' 
 
 He was born in Bristol November 8th, 1791, and was endowed with 
 high intellectual abilities, which he cultivated with assiduity, but was 
 
 * Memoirs of the Life of the Rev. Lant Carpenter, LL.D., by Russell Lant 
 Carpenter, B.A., p. 441. 
 
 4 The Welsh have also a small chapel in the same street, where service is 
 performed in their native language. 
 
 Q 
 
194 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 carried off by consumption at the early age recorded on his grave-stone. 
 His poems, Ac., were published by Hayley, and present a pleasing 
 picture of his genius and acquirements. 
 
 THE BRISTOL FEMALE PENITENTIARY is also in this 
 street. It was established June 24th, 1801, when it was opened 
 for the reception and reclaiming of females, who, having unhappily 
 strayed from the paths of virtue, are desirous of being recovered from 
 vice, and restored to a respectable station in society. There is an 
 Episcopal chapel attached to this institution. 
 
 An almshouse is mentioned by Mr. Barrett,* as having been built on 
 St. James’s Back, “ by William Chester, Esq., mayor, in his life-time, 
 for six persons:” it was called the gift-house. Another (called the poor 
 house), situated in Barrs Street, has been removed, and a new structure 
 built near St. James’s Church. On the west side of Merchant Street 
 is the Merchant Tailors’ almshouse, which was a fraternity or guild 
 dating its commencement in Bristol from October lGth, 1399, when its 
 charter was granted. To this guild were conceded certain privileges on 
 consideration of its members having erected a chapel to the “honour of 
 God and St. John the Baptist, for the intent of finding there a chaplain, 
 for ever, to celebrate divine service, for the good estate of us (King 
 Richard II.), and our dearest consort, the Queen, wdiilst we live, and for 
 our souls when we shall leave this world, and for the souls of our 
 progenitors, and all the faithful deceased, and for the brethren of a 
 certain fraternity there, for ever, to be founded, ordained, and 
 incorporated;” Ac. f The almshouse or hospital, although belonging to 
 this fraternity, seems rather to have been supported by donations made 
 by the brethren, than to have had any regular foundation of its own, 
 until the year 1701, when the present structure was erected on some 
 ground belonging to the guild, the inmates to whom preference is given 
 being decayed tailors, or their widows. 
 
 The public educational establishments in this parish are the Benevolent 
 Schools in St. James’s Barton, in which about three hundred children 
 are taught reading, writing, arithmetic, and the elementary branches of 
 
 * Hist, of Bristol, p. 402. For Spencer’s almshouse in this parish, see ante p. 64. 
 + Manehees’ Bristol Charities, vol. i., p. 206. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 195 
 
 a general education, with the use of the needle, <fcc., and the Ragged 
 School on St. James’s Back, first commenced here in 1845. The former 
 is held in a neat building erected some years .ago, many of the girls 
 being annually clothed; and the latter is conducted in a structure which 
 was once a Roman Catholic chapel, and since that, belonged to some 
 Dissenting body. Both schools are in connection with the Church of 
 England, and are supported by voluntary subscriptions. 
 
 THE BRISTOL ROYAL INFIRMARY, a noble charity, is situated 
 in Marlborough Street, in this parish. The idea of founding such an 
 institution was first conceived in November, 173G, when a subscription 
 was commenced for its erection. In December of the same year the 
 subscribers were first called together, when a body of rules for the 
 governance of the newly formed society was submitted for their 
 approval. At the second meeting of the society, John Elbridge, Esq., 
 was elected treasurer. “Of his unceasing exertions and successful efforts 
 in the cause of suffering humanity, the records of this great charity 
 make frequent and very honourable mention. In the Committee Room 
 of the Infirmary is a tablet beneath a portrait of this worthy man, with 
 the following inscription;— 
 
 ‘ John Elbridge, Esquire, 
 
 was among the first who engaged in this Charity; as soon as the Society was 
 formed he was chosen Treasurer, and cheerfully undertook the care of the 
 buildings, and of providing furniture of all kinds for the House and Apothecary’s 
 Shop, necessary for the first opening. He gave a constant and unwearied 
 attention to this work, which he effected entirely at his own expense in the year 
 1737. In the next year he erected a new ward for twelve patients, which he 
 furnished with beds and all other accommodations, likewise at his own expense. 
 Besides these most seasonable benefactions, which may be estimated at £1500 at 
 least, he, by his will, bequeathed to the use of the Society £5000. 
 
 He died on the 22nd of February, 
 
 1738, 
 
 Treasurer of this Society.” 
 
 Mr. Elbridge lived to witness but a short time the growing prosperity 
 of the laudable object of his solicitude, for in two years after its 
 commencement he was numbered with the dead. “ In consideration of 
 his (the founder’s) great benefactions to the Infirmary, the master of 
 the school which he established in the Royal Fort Road, St. Michael’s 
 parish, has for ever the right of sending any scholar, when sick or 
 wounded, for advice, Ac., by giving her a note signed ‘ Elbridge,’ when 
 
 Q 2 
 
196 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 the patient is to be admitted, if needful, immediately , without waiting 
 for the regular forms, or taking-in days. A ward in the institution was 
 called after him, ‘ Elbridge’s Ward,’ and was in use up to the year 1780, 
 when it was so dilapidated that it was closed.” * 
 
 In less than half-a-century after Mr. Elbridge’s death, the structure 
 which he had raised became too circumscribed for the continually 
 increasing wants of the charity, and it was resolved to pull it down, and 
 re-construct it on a more extensive plan on the same site. Accordingly 
 the first stone of the present central building was laid in 1784; an east 
 wing was added in June, 1788, and that towards the west in 1805; the 
 whole being effected by voluntary contributions, by which means also 
 the institution is supported at a cost of upwards of £7000 per annum- 
 The average number of in-patients, annually, is more than two thousand; 
 and about eight thousand out-patients receive assistance in advice and 
 medicine, gratuitously, in the same space of time. At the back of the 
 building is a newly-erected Episcopal chapel; beneath which is the very 
 valuable and extensive museum bequeathed to the institution by the late 
 eminent senior surgeon to the charity, Richard Smith, Esq. 
 
 Close to St. James’s Church is an old house, traditionally the residence 
 of the former ministers of the parish. On each side of the door of entrance, 
 in the spandril formed by the framework, is a shield, one bearing the initials 
 t e a and the other the date of the year in which it is believed the house 
 was erected, 1666; probably intended to refer to some member of the 
 Edwards’ family, monuments to whom are still in the adjoining church, 
 and who, also, are believed to have erected the house in question. 
 There are also some ancient houses in Lewin’s Mead and its 
 neighbourhood, as well as in the Horse Fair, having highly ornamented 
 ceilings, according to the fashion of the seventeenth century; and 
 St. James’s Back has also some houses on it apparently quite as old as 
 any remaining in the parish. Here was born, in the year 1415, 
 William Botoner; his father’s name appears to have been Wyrcestre, 
 but the son, for some unexplained reason, seems to have preferred 
 adopting the maiden name of his mother, who was descended from an 
 opulent family settled at Coventry; this, however, he does not appear 
 
 * Pryce’s Fact versus Fiction, p. 105, where there is a further account of Mr. 
 Elbridge. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 197 
 
 to have done until after he left Hart Hall, Oxford, in which college he 
 entered, as a student, in 1431. Here he remained four years, and 
 then became a retainer to Sir John Fastolf, of Caistre Castle, Norfolk, 
 and subsequently his secretary, physician, and executor. He translated 
 Cicero’s Treatise on Old Age, which was printed by Caxton; but his 
 “pretensions to learning, as it was professed among the few erudite 
 ecclesiastics, may be subject to several considerations of abatement. 
 But his love of learning was at all times superior to his acquirements, 
 and his industry in copying many MSS., is sufficiently proved by those 
 which are still extant. Nor can we say, concerning those which treat 
 of science only, that he did not, in some degree, make them his own. 
 As to his historical collections and the memoranda which he made of 
 what was passing in his own times, lie must, in candour, be allowed all 
 the merit which, in such times, was due to any lay-man who dedicated 
 his leisure to a literary pursuit.” * 
 
 After the death of his patron, William Wyrcestre returned to his 
 native place, and resided on his own property, near the gate leading 
 into St. Philip’s churchyard, where he employed himself in the 
 cultivation of medicinal herbs, and the practice of physic. He is 
 chiefly remarkable, however, for the pains he took in surveying Bristol, 
 and measuring, by paces or steps, its most interesting features, which 
 he carefully noted down as he proceeded with his labour. His note¬ 
 book was, some years ago, discovered in the library of Bennet College, 
 Cambridge, but it was written in such a desultory manner and “so 
 vile a character,” that it required great tact and application in an 
 endeavour to decipher it; which laborious task was, however, 
 accomplished by the late ingenious Mr. Nasmith, and the work was 
 published in 1/78. 
 
 William Wyrcestre died about the year 1484, leaving behind him 
 many other monuments of his industry in manuscript, besides the above 
 mentioned, the titles of which are recorded by Mr. Dallaway. He 
 cannot, however, be regarded as a man of deep learning; he was rather 
 an industrious transcriber than a scholar. “Twelve distinct MSS., 
 some of which are voluminous, may still be seen in different libraries, 
 which will afford sufficient proof that his diligence of transcription 
 
 * Callaway’s Topography by William Wyrcestre, p. 23. 
 
198 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 always seconded his opportunities. If we consider the general dispersion 
 and frequent annihilation of such MSS. as are written upon paper, it is 
 matter of no small wonder that so many of them remain; and we may 
 conclude that his industry in literary collections would have supplied 
 many more, which have been destroyed.” * 
 
 In the time of William Wyrcestre St. James’s Back was almost 
 wholly occupied as open garden ground, belonging to the few houses of 
 the opulent who were located in that neighbourhood. At that time, 
 too, Broadmead was a spacious meadow, from whence it is supposed by 
 some to have derived its name, which, however, is to me somewhat 
 questionable; because here the clothing trade was once a flourishing 
 business, particularly on that side of the thoroughfare which is bounded 
 by the River Froorn, and in 1490 the master of the guild of Weavers, 
 of Bristol, memorialized the mayor, sheriff, and common council, because 
 “ that Divers persons of the said crafte (had) dailly taken vpun tlieym 
 to receyve into their houses wollen yarne made of fflokkes and thruumes 
 and the same yarne Deceytefully weue in their lomes into the likenesse 
 of Brodemedes, that afterward e be sent into divers places byonde see, 
 and ther sold to marchants strungiers as true Drapery called Brodemedes 
 made in this said Towne of Bristowe, to the grete infamie and 
 diselaundre of this Worshipfull Towne.” After dilating upon other 
 causes of complaint, the memorialists pray the Common Council to 
 ordain “ that no person of the said crafte from the fest of puryficacion of 
 seint Mary virgyn next cornyng forthwards take vpon him to weue any 
 Brodemede or other cloth made of any other stuff than oouly of flees 
 wollen or felted wollen vpon payment of fforfaiture of Xs for every 
 cloth, and that every suche Brodemede be made within th,e said Towne of 
 Bristowe and not in the countrey and to be made of V boudes or aboue 
 vpon the same payn.” + 
 
 From the above it appears that Brodemedes were distinguished from 
 “ other cloth,” by being of the best quality and of the widest 
 description ; and it appears equally clear, I conceive, that the street in 
 this city named Broadmead received its name rather from the appellation 
 given to the cloth made upon this spot in the middle ages, than it did 
 
 * Dallaway’s Topography by William Wyrcestre, p. 24. 
 
 + Manuscript of some Transactions of the Company of Weavers in the 
 author’s possession. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 199 
 
 from its being a spacious meadow, as some writers would have us 
 believe. 
 
 In Christmas Street the remains of the ancient bridge, which unites 
 the parish of St. Michael with that of St. John, were recently exposed, 
 when forming a new street named after Prince Rupert, in that vicinity. 
 It consists of two arches, and about two centuries ago it was surmounted 
 with gatehouses, beneath which was the principal entrance to the city, 
 northward. St. John’s Bridge, which leads from the city to Lewin’s 
 Mead, was completed in the year 17GO. Dighton Street, and others in 
 the neighbourhood, with King’s Square, were commenced in 1755 : the 
 street was so called in compliment to the Dighton family, several of 
 whom lie interred in the church of St. James. 
 
 In 1787 an Act of Parliament was obtained for dividing this 
 extensive parish into two other parts ; one forming the out parish of 
 St. James, and a new parish to be called that of St. Paul, which will 
 be hereafter treated of. Part of Kingsdown, too, immediately adjoining 
 that of St. James, is in West bury parish; in it is situated Portland 
 Street Wesleyan Chapel, and Colston’s Mount, a spot well-known in 
 connection with the siege of Bristol. “Although the parish of St. James 
 had been so divided, it was proposed, from the increasing population of 
 the old parish, especially in the neighbourhood of Kingsdown, to erect 
 another church in that situation. A subscription was readily entered 
 into for that purpose, and the foundation stone was laid on part of the 
 site of the well-known Mother Pugsley’s Field,* August 2Gth, 1833. 
 The church, consisting of a nave, which is lofty, and lit by clerestory 
 windows, and two side aisles, with a handsome east window, was 
 consecrated and dedicated to St. Matthew by the late Dr. Ryder, 
 Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, and opened for public worship in the 
 spring of 1835.” f 
 
 In the church is a marble monument inscribed as follows:— 
 
 “ Sacred to the Memory of 
 Jolm Bangley, Esq., 
 
 Late of Kingsdown, Merchant, who died Oct. 8, 1836, in the 78th year of his age, 
 and whose remains are deposited in the Cathedral Church oi' this city. 
 
 For more than fifty years he was an inhabitant of the parish of St. James; 
 and as senior Vestryman laid the Foundation stone of 
 This Church, 
 
 Appendix XXIV. 
 
 + Ecclesiae Bristolianae. 
 
200 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 on the 26th day of August, 1833, towards the building of which he contributed 
 and moreover presented to it a set of [liberally. 
 
 Eight Bells. 
 
 By his will, he gave several bequests to Charitable Institutions in 
 Bristol and its neighbourhood, and left 
 An annual gift of thirteen pounds, 
 
 to be equally divided between twenty-six poor men and women, inhabitants of the 
 Parish of St. James, on the 26th day of July for ever.” 
 
 Mr. Bangley carried on a prosperous mercantile concern in Lewin’s 
 Mead for many years ; he was possessed of very active business habits, 
 and was honourably distinguished for the sterling integrity and bene¬ 
 volence of his character; and his munificence, as recorded on the above 
 tablet, will be a lasting monument to his memory. Besides his donations 
 mentioned there, he bequeathed £700 to the Bristol Royal Infirmary; 
 £200 to the National Benevolent Society; £100 to the Strangers’ 
 Friend Society; £100 to the St. James’s Sunday School; £100 to the 
 Charity School, St. George's, Gloucestershire; and £3 10s. for a sermon to 
 be preached on the 26th of July in every year, in the parish church of 
 St. James. 
 
 There have been convenient school rooms in connection with this 
 church, erected by voluntary contributions, in the neighbourhood, in 
 which children of both sexes belonging to the poor of the surrounding 
 district are carefully educated according to the principles of the Church 
 of England. 
 
 PORTLAND STREET WESLEYAN CHAPEL, Kingsdown, is a 
 neat structure, and next to Wesley’s Room, Broadmead, is the oldest 
 place of worship belonging to that people, in connection with Bristol; 
 it is, as before stated, in the parish of Westbury-on-Trym, but close to 
 the confines of that of St. James; hence its description here. It is to 
 Lieutenant Webb, of the 48th regiment of foot, that this society is 
 principally indebted for its erection. Here he frequently preached in 
 his military dress, and collected together large congregations, who 
 eagerly attended his ministry. He died in 1796, and was buried in the 
 chapel, where there is a neat tablet of marble erected to his memory, 
 inscribed as follows:— 
 
 ‘ ‘ Sacred to the Memory of 
 Thomas Webb, Esq., 
 
 Lieutenant in the 48th Regiment of Foot, 
 
 Who died the 20th December, 1796, 
 
 Aged 72, 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 201 
 
 And whose remains are interred in the recess. 
 
 As a Soldier 
 
 he was brave—active—courageous, 
 and lost an eye at the siege of Louisbourg, 1758. 
 
 When afterwards enlisted under the banner of Christ, 
 
 As a Christian, 
 he was exemplary 
 for simplicity and godly sincerity. 
 
 As a Preacher, 
 
 he was faithful—zealous—successful, 
 both in Great Britain and America. 
 
 In the latter he founded 
 the first Methodist Churches, 
 and was 
 
 the principal Instrument 
 In erecting this 
 Chapel. 1 ’ 
 
 Mr. Webb was formerly a resident at Bath, from whence he removed 
 to Portland Street, Kingsdown, where he died. He had been, for many 
 years, a useful preacher in the connexion to which he had attached 
 himself; his labours extending to various parts of the kingdom. His 
 life was a comment on the doctrine he taught, and his death, though 
 sudden, fully exemplified the truth of these words, “Mark the perfect 
 man, and behold the upright, for the end of that man is peace.” 
 
 Colston’s Mount, before mentioned, was so called after the first siege 
 of Bristol, from the fact of William Colston, father of the 
 philanthropist, Edward Colston, having the command of it; and being, 
 also, under the Duke of Beaufort, deputy governor of the city and castle. 
 The residence built upon its site in 1823, is still known as “Colston 
 Fort House.” In this neighbourhood Boman coins have been dug up; 
 and adjacent is the Montague, a well known tavern, probably so called 
 from a piece of ground close by, once named “The Montagues,” in 
 compliment to the owners, who founded the religious house at Temple 
 Gate, for the brothers Eremite of St. Augustine. 
 
 THE PARISH OF ST. PHILIP AND JACOB extends to the 
 river Froom on the north; the out parish lies on the south and east 
 sides; and on the west the Castle Precincts. The character of the surface 
 of this parish may be described as almost level, like that of a plain. 
 
 THE PARISH CHURCH. It is not improbable that the first 
 church erected where the present fabric stands, was an Anglo-Norman 
 edifice; and this opinion is strongly confirmed by the fact that, a few 
 
202 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 years ago, on rebuilding the south wall of the chancel, a stone resembling 
 in shape a coffin lid of that period, was discovered on digging the 
 foundation; it is now deposited within the church, where some regard 
 seems to be paid for its preservation. On its upper surface is sculptured 
 a rude Maltese cross, the lower part of which, or that composing the 
 shaft, has disappeared; so, also, have some of the figures with which, on 
 each side, it was once embellished. Round the sides of this relic run 
 a series of intersecting semi-circular arches, clearly establishing the 
 age to which it belongs to be about the twelfth century. But perhaps 
 a stronger proof that the original church was Anglo-Norman, is to be 
 found in the fact that the font used for baptisms in the old structure 
 stands at the west end of the present church, where it is still used for 
 the same purpose; the sculptured figures, once on its sides, have, 
 however, long since disappeared. 
 
 There is reason to believe that the chancel of this church originally 
 comprised the entire structure, and that it was the chapel of a priory of 
 Benedictines here located. The name of its founder is unknown, but as 
 it was certainly parochial as early as the year 1220, we are enabled to 
 trace its history, with some degree of accuracy, from this circumstance, 
 in connection with the various styles of architecture to be found in the 
 building itself. 
 
 Although there is no appearance in the present structure that any 
 portion of the church dates so early as the Anglo-Norman era, we may, 
 with certainty, conclude that it had existence very soon after that period, 
 for there is abundant evidence in the lower stages of the tower, as well 
 as at other portions near the east end of the fabric, to prove this fact. 
 The interior of the tower contains some very beautiful relics of Early 
 English architecture, which, even in their present mutilated state, 
 convey some idea of the finished elegance which characterises that first 
 stage of our national invention in the science of construction. This 
 portion of the church must have been erected shortly after it became 
 parochial, at which time, in all probability, the structure was enlarged, 
 so as to accommodate the great influx of worshippers at its altars, 
 occasioned by this circumstance; such increased convenience, too, I 
 have no doubt, involved also the erection of a nave and its aisles at 
 this early period. The arches of egress from this tower into the church, 
 as well as that from the north aisle of the chancel on the opposite side, 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 203 
 
 are all of pure Early English architecture; and I therefore infer from 
 this circumstance, and the mouldings of the arches which divide the 
 nave from the south aisle, which are older than those on the north side, 
 that a nave, with its aisles, was certainly constructed at this time. Not 
 many years since, two smaller Early English arches remained on each 
 side of the nave at the west end, dividing it from its aisles; but these 
 were destroyed for the purpose of constructing larger arches, so as to 
 make the interior of that part of the church uniform. These smaller 
 arches belonged to an earlier fabric, and doubtless supported the roof, 
 extending the entire length of the nave and chancel; the remains of 
 mouldings of such arches are still existing on the north side of the 
 latter part of the building. 
 
 The arches which now divide the nave from its aisles are evidently of 
 an early character also, rising with piers directly from the floor, without 
 the intervention of columns, capitals, or ornaments of any kind; the 
 mouldings being simply rounded off as in the Early English style. 
 Above these arches a very interesting series of corbel heads remain in 
 the wall, which, with the roof, are of the time of .Richard II.; a more 
 modern cornice being substituted for the original work. The north 
 aisle of the chancel, which is the last portion of the structure erected 
 during the middle ages, was once a chantry founded by John Kemys, 
 and which is, to this day, called the “ Kemys aisle.” It is divided 
 from the chancel by three arches, the soffits of which are panelled. In 
 the pier of one of them are a doorway and steps, which probably 
 conducted to a rood-loft; in a second is a small aumbrye or locker; the 
 third contains the remains of a flight of steps once leading to a beautiful 
 stone pulpit, which, not many years since, was purloined by a deceased 
 churchwarden, and used by him to ornament his garden ! The windows 
 in the Kemys aisle are very good examples of Perpendicular English 
 architecture, in which style this part of the church is built; the date of 
 its erection is probably in the reign of Edward IY. 
 
 The preceding remarks refer to all that remains of this structure 
 which can, with certainty, be ascribed to the architects of the middle 
 ages; the residue being the productions of modern times, and erected 
 by men of small pretensions to excellence in design; at least, in the 
 particular style in which the best portions of this church are built. It 
 underwent a thorough internal repair many years ago, and again in 
 
204 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 1843. At these times of renovation the tasteless west window was 
 constructed, and the ugly pinnacles were added to the structure; the 
 whole of these repairs and restorations were defrayed by voluntary 
 contributions. 
 
 Against the wall, at the west end of the Kemys aisle, and beneath a 
 blank Early English window, is the bust of a figure in armour, of which 
 Mr. Barrett says, “ I have a drawing of a stone figure in a praying 
 posture once kept in the castle church, under which is inscribed, ‘ Carne 
 of Roberte Courtehose mynde yn castelle chyrche.’ This figure is still 
 extant, being fixed in a wall at the upper end of the north aile of St. 
 Philip’s Church.” * In this remark we have another instance in which 
 the easy credulity of the writer of the “ History of Bristol,” made him 
 the tool of the unfortunate Chatterton. Had he been at all acquainted 
 with the subject upon which he was writing, the falsehood of such an 
 inscription as that which he says was placed beneath the above-named 
 drawing, would have been at once detected, for he would have known 
 that this bust could never have been intended to represent Robert, the 
 eldest son of William the Conqueror; “it is not probable that such an 
 unfortunate captive would be complimented with the sculpture of his 
 person.” “ For want of other evidence (Barrett), had recourse to the 
 literary forgeries of Chatterton, to the Pseudo-Rowley, and the fictitious 
 (writings of) Turgot, f which disgrace his work, occasion us to question 
 bis abilities, and prove him to be the dupe of an artful and designing 
 boy, inexpressibly his master and superior.” j: The truth is, I have no 
 doubt that this figure formed part of a sepulchral effigy; the hands are 
 raised in devotion, and the head rests on a cushion, above which is 
 placed a detached stone of smaller dimensions, with a carved coronet of 
 strawberry leaves upon it, a species of decoration unknown in the time 
 of the Anglo-Normans—Edward II. being the first English monarch 
 upon whose crown such an embellishment appears. The armour on 
 this figure, too, is of a kind not earlier than the reign of Henry V. 
 There was a second chantry founded in this church by Robert Forthey.§ 
 
 * Hist, of Bristol, p. 208. 
 
 t For a full account of this writer, see Biographical Notices at tire end of 
 the work. 
 
 t Heath’s Hist, of Bristol, pp. 128 and 45. § Appeudix XXV. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 205 
 
 In the soffit or return of the most easterly pier which separates the 
 Kemys aisle from the chancel of the church, is a singular monumental 
 memorial in Latin on a label in black letter, which commemorates 
 “John Lyltir (or Lyltie) and Margaret his wife;” but beyond this no 
 information is conveyed as to who the deceased were, but that their 
 interment took place near this spot there can be no doubt. The label, 
 on which the inscription is found, surrounds an axe also sculptured in 
 stone; from which circumstance it is highly probable that it was 
 intended to perpetuate the memory of a wood-reve, ranger, or keeper of 
 the neighbouring royal chase or forest of Kingswood—the instrument 
 pourtrayed being emblematical of his calling. In like manner we find 
 a flat stone within the communion rail inscribed round the edge in a 
 border, “ Here lyeth the body of Thomas Pytley, symtims keper ” 
 of the same chase or forest, “ who died the last day of October, 1596,” 
 and on which are sculptured the emblems of his office—a dog and a 
 crossbow; both of which have been sadly mutilated to make way for 
 the insertion of modern inscribed brasses. 
 
 There are no other monuments in this church particularly interesting 
 to the general reader, if we except that to the memory of the late vicar, 
 which is erected in the Perpendicular style of English architecture, 
 finely carved with sculptured ornaments, and has an elegantly wrought 
 canopy, upon a marble slab beneath which is inscribed, 
 
 ‘ 1 To the Memory of 
 The Rev. William Day, A. M. 
 
 Twenty-two years Vicar of this Parish, 
 
 And twenty-six years Chaplain of the Gaol in this City. 
 
 He departed this life 
 The 7th of September, in the year 1S32, 
 
 Aged 66 years. 
 
 His mortal remains are deposited in a Vault in the Chancel of 
 this Church. 
 
 This Monument is erected by Subscription, 
 
 As a mark of reverence for his character, and of 
 The high sense entertained of the faithful, affectionate, and 
 laborious discharge of his Ministerial duties. 
 
 Sacred and sweet the memory of the just 
 Shall long survive him, when he sleeps in dust; 
 
 And such the memory of their Pastor, Day, 
 
 To whom his grateful flock this tribute pay. 
 
 Dear sainted name, inspired with love to God, 
 
 And love to man, the Saviour’s path he trod ; 
 
 Meek, patient, fervent, in his Lord’s employ 
 He laboured, and in labour found his joy; 
 
206 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Fearless, when called the Bible to defend, 
 
 Yet, mild as mercy, man’s unwearied friend, 
 
 He traced the haunts where want and sickness dwell; 
 
 Prayed with the trembling culprit in his cell, 
 
 Consoled the penitent, the pious blest, 
 
 In these his Master served, now shares his Master’s rest.” 
 
 The above inscription is from the pen of the Rev. Thomas Grinfieid, 
 A.M., a well known liberal-minded clergyman of the Church of England, 
 residing at Clifton; who, in 1843, published “Fifty Sermons delivered 
 by the Rev. Robert Hall, M.A., (Baptist Minister at Broadmead Chapel), 
 chiefly during the last five years of his Ministry: from Notes taken at 
 the time of their delivery; ”—which notes, according to the preface of 
 the work, appear to have been taken by himself, chiefly. 
 
 The Rev. William Day was of St. Edmund Hall, Oxford, and 
 obtained the degree of Master of Arts in 1789. The vicarage of St. 
 Philip and Jacob was presented to him by the corporation of Bristol in 
 1810. He was so greatly respected that his funeral was attended not 
 only by nearly all the clergy of the Established Church, but also by 
 many Dissenting ministers, resident hi Bristol and its neighbourhood. 
 
 TPIE WESLEYAN CHAPEL in Old Market Street, which was 
 opened in August, 1817, is capable of accommodating 2300 persons; 
 owes its origin and subsequent support to voluntary contributions. 
 The Baptist and the Tabernacle churches have each a burial ground in 
 Redcross Street, where were once many interesting inscriptions and 
 monuments to the memory of their respective members, but which are 
 now nearly illegible. In Redcross Street is also a spacious building 
 erected about 1814 for the education of several hundred poor children 
 of both sexes, on the British or Lancasterian system; this was likewise 
 raised, and has continued to be supported, on the voluntary principle. 
 
 At the top of Old Market Street, within Lawford’s Gate, stands a 
 hospital, founded in 1402, by John Barstaple, a merchant of this city, 
 which he dedicated to the Holy and Undivided Trinity, and St. George. 
 The original structure has been removed, however, to make way for 
 another almshouse much more modern, erected about 1738; and this 
 again has been partially pulled down to give place to a more finished 
 building for the accommodation of the twenty-two widowers who now 
 inhabit it.* John Barstaple was bailiff of Bristol in 1379; sheriff in 
 
 Ante, p. 62. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 207 
 
 1389; and mayor in 1395, 1401, and 1405; his wife was a daughter 
 of Walter Darby, who built the tower of St. Werburgh’s Church. The 
 almshouse is situated on the south side of Old Market Street, and is 
 tenanted by aged men ; on the opposite side of the same street, and 
 pertaining to the same foundation, is a building consisting of twenty-four 
 apartments, which is inhabited by as many aged women; this is said 
 to owe its foundation to John Barstaple’s wife, Isabella. There is also 
 an almshouse in this street founded by Alderman Stevens, in 1G79 ; it 
 is a substantial stone building, and erected for the accommodation of 
 sixteen freemen’s widows or daughters. The interior is an oblong court, 
 and over the entrance to it from the street is inscribed 
 
 “ Thomas Stevens Esq 
 late Mayor & Alderman 
 Of this City founded & 
 
 Endowed this Almshouse 
 for twelve poor per¬ 
 sons. MDCLXXXVI.” 
 
 At the extreme end of the court, and fronting the entrance, is a bust 
 of the founder, in the stiff attire of the period, and beneath it the 
 initials T.S. with the date 1725—the year when it was probably erected. 
 
 In Old Market Street, beneath the pillars which support the front of 
 a well known tavern called the Stag and Hounds, is annually commenced 
 the Court of Pie Poudre, in the open air, and with great ceremony, on 
 the 30th of September; it is believed to be as old as the reign of King 
 Alfred, by whom it is said it was established. Hither comes the 
 Registrar of the Tolzey Court in procession, attended by a body of 
 policemen, bailiffs, Ac. After the first day the court is adjourned to the 
 office of the Tolzey Court, where it sits for fourteen days. On the last 
 day the sitting is again held in the open air, as on the day of commencing 
 the court, which is then closed until the next 30th of September. 
 Before proceeding to business the members who officiate partake of 
 toasted cheese and metheglin, a kind of refreshment which marks the 
 remotely British antiquity of this branch of civic jurisdiction. 
 
 At the top of Old Market Street stood Lawford’s Gate, which 
 enclosed the old town in that quarter. Beyond it is the out-parish of 
 St. Philip and Jacob, which being large, and becoming very populous, 
 “in the parliament held 1751 an act was passed for dividing the 
 parish, and for erecting a church in the new intended parish; the 
 
208 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 preamble to which recites ‘that the church was not large enough to 
 contain the inhabitants.’ In order to promote that good intention, 
 Thomas Chester, Esq., lord of the manor, gave a piece of ground in 
 Kingswood, the site of the church dedicated to St. George, churchyard, 
 parsonage-house, and a field near it. Dr. Butler, Bishop of Bristol, 
 gave £400 towards the maintenance of the new vicar, besides wluch he 
 obtained £400 more from the Governors of Queen Ann’s Bounty. The 
 corporation of Bristol gave towards building the church £250, provided 
 they should have the presentation of the living, which they now enjoy; 
 the Merchants Society gave £150, and Mr. Onesimus Tyndal £100. . . 
 Thus at the expense of £2853 17s. 7-jd., was the church and vicarage- 
 house completed, and a place of ■worship erected for the resort of the 
 numerous inhabitants of Kingswood, which from being a wild forest 
 for deer is now become a well-inhabited place, with several thousand 
 industrious and civilized people, living happily in their neat cottages. 
 This chase of Kingswood was a demesne of the crown belonging to 
 Bristol castle.” * The first stone of the church was laid March 3rd, 
 1752, by David Peloquin, Esq., mayor of Bristol. 
 
 THE OUT PABISH OF ST. PHILIP AND JACOB, exclusive 
 of the above new parish of St. George, which has been taken out of it, 
 has, since the writer of the above closed his account, very greatly 
 increased the number of its inhabitants, and so extended itself, in all 
 quarters, as to require new churches and other places of worship for the 
 accommodation of its teeming population. At the top of West Street 
 the foundation of Holy Trinity Church was laid September 23rd, 1829, 
 and round it has sprung up a densely peopled district, denominated 
 “New Town.” The church is a good modern example of Perpendicular 
 English architecture, with two turrets at the west end, over a fine 
 window of five lights. It consists of a nave and side aisles, divided by 
 corresponding pillars and arches well-proportioned, and supporting a 
 flat ceiling divided into square compartments; the east window, and 
 also those in the clerestory, deserve commendation. The cost of this 
 church, two-thirds of which was obtained from Parliament, and the rest 
 by voluntary contributions, was £9020 19s. 4d.; it will seat 2000 
 persons, and, it is said, will accommodate about 500 more if necessary. 
 
 Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, pp. 539, 540. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 209 
 
 The National Schools erected in memory of Mrs. Hannah More, for 
 the education of children of both sexes belonging to the labouring and 
 operative classes, stand opposite this church. They were also erected 
 by voluntary contributions, and will contain nearly seven hundred 
 children. The Wesleyan Reformers have erected a chapel at “ New 
 Town,” which they have named Trinity, after the district. 
 
 ST. JUDE’S DISTRICT CHURCH, TRINITY, out parish of St. 
 Philip and Jacob, was founded August 7th, 1848, and opened in June, 
 1849. It consists of a nave, side aisles, and chancel, with a tower at 
 the west end, having a pierced battlement and purfled pinnacles. The 
 windows are all consistent with the style in which the structure is 
 built, which is that of Decorated English architecture. It was erected 
 at a cost of about £2,500, and the sittings are all free. 
 
 ST. LUKE’S CHURCH, another Episcopal erection in the out 
 parish of St. Philip and Jacob, is situated near the Great Western 
 Cotton Works, and was opened for public worship September 19th, 
 1843: it was erected at a cost of £2,700. It has been described as 
 resembling “ in style, the churches of the 13th century, in which more 
 detail and ornament are dispensed with than in any other style.” * 
 Whoever the writer of this description of the structure may have been, 
 it is evident he knew nothing about styles in architecture, as there is 
 nothing whatever in the church that bears any resemblance to “ the 
 churches of the 13th century.” It appears that for want of sufficient 
 funds, the building in question could not be carried out in any style, 
 and therefore it seems that necessity tied the hands of the architect, so 
 that the cheapest possible fabric, without regard to style, resulted. It 
 is presumed that the person who designed this church intended the west 
 window and doorway to be something like those constructed in the 
 Decorated style of English architecture, as perhaps he did those on the 
 north and south sides of the building, but it is impossible to tell; and 
 the east window he probably intended for Perpendicular English 
 architecture; we can only suppose this, however, because of the mullions 
 running directly into the head of the arch. This church will 
 
 * Ecolesi® Bristolian®. 
 
 R 
 
210 
 
 HISTOKY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 accommodate about eight hundred persons, and beneath the structure 
 is a school in which seven hundred children may be taught : it 
 ■was built by voluntary contributions. 
 
 THE CHURCH OF ST. SIMON is at Baptist Mills, another 
 division of the out parish of St. Philip and Jacob, and was opened 
 for Divine worship December 22nd, 1847: it will accommodate about 
 seven hundred persons. It is constructed in the Decorated English style 
 of architecture, at an early period of its practice, and is divided into 
 nave, north aisle with a porch attached, and a chancel; at the east end 
 of the aisle is a tower, surmounted by a good broach spire, 121 feet 
 high: this also was built by the voluntary offerings of the people. 
 
 The Baptists have a chapel in the Trinity district of this out parish, 
 in Thrissell Street: the Wesleyans, and the Wesleyan Reformers have 
 one each at Baptist Mills; the Independents have tw T 0 —one in Anvil 
 Street, Cheese Lane, built in 1834, with a congregation numbering 
 about eight hundred persons, and a Sunday School attended by four 
 hundred children; the other, called Kingsland Chapel, is in the Dings, 
 was built in 1837, and will accommodate about six hundred persons. 
 The Roman Catholics have a chapel dedicated to St. Nicholas, which 
 stands opposite the Gloucester County Prison, and was opened in 1851: 
 all these chapels were erected, with the schools attached to them, by 
 voluntary contributions. 
 
 Barton Regis, the district in which St. Luke’s Church is situated, is 
 mentioned in the reign of William the Conqueror, as a manor belonging 
 to Bristol which “ had declined both in extent of cultivation and in 
 number of inhabitants.”*' Baptist Mills was so named because here 
 the first candidates for the rite of adult baptism and admission into 
 the Baptist churches in Bristol were immersed. Here, too, the first 
 brass was made in England; Lawrence Hill derives its name from a 
 roadside hospital for lepers, dedicated to St. Lawrence. 
 
 THE CASTLE PRECINCTS embrace the space which lies 
 between the parishes of St. Philip and Jacob on the east, and 
 that of St. Peter on the west; the river Frome on the north, and the 
 waters of the Avon on the south. Within these boundaries once stood 
 
 Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. i., p. 323. Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, pp. 201, 2. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 211 
 
 (as the name implies) the Castle of Bristol; * the site of which is now 
 occupied by modern streets, having some allusion, by name, to the 
 great feudal fortress. With the exception of two chapels situated in 
 Castle Green, one in Lower Castle Street, and a new school, recently 
 erected at its western extremity, for St. Peter’s parish, there is nothing 
 of a public character in this district to be described in these pages. 
 
 CASTLE GREEN INDEPENDENT CHAPEL. The first notice 
 of the body of Christians who subsequently worshipped on this spot, 
 dates back to as early as the reign of Charles I., before the year 1G33. 
 In 1G54 the little band met at the house of Scroop, the governor of the 
 castle; and the first pastor of the church, which, it seems probable, 
 afterwards met near Queen Street, at the back of Castle Street, was 
 chosen by this people in 1670, in the person of Mr. John Thompson, 
 son of Mr. Hugh Thompson, minister at Dorchester, and subsequently 
 in the Isle of Wight, who had been a student of Christ Church, Oxford; 
 conformity, however, to Episcopacy, being strictly required by the 
 Government, he chose rather the relinquishing his prospects of 
 University preferment, to violating his conscience, and he left it 
 • accordingly, and returned to his father, at Dorchester. On coming to 
 Bristol he suffered much persecution from Guy Carleton, bishop of the 
 diocese, and other clergymen of inferior rank. Being imprisoned in the 
 common gaol of Newgate by the former, the doctor who attended him 
 remonstrated with the bishop on account of his ill state of health, and 
 the danger his confinement might be to his life; to which the prelate 
 replied, as one of the sheriffs reported, “Mr. Thompson was committed 
 by the law to the common jail for six months, and that there he should 
 abide, and in case the sheriffs should attempt his release, they should 
 answer it at the severity of the law.” The fever, of which the doctor 
 complained to the bishop, daily increased until the 4th of March, 1675, 
 when he died in gaol, as it was feared he would. He was buried, on 
 the following day, in St. Philip’s churchyard, greatly regretted, f 
 
 The second pastor of this church was the Rev. Benjamin Way, who 
 died in November, 1G80, and was buried in St. Philip’s churchyard; 
 
 * Ante, p. 73. 
 
 + Gaston’s Independency in Bristol, pp. 45, 50. This book, recently published 
 by Mr. Mack, Wine Street, contains a history of all the Independent churches 
 of, and the rise of Dissent in, this city. 
 
 R 2 
 
212 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 after which, and during the reigns of Charles II. and the second James, 
 whose Papistical tendencies are well known, its members, in common 
 with those of other Nonconformist churches in this city, suffered much 
 at the hands of the authorities, on account of their religious opinions. 
 The Bristol gaol of Newgate was filled with these unoffending victims 
 of tyranny, who were mercilessly dealt with for the truth’s sake, until 
 the Revolution of 1G88, when liberty of conscience was recognized as 
 the birthright of every human being. Since this memorable period the 
 church meeting at Castle Green has continued to flourish under the care 
 of various pastors; the original chapel has been replaced by the present 
 commodious house for worship, which was erected in 1815, during the 
 ministry of the Rev. William Thorp; the foundation stone of which 
 was laid in the month of March in that year, and it was opened 
 November 22nd following. Mr. Thorp died in 1833, and was buried 
 on the right hand of the entrance door to the chapel, within which, on a 
 mural tablet, is inscribed the following:— 
 
 “ In Memory of 
 The Rev. William Thorp, 
 
 The highly esteemed Pastor 
 Of this Church and Congregation 
 For the period of twenty-seven years, 
 
 Who entered into his Master’s joy 
 On the 7th day of May, 1833, 
 
 Aged 62 years. 
 
 During his Ministry this Chapel 
 Was erected and dedicated to the 
 Triune Jehovah. 
 
 He was an eloquent Man, 
 
 And mighty in the Scriptures.” 
 
 The Rev. William Thorp was born at Masbro’, near Rotherham, in 
 Yorkshire, September 5th, 1771, where his father, the Rev. John Thorp, 
 was pastor of the Independent Congregational Church. He was early 
 designed for the ministry, when he had shown that he was in all 
 respects qualified for it; and he commenced his career as a preacher 
 when but seventeen years of age. He was first invited to Shelley, in 
 Yorkshire; then to Chester; but returning to Yorkshire, was ordained 
 pastor of the Congregational church at Thurlestone, near Pennistone. 
 Whilst there he received an invitation from Derby, and also one from 
 New Court Chapel, Carey Street, London, the latter of which he 
 accepted, and there he remained until 1805, when he was invited to 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 213 
 
 take the oversight of the church meeting at Castle Green, Bristol, which 
 he accepted, and entered upon his pastoral duties there in January, 180G. 
 
 As a preacher Mr. Thorp was eminently popular and extensively 
 known throughout the kingdom, his statements were clear and forcible, 
 his exhibitions of evangelical truth full and rich, his appeals to the 
 conscience energetic, and his pleadings tender and affectionate. “He 
 lived a life of unblemished purity, and one that exemplified the truth 
 of the doctrines which he preached, and the simplicity and sincerity of 
 his own conviction. The furniture of his mind was greatly enlarged by 
 vast and extensive acquisitions. His memory, singularly accurate and 
 retentive—was combined with a matured and discriminating judgment. 
 His acquaintance with historical, ecclesiastical, and theological literature, 
 was minute and extensive; and on all the great and interesting points 
 that regard the essential verities of Christian doctrine, he possessed the 
 most luminous and comprehensive views. His power of argumentation 
 was of the highest order; and he had the rare and enviable faculty of 
 investing an abstruse and complicated train of reasoning with so much 
 of lucid order and expansive illustration as to render even a polemic 
 discussion a source of the richest intellectual enjoyment, as well as 
 conducive to the great ends of religious edification. His mind was 
 eminently fitted for discursive efforts;—possessing a grasp of gigantic 
 power on any subject that had been long the matter of his thoughtful 
 meditation. He could perceive distinctly all the direct and collateral 
 bearings of each successive point of evidence; no link dropped from the 
 chain; and of all, he was in such complete possession as to bring the 
 entire series of the most prolonged argumentation, without any artificial 
 help, to a satisfactory and convincing termination. At the same time, 
 there was everything that tended to confirm and perpetuate impression, 
 in the manner as well as the matter of his discourses; a tone of 
 majesty that could awe—and of tenderness that could melt and subdue. 
 His discourses were eminently imbued with evangelical sentiment; he 
 maintained the harmony and proportions of Christian doctrine; and 
 exhibited with fearlessness and fidelity ‘the whole counsel of God.’” * 
 
 Mr. Thorp’s health had been declining for some years, but the 
 serious result which followed was not apprehended until November, 
 
 Funeral Sermon by Dr. Fletcher. 
 
214 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 1832, when he was confined to his chamber. From that time he 
 lingered in great bodily pain, until death released him from his 
 sufferings, on the day inscribed upon his monument. “ His funeral 
 was a scene that must long be remembered. It consisted of a walking 
 procession, which passed nearly a mile through streets everywhere 
 crowded with spectators, and included ministers and clergymen of 
 almost every persuasion and every rank. Among the parochial clergy 
 who were present were the Rev. Messrs. Biddulph, Whish, and Day, 
 w'ho appeared, with several Dissenting ministers, as pall bearers. The 
 two former of these gentlemen announced from their respective pidpits 
 their intention to improve an event which they regard as no mean loss 
 to the city of Bristol, and to the Church of God.” 
 
 Nearly opposite to the above chapel is one newly erected, belonging 
 to the Methodist New Connexion, a body of Christians whose 
 founder, the Rev. Alexander Kilham, seceded from the connexion 
 of the Rev. John Wesley, about sixty years ago. In Lower Castle 
 Street, formerly called the Castle Ditch, is an Independent Chapel, 
 built in 1822, in which Divine service is performed in the Welsh 
 language. At the western extremity of Castle Green are the National 
 Schools belonging to the adjacent parish of St. Peter, for boys and girls, 
 which were built and opened in 1855; and on the opposite side of the 
 street is an old tavern known by the sign of the Cat and Wheel—a 
 corruption of the St. Catherine Wheel. 
 
 THE PARISH OF ST. PETER is small, having the river Frome 
 on the north, and the Avon for its southern boundary; on the east lie 
 the Castle Precincts; while on the west, the upper end of Bridge Street, 
 that of St. Mary-le-Port Street, Wine Street, and Union Street, to the 
 river Frome, is the extent of its limits on that side; with Castle Mill 
 Street, the Broad and Narrow Weirs, to some distance beyond the 
 bridge crossing the last-named stream, at River Street, out parish of 
 St. Philip and Jacob; close to which stands the Poor House of the 
 Society of Friends. 
 
 THE CHURCH IS DEDICATED TO ST. PETER AND ST. 
 PAUL; and although it has some parts remaining of very ancient 
 date, there is little in its present appearance to interest the inquirer. 
 The oldest portion is the tower, the walls of which are of Anglo-Norman 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 215 
 
 architecture, and is, probably, the only part of the original structure 
 now standing, the rest of the building being of a much later date. The 
 entrance doorway at the west end, beneath the tower, is in the 
 Perpendicular style of English architecture ; and so, also, are most of 
 the windows in that part of the structure, as well as those on the south 
 side of the church; but nearly all the remainder in the building are a 
 very indifferent imitation. 
 
 The interior of this church is divided into a nave with its aisles, and 
 a chancel : the former are separated by small clustered columns with 
 plain capitals, and arches in the Perpendicular English style. The north 
 aisle, which is next the street, is narrower than that on the south side 
 of the structure, probably from the fact of the thoroughfare having 
 been, at some time, made wider; perhaps in 1749, when “ the church 
 was decaying and out of repair, and a faculty was obtained to repair 
 and beautify the whole.”* The roof of the nave and its aisles describe 
 Perpendicular English arches, which are sparingly divided into squares, 
 by libs springing from corbel heads, above which an embattled moulding 
 extends from east to west of the nave and south aisle only. The 
 windows in the latter are expansive and good, and those in the north 
 aisle once were, no doubt, equally so, but having been altered or 
 renewed for the reason above assigned, they now betoken great poverty 
 of design in the architect. 
 
 Against the north-west side, at the entrance to this church, a very 
 interesting discovery was made about ten years ago. On removing an 
 inscribed tablet for some purpose of convenience, it was found that 
 behind it was concealed a very elegant, though mutilated niche, which 
 had been constructed after the most costly maimer of the last stage of 
 English architecture. Every part of it was richly embellished with gold 
 leaf and gorgeous colouring of ultramarine; the whole being wrought 
 with the most elaborate fidelity to truth, and its exquisite canopy was 
 chiselled with an artistic skill which ought to have secured it a better 
 fate. In it, in all probability, stood a figure of the Virgin, which has 
 disappeared; and so has the canopy once standing over her, with all 
 the costly adornments that made this niche beautiful. It is now filled 
 by a benefaction table, and has been— whitewashed! 
 
 Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 518. 
 
216 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 In tlie wall of the north aisle is a turret in which is a staircase 
 formerly leading to the rood loft, and a small arched doorway at the 
 east end of this aisle conducts to a room of limited dimensions, situated 
 over another apartment now used as a vestry; in the latter is a good 
 square-headed Perpendicular English window, of four lights on the 
 north side. These rooms were probably an oratory and residence for 
 the priest who officiated at the altar of the Blessed Mary of Bellhouse, 
 to whose honour a chapel or chantry was founded at the east end of 
 the south aisle in the year 1500, by a fraternity called by that name, 
 and then newly constituted; probably, from the analogy of the name, it 
 may be inferred that this brotherhood was nothing more than a society 
 of ringers, similar to that established at the church of St. Stephen. 
 To this charity William Spicer gave a garden and a house in Merchant 
 Street, and others contributed towards its support in like manner. In 
 it, also, John Estcrfield, who died in 1507, established a yearly obiit to 
 be solemnised here for ever, on the 18th of February.* There is no 
 east window in the chancel of this church visible, it being blocked up 
 by an unsightly wooden altar-piece in the Corinthian Order of 
 architecture : the columns which support the organ gallery are an 
 imitation of Roman Ionic; and windows have been made in the roof. 
 There is an ugly cobbled entrance to this church, on the north side, 
 purporting to be in the Grecian manner ! 
 
 The monumental memorials in this church are interesting. Inserted 
 in the floor at the east end of the south aisle is a brass engraved with 
 the figure of a priest in Eucharistic vestments, holding between his 
 uplifted hands the sacramental emblems. This, which is the most 
 valuable brass of a priest now existing in Bristol, commemorates Robert 
 Loude, who was rector of this parish in 1446; he died February 23rd, 
 1461. Near it, on the floor of the church, lies a cadaver or skeleton of 
 a man, represented in stone, wrapped in grave-clothes, tied at the head 
 and feet, the whole well-executed and in good preservation. There is 
 nothing to inform us for whom this figure was intended. 
 
 In the north aisle is an altar-tomb inserted in the wall, adorned with 
 sculpture of a late date in the Perpendicular English style of 
 architecture. The spandrils of the arch above bear shields in the centre 
 
 Appendix XXVI. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 217 
 
 of fruit and foliage': on them are the initial letters jjt, and I.A. in 
 old English characters, but it is not known who are commemorated by 
 them: probably one or more members of the Aldworth family. 
 
 At the east end of the south aisle is a costly monument surmounted 
 by the arms of the Merchant Venturers, and several figures, apparently 
 intended to represent the cardinal virtues; beneath which, on a pedestal 
 supported by Corinthian columns, is inscribed in Latin— 
 
 “ Praise God—Keep the Faith—Watch and Pray—and it shall be well.” 
 
 Kneeling at a desk are two figures in the attitude of prayer, one 
 representing an alderman in his robes of office, and the other a female 
 attired according to the fashion of the times. Above the male effigy is 
 an inscription (in Latin) thus:— 
 
 “ Robert Aldworth 
 Merchant and Senator 
 of Bristol; 
 
 Born | M , ( 8 ) 1561 
 
 Died } November j fi j 1634 
 
 The Trumpet shall sound, and 1 tho’ dead, shall Live. ” 
 
 Over the female is the following inscription in English:— 
 
 “ Martha Aldworth the loving and belov’d wife 
 of Robert Aldworth, Merchant Adventurer, and 
 Alderman of this city of Bristol, lietli here 
 under interred, to whose pious and everlasting 
 Memory, and as a perpetual testimonie of his 
 dear love and her matchless virtues, her 
 sorrowful surviving husband aforesaid, 
 hath dedicated this monument. 
 
 Obijt 2d die, Maij \ Ano Dni 1619 
 ( rtitat suae 58 ” 
 
 In a recess behind the male figure, but on the front of the tomb, it is 
 recorded that 
 
 “ In the Vault under this Monument 
 lies (with Martha his Wife, and the following 
 Relations) Robt Aldworth Mercht and 
 Alderman of this City : Who leaving no 
 Issue bequeath’d all his Estate to Giles Elbridge 
 Mercht likewise of the City, Who married 
 his Niece.” 
 
 Then follow the names of nineteen relatives who lie entombed below, 
 among which is that of “John Elbridge, died Feb. 22nd, 1738.” He 
 
218 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 was the founder of the Bristol Royal Infirmary. The centre compart¬ 
 ment beneath the figures has a Latin inscription, which, in English, is, 
 
 “ Although this statue of the venerable man is silent, 
 learn, 0 Reader and beholder who he was, 
 a famous merchant, a successful voyager through 
 many seas, seeking rather the glory of his country 
 and the relief of the poor than thirsting for 
 the accumulation of hoards of wealth, 
 and therefore by the will of God, 
 
 he became richer, an exemplary chief-magistrate of the city, 
 full of honour and fidelity, serving Christ and God 
 according to the teaching of the Church of England, 
 
 (which was dear to his heart),—he closed his life in peace 
 and now enjoys eternal peace beyond the stars.” 
 
 Iii the right hand division under the female is inscribed in English, 
 
 “ What riches, grace, and nature, could bestow. 
 
 In her that’s here interr’d as streams did flow, 
 
 A second Martha one whose faith did even 
 Wing’d with hope and love mount up to heaven ; 
 
 Here sweetly sleeps her dust, her soul divine, 
 
 Is fled from hence and now above doth shine ; 
 
 As loathing earth should longer kept in thrall, 
 
 From Christ, to be with whome is best of all; 
 
 Where now she lives in bliss and left us here, 
 
 To mourn her loss yet joy to meet here there.” 
 
 There are three other inscriptions on this tomb, which shew that it has 
 been as many times renovated; the first of these records that “ This 
 Monument was beautified at the charge of Mr. Thos. Moore, Merchant 
 1706.” The second, that this was done by “Mrs. Ann Hort, 1749;” 
 and the third by the “ Dowager Lady Smyth, 1807.” There are various 
 devices sculptured on this tomb, such as merchant ships in full sail, Ac., 
 the whole of the monument being richly embellished with gold and 
 colour. 
 
 There are but few particulars preserved of Robert Aldworth, 
 interesting to the reader, yet he was a merchant of importance in the 
 times in which he lived, and he might have retired altogether from 
 business with a competent fortune, but that he seems to have preferred 
 being engaged in extensive mercantile transactions, merely 7 because they 
 furnished the means by which he was enabled to make others happy and 
 comfortable; and gave him the opportunity of relieving the wants of the 
 distressed, and lessening the miseries of the indigent. “ He was a great 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 219 
 
 adventurer in trade and successful in merchandise.” * He erected an 
 almshouse, and also a parsonage near his own residence (now St. Peter’s 
 Hospital) for the clergyman of the parish, on the right hand side of the 
 entrance to that fine old mansion. Both buildings have been for many 
 years destroyed. 
 
 John Elbridge was comptroller of the customs for the port of 
 Bristol, but the date of his appointment cannot now be traced. The 
 place of his birth, too, is equally uncertain, but there is every reason to 
 believe that he was a native of the parish of St. Ann, in the island of 
 Jamaica; he built the house upon his estate at Cote, in the parish of 
 Westbury. He expended and bequeathed, altogether, the sum of 
 £58,000 in public charities within the walls of old Bristol. Of this 
 large amount, £52,000 was left by will, which document he kept by 
 him for many years, having a reluctance to sign it. This was discovered 
 only just in time for him to execute it, which he did with difficulty, 
 and by making his mark only! 
 
 On a monument full of rich carvings, and once as full of gold and 
 colour, beneath a lofty canopy supported by pillars, is the effigy of a 
 female extended at full length, with her hands upraised as in prayer, 
 and habited according to the fashion of the time. This tomb is situated 
 close to the last-mentioned, and is thus inscribed over the figure : — 
 
 ‘ ‘ This Monument was Erected to 
 the Memory of a Maiden Lady, an 
 Ancestor of the Family of the 
 Newton’s of Barr’s Court in the 
 County of Gloucester, about 
 250 Years since. And Repaired 
 by Mrs. Archer Sister to the late 
 S r Michael Newton, 1750.” 
 
 The repairs referred to in this inscription seem to have consisted of 
 painting the effigy of the deceased, and whitewashing the monument, 
 arms and all! 
 
 At the east end of the north aisle is a tomb on which is represented 
 an alderman and his lady kneeling at a desk as in prayer, beneath an 
 arched canopy, with this inscription:— 
 
 “ To the Memory of the Worshipfull Mr. George Harrington, some time 
 Mayor and Alderman of the Citie. Who departed this life the second of 
 Janvarie 1639.” 
 
 Barrett's Hist, of Bristol, p. CSS. 
 
220 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Mr. Harrington was a brewer, whose arms are placed upon this 
 monument. There is a portrait of him at the Council House. 
 
 On a slab in the south aisle, near the west end, is inscribed:— 
 
 “ To the Memory 
 
 Of Henry Northall of this Parish, Whitetawer, 
 who deceased 
 
 May 9th, Anno j ^So. 
 
 And also of John Northall sonne of the said 
 Henry Northall, who deceased, 
 
 Feb. 20th Anno j ° 0 ™ nJ 1669 „ 
 
 l Httatis suae 39. 
 
 Near the west door is the following inscription : — 
 
 “ Underneath ly’s 
 Capt Richd Stear with Eugene 
 His Brother, Both drown’d out of a 
 Boat near Blacknore ® 20 tl * of August 
 1722, with 5 more with them. Riclid 
 Aged 23 & Eugene 10 Years. 
 
 Their fate was hard yet God y gave “ breath, 
 
 Can which way he doth please bring to death ; 
 
 Chastisements of this nature’s very tart, 
 ch 
 
 The thoughts of w would melt a stony heart : 
 
 Our trouble’s for "y B very great but yet 
 ’Tis not immortal Children wee beget.” 
 
 In the middle of the floor of the nave is a brass plate inscribed: — 
 
 “ Matthew Wasbrough, 
 
 Died 21st Oct. 1781, 
 
 Aged 28.” 
 
 Matthew Wasbrough, an ingenious and very promising mechanician, 
 was the son of William and Mary Wasbrough, and was born in the 
 house now occupied by Messrs. Thomas Hale and Sons, brass founders, 
 &c., No. 3, Narrow Wine Street, in this parish, and was baptised at the 
 church of St. Peter, November 18th, 1753. His father was at the 
 time in partnership with Mr. Roger Rice, who had established this, the 
 oldest business of the kind in Bristol, on the premises referred to, in 
 1726, where it has ever since been carried on by some member of the 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 221 
 
 family until the month of March, 1848, when Mr. Eice Wasbrough 
 (who also has an inscription to his memory in this church), the last of 
 that name connected with it, died, and the late Mr. Thomas Hale, who 
 had long been associated with him, became the head of the firm. To 
 this business Matthew Wasbrough was, at a proper age, introduced, and 
 clock-making forming at that time an important branch of the trade, 
 and the mind of the future inventor running in the direction of machi¬ 
 nery, he was very naturally led to investigate the subject with a view 
 to the introduction of improvements in his own peculiar department of 
 it. He soon conceived the idea of making a machine that would drive 
 the whole of the lathes employed in the manufactory to which he was 
 attached (some twenty-five in number), and he accordingly, after much 
 patient toil, constructed a steam-engine (which he ereoted in a small 
 building still remaining, with indications of the fact yet to be seen) 
 beneath the clockmakers’ workshops. To this machine he added the 
 jly-wlieel , which was intended to produce a steady and uniform force, and 
 of which I shall show that he was the inventor. At page 157 of Hugo 
 Eeid’s account of the steam engine is given “ A Sketch of the double¬ 
 acting Steam Engine of James Watt, invented by him in 1782;” which, 
 however, is nearly three years after Matthew Wasbrough had patented 
 his invention, which is described as his “New invented machine 
 or piece of mechanism, which, when applied to a steam engine, 
 or any reciprocal movement, produces a circular or rotative movement 
 without the medium of a water-wheel.” This is, unquestionably, the 
 first mention of such an invention having been perfected; the date of the 
 patent of which is March 10th, 1779. It appears, however, that about 
 the same time other master-minds were directed to the same subject; 
 but Matthew Wasbrough was in advance of them all. Picard’s rotative 
 motion was patented in 1780 ; and that of James Watt followed, being 
 “Inrolled 23rd of February, 1782 ;” that is, as already intimated, 
 nearly three years after that of Matthew Wasbrough ! There can, 
 therefore, it is conceived, be no error in ascribing the invention of 
 the fly-wheel or rotative motion of the steam engine, to a Bristol citizen; 
 although it has been customary to award that honour to the Birmingham 
 mechanist, James Watt. 
 
 Towards the close of 1780 Mr. Wasbrough communicated with the 
 Commissioners of the Navy on the subject of his newly patented steam 
 
222 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 engine, and on January 31st, 1781, he received an order to erect one 
 without delay, at the Deptford Victualling Yard, for the purpose of 
 grinding corn. The engine was at once commenced, and was progressing 
 favourably; the castings necessary to complete it were ordered in 
 Bristol by the inventor, as directed by the authorities at the Navy 
 Board, and great expense had been incurred by him in the work, when, 
 through the intervention of a jealous official, he received, in the follow¬ 
 ing July, with much astonishment, and when his engine was nearly 
 finished, an intimation that it would not be required ! Disappointed 
 in realizing his long cherished hopes of bringing his invention into 
 public notice, under the auspices of the Government, and suffering at 
 the time from severe indisposition, brought on by anxiety and the 
 pecuniary losses he had sustained in perfecting his invention, he was 
 seized with a fever, of which he died as stated above, and when he had 
 but just completed his twenty-eighth year. “ The public have to deplore 
 in him the loss of one of the first mechanics in the kingdom, whose 
 early genius brought to perfection that long wished for desideratum, the 
 applying the powers of the fire engine to rotular movements. Upon 
 these principles he lived long enough to complete several ingenious 
 pieces of mechanism, of which the corn and flour mills of Messrs. 
 Young and Co., in Lewin’s Mead, are striking monuments of his ex¬ 
 tensive abilities. His name, therefore, will be handed down with 
 veneration to the latest posterity.” * 
 
 “ Without wishing to detract from the great merit and genius dis¬ 
 played by the late Mr. Watt, in maturing the powers of steam, and 
 applying it through the medium of mechanism to the various purposes 
 which excite the admiration and astonishment of the world, we think it 
 not inconsistent to notice the claims of a gentleman, formerly our fellow- 
 citizen, to the honour of that invention on which the chief utility of 
 the steam engine depends, viz:—the rotative motion, which Mr. Watt 
 lived long enough to perfect in all its various principles and modifications, 
 whilst his contemporary was prematurely cut off; and were it not for 
 the record inserted in one of our predecessor’s papers (alluding to the 
 notice of his death, &c., given above), perhaps there are but few living 
 who are acquainted with a fact which affords an additional proof that 
 
 Felix Farley’s Bristol Journal. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 223 
 
 Bristol lias had a due share in promoting the progress of the arts and 
 sciences in this instance.” * * * § 
 
 Mr. Watt himself says, upon the invention of the rotative motion, 
 “One of Matthew Wasbrough’s rotative engines was erected at 
 Birmingham, for a rolling mill, and was much talked of. This set me 
 again to think upon the subject and brought to my remembrance my 
 former meditations upon the crank, the date of which I cannot 
 ascertain.” And again he says, “ I have at times had my thoughts a 
 good deal upon the subject, but I have not hit upon anything decisive.” 
 From Watt’s own statement, then, it is clear that Matthew Wasbrough 
 had not only applied the crank to produce *a rotative motion, but that he 
 had also erected a steam engine at Birmingham with loth in use, while 
 Watt had only been thinking how the one might be made to produce 
 the other! But further he says “ Matthew had added a fly-wheel, which, 
 as far as I know, was the first time it had been employed for that 
 purpose —the obtaining the motion in question ! t 
 
 “ In the churchyard was buried the poet Savage, who having 
 experienced a variety of good and bad fortune, at length died in 
 Newgate, and was buried here, Newgate being in this parish.” | 
 
 “Richard Savage (was) a man whose writings entitle him to an 
 eminent rank in the classes of learning, and whose misfortunes claim a 
 degree of compassion, not always due to the unhappy, as they were 
 often the consequences of the crimes of others, rather than his own.Ӥ 
 He was born January 10th, 1G98, his mother being the Countess of 
 Macclesfield, and his reputed father the Earl Rivers. He was sent to 
 be educated in grammar to a school near St. Albans, on leaving which 
 he was apprenticed to a shoemaker. Some writers believe him to be an 
 impostor, and not at all connected with any member of the English 
 nobility; be this as it may, he became dissatisfied with his employment, 
 and used every art to insinuate himself into the favour of the lady he 
 was determined to consider as his mother; who, in her turn, seemed as 
 determined to reject his advances, denying that he was her son, who 
 she said had died early. Failing to obtain a parent’s recognition from 
 
 * Bristol Gazette. 
 
 t Watt’s letters to his son quoted in Muirhead’s Life of James Watt, p. 281, &c. 
 
 J Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 519. 
 
 § Johnson’s Lives of the Poets, vol. iii., p. 124. 
 
224 
 
 HIST0KY OF BKISTOL. 
 
 her, he turned his attention to poetry and the stage, and was just 
 emerging from obscurity and poverty, when, by a midnight brawl, 
 in which, with some dissolute companions, he was concerned, his life 
 and reputation were imperilled by a man being killed in the affray, and 
 himself and another tried for murder, found guilty of the crime, and 
 condemned to death, but ultimately pardoned by the king. Savage was 
 patronized by Lord Tyrconnel, who granted him a pension of £200, 
 which he soon forfeited by quarrelling with his friend; after this he 
 had recourse to satire and eulogy to support himself, but both at length 
 failing him, and his habits becoming dissolute and expensive, beyond 
 his means, he was arrested for debt, at Bristol, in January, 1743, and 
 after suffering six months’ incarceration, he died, in confinement, of 
 fever, the last time he was seen alive being on July 31st, 1743. He 
 was buried at the expense of Mr. Dagge, the keeper of the prison, who 
 had treated him with great humanity, and supported him at his own 
 table. In the parish register occurs the following entry:—“Savage, 
 Bichard. The Poet buried 2nd (August) 1743.” 
 
 At the back of St. Peter’s Hospital is situated the completest 
 specimen of early domestic architecture (as a whole) in Bristol. It 
 stands on the site of the once “magnificent dwelling of the Hortons,” * 
 which was built apparently towards the close of the fourteenth century, 
 occupying the whole of the ground to the river Avon. It was 
 bequeathed, in 1435, by Thomas Horton, to his two sons, Thomas and 
 Walter, who occupied it in separate portions; and it continued so to be 
 until 1580, when Sir George Horton, knight, who became the sole 
 owner, sold it to Henry Hewton, Esq. (afterwards Sir Henry Hewton, 
 knight, of Barr’s Court), none of whose family, however, appear to have 
 occupied it. In 1G02 it was the property of Robert Chambers, Esq., 
 who sold it to Robert Aldworth, in 1607; when it underwent such 
 extensive alterations, that he is said to have re-erected it wholly, and as 
 such it appears at this day. This re-erection, however, could not apply 
 to the whole of the structure, for the three gables at the east end of the 
 building undoubtedly form part of the original mansion of the Hortons, 
 which are constructed in the style of architecture prevailing before the 
 Reformation, whilst every other part is subsequent to it. After 
 
 Appendix XXVII. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 225 
 
 Aldworth’s death it descended to his relative, Giles Elbridge, and it 
 afterwards was occupied by different families, until it ceased to be a 
 private residence, and became appropriated to the purposes of trade ; it 
 being, in 1666, “Mr. Beachim’s sugar house,” which it had been 
 previous to this date, and was the first establishment of the kind, in 
 Bristol of which we have any notice, and it continued a sugar refinery 
 until, in 1689, it was conducted as such by Edward Colston and others 
 his partners in the business. It was subsequently called “ The Mint,” 
 because here, in 1696 and following year, the local coinage bearing the 
 date of those years was struck, having succeeded the preceding coins 
 minted in the neighbouring castle. The adaptation of the building to 
 its present use occurred in 1698, when “that spacious and general 
 asylum for the poor, the old, the infirm, the diseased, and the helpless,” 
 was located in the old mansion of Robert Aldworth, where he lived and 
 died, and which has ever since been known as “ Saint Peter's Hospital, 
 the Public Poor-house of the City.”* 
 
 Opposite to this building is St. Peter’s rump, or the well of St. Edith, 
 which, towards the close of the fifteenth century, was surmounted 
 by a castellette, the latter being built, and the former sunk, by William 
 Spencer, who was mayor of Bristol in 1474, and also executor to William 
 Canynges’ will. This interesting little structure was removed in 1765, 
 and erected by Sir C. Hoare, Bart., over the source of the River Stour, 
 at his seat in Wiltshire, to which place the Bristol High Cross was also 
 conveyed a few years afterwards. 
 
 The first mention I find of the gaol of Newgate is in the year 1148, 
 when the prisoners confined there are distinctly mentioned; and in 1472 
 the Earl of Oxford w r as there incarcerated. In 1516 it is said that 
 “there was a custom in Bristol for relief of the prisoners in Newgate, 
 that every person of the Country that brought anything to be sold in 
 the market should pay to the Jaylor for pitching down of every potor 
 sack one half-penny; but because the Jaylors converted it to their own 
 profit, Mr. Richard Abbington, with the consent of the Mayor, John 
 Jay, Esq., did put down this disordered abuse and custom, and to ease 
 the country people, purchased at his own costs a perpetuall stipend, to 
 find the prisoners victualls, wood, and straw.” f The immortal John 
 
 Johnson’s Transactions of the Corporation of the Poor, 
 t Bristol Memorialist, p. 40. 
 
 8 
 
226 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Howard, wbo visited this prison in 1775, describes it as “standing in 
 the midst of the city, (and as) too small for the general number of 
 prisoners ; ” and he adds, “ This close prison was white without and foul 
 within.” The building of which Mr. Howard writes was not the 
 original gaol, but one constructed in 1691 by a rate of sixpence in the 
 pound upon the inhabitants, and ought, therefore, to have been more 
 commodious; it was, however, abandoned in 1820 for the new City Gaol 
 erected on the New Cut, near Bathurst’s Basin.* 
 
 The Swan Inn, an hostelry noticed by William Wyrcestre as standing 
 in Wine Street, is probably the same as that situated partly in Bridge 
 Street, and partly in that of St. Mary-le-Port, in this parish, especially 
 as he mentions the latter thoroughfare in the same passage. The gables 
 rising over the back of this once fine building have beautifully carved 
 barge boards, one of which, in open work, directly refers the erection 
 of the house to the period mentioned by the old topographer—the 
 middle of the fifteenth century; the rest of this part of the structure is 
 of the Elizabethan period. 
 
 It was common in the middle ages for noblemen to have their hostels 
 or inns in provincial towns, and to call them by the arms, badge, or 
 cognizance, belonging to the family owning them. The sign set up in 
 this case, however, is far more likely, I conceive, to have reference to a 
 partizan, than to a noble of the house of Lancaster, during the wars of 
 the Boses; and perhaps to an old servant of the Bohuns, who was 
 interested in the success of the Lancastrian party; Eleanor, daughter 
 and co-heir of Humphrey Bohun, Earl of Hereford and Northampton, 
 having been married to Thomas, of Woodstock, and thus became 
 connected with the house of Lancaster; the swan, ducally gorged and 
 chained, being the cognizance of the Bohuns, earls of Hereford and 
 Northampton; and further, the swan, ducally crowned, was the badge 
 of King Henry IV. 
 
 Inclosed within the premises occupied by Messrs. Billier & Co., at 
 the corner of Peter Street and Chequer or Church Lane, is a stone 
 structure about fifteen feet square, which bears evidence of its having 
 been erected subsequent to the reign of Richard II., certainly not before 
 that era; and as the Tudor, or four-centred arch, occurs in the building, 
 
 Appendix XXVIII. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 227 
 
 the super-structure may have been rebuilt even so late as the reign of 
 Edward VI., when in the month of May, 1549, there was a great rising 
 in the city, and when, also, “most part of the gates were made new At 
 this spot was certainly an outlet or portal, not forming, however, any 
 portion of the contiguous castle defences or outworks, but built in a 
 line with, and belonging to, the wall which protected the city. 
 According to William Wyrcestre the town Avails extended from Old 
 Gate, in Narrow Wine Street, through Chequer Lane. If so .(and I see 
 no reason to doubt it), it is not unlikely that Messrs. Hillier’s 
 house now incloses a small postern or city gate, situated at an angle 
 of the walls which crossed from this site to the west of St. Peter’s 
 Church, and thence to the east end of the spot now occupied by Bridge 
 Street. There is a newel or circular stone staircase within this small 
 building, which seems to refer the structure to the purpose above 
 mentioned. The walls are of great thickness, and so strongly cemented 
 together, that several days have been occupied in perforating one of 
 them for a doorway to form a communication from one part of the 
 super-structure to another. 
 
 In the cellar beneath this building are two stone door-cases in the 
 Perpendicular English style of architecture—one leading from the 
 apartments above, and by the other is entered a subterranean passage 
 extending towards the city, but Avhich, although tra\'ersed a considerable 
 distance, led to no satisfactory result. It would be interesting to 
 connect it with the old Guard-house, in Wine Street, because as there 
 still remains a similar passage leading from the Council House to the 
 late Castle Bank, and once extended from thence to the river at the 
 bottom of High Street, it would show that the whole of these vaulted 
 passages had the same termination, and that they not only communicated 
 with the seat of civil judicature at the Council House, or Tolsey, but, in 
 all probability, Avith the military tribunal also, which had its authority in 
 the castle. 
 
 At the end of the Broad Weir, towards the east, is Elle Bridge, from 
 which Ellbroad Street receives its name; close by stood the ducking- 
 stool—an object of terror to scolding ladies. It consisted of a post 
 erected in the river Frooro, with a transverse beam moving on a snivel, 
 and a chair fixed at one end of it, into Avhich the unfortunate delinquent 
 was placed, and turned torvards the middle of the stream; when this 
 
 s 2 
 
228 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 was done she was at the mercy of her tormentors, and punished by 
 them as they pleased, with sundry immersions in the water beneath, 
 according to what was regarded as her desert for the improper exercise 
 of the unruly member she possessed ; the last time its use was required 
 was in 1718. It has since been removed, no doubt because ladies have 
 grown wiser. 
 
 There was a bridge over the river Froom into Merchant, or, as it was 
 then called, Marshal] Street, because the soldiers from the castle (as 
 already stated) were marshalled here before marching to the downs to 
 exercise.* Close to the prison and gate of Newgate was the Mill 
 Bridge, at the bottom of Castle Mill Street, so named because here 
 stood the castle mill, driven by water which passed from the adjacent 
 mill pond, or Broad Weir, into the river Froom. 
 
 The Dolphin Inn, once standing in this parish (on the site since 
 known as the Bush stables), gave its name to the thoroughfare in 
 which it was located. In the great room of this tavern the first Baptist 
 Nonconformists in Bristol, whose successors now worship in Broadmead 
 Meeting under the pastorate of the Bev. Nathaniel Haycroft, M.A., 
 held their meetings, and laid the foundation of that and other Baptist 
 churches in the city. 
 
 THE PARISH OF ST. MARY-LE-PORT is very small, the only 
 public buildings in it being the parish church, and a chapel belonging 
 to the Independent Nonconformists, situated in Bridge Street. The 
 former, which is dedicated to the Virgin Mary, derives its name of 
 St. Mary of the Port, from there having once been an embankment, or 
 wharf, descending gradually from the vicinity of this structure to the 
 river Avon, near the then margin of which it stands. This was the 
 quay or port where ships discharged their cargoes. 
 
 Before the present channel for the river Froom was made, and the 
 quay formed at the back of Prince Street, the Grove, &c., the usual 
 place for unloading ships was on the Welsh Back, where the old Custom 
 House (for many years parted off into dwellings and shops), stood until 
 the year 1855, when it was pulled down to make way for some 
 warehouses erected upon its site. Bridge Street is built upon 
 
 Ante, p. 17. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 229 
 
 the spot once occupied by the ancient shambles or flesh-market. 
 The latter was a place of some importance in the middle ages, 
 and was once called “Worship Street, (because) it was a street 
 of honour and dignity, on account of the merchandize of wool 
 landed there, being a port for loading ships, and having the king’s 
 cellars,” or Custom House for his prisage of wool and wine.* These 
 Shambles were in a line with St. Nicholas Street, and on their removal, 
 in 17G5, the cellars referred to, which appear to have been long disused, 
 probably for more than three centuries, were again brought to light; 
 and from the resemblance they bore to ecclesiastical buildings—the 
 groining of their roofs springing from single columns, and branching 
 out like those of our churches—they were supposed to be the remains 
 of the crypt of a religious house or monastic establishment, which, 
 however, was a great mistake, f 
 
 CHURCH OF ST. MARY-LE-PORT. Although the earliest record 
 of an ecclesiastical foundation upon the site where this structure stands 
 dates from the year 1170, when William, Earl of Gloucester, is said to 
 have commenced building a church here, there is no part of the present 
 fabric which can lay claim to anything like such high antiquity. 
 Nearly all the structure now existing has undergone such extensive 
 repair, and been so much altered in its appearance, as to leave it quite 
 a matter of doubt whether any part of it is older than the tower, which 
 is built in the Perpendicular style of English architecture, and was 
 probably erected about the middle of the fifteenth century. The 
 columns and arches dividing the nave from the north aisle and the 
 chancel, appear to be of the same age, and are of good design. The 
 windows in the upper part of the tower are particularly good; those in 
 the church are bad. The small octagonal turret at the south-west angle 
 of the former is a species of embellishment very common to the church 
 towers of the West of England. 
 
 Several chantries were founded in this church, the principal of which 
 was that endowed by John Inhyng, in 1457, and dedicated to St. 
 Katharine. To support this charity, he gave, by will, fifteen shops, and 
 a rack in Bear Lane, Temple Street, and a house there for mass to be 
 
 * William Wyrcestre, and Appendix II. 
 t See a description of similar cellars at page 16. 
 
230 
 
 HISTOEY OF BKISTOL. 
 
 celebrated for ever on St.Valentine’s day, on which occasion eight priests 
 were to attend, each of whom received four-pence. In 1417 Phillis 
 Holloway gave, by will, twenty pounds to found a chapel here for a 
 priest to pray for her soul; and John Newman settled the rent of a 
 certain tenement in the Shambles, for another mass. 
 
 In the south wall of the chancel, in a turret, is a flight of steps 
 which now leads to the pulpit, but which formerly conducted to the 
 rood-loft. The altar-piece is of Corinthian architecture ! In the centre 
 aisle, near the chancel, stands the brass eagle or lettern which once 
 belonged to the cathedral in this city.* It was sold for old brass, but 
 an advanced price being offered for it to-prevent its being broken up, 
 it was purchased by Mr. W. Ady, and presented to this church. The 
 original price for which it was sold by Dean Layard was something 
 over twenty-seven pounds; its weight is six hundred and ninety-two 
 pounds; and it stood in the cathedral one hundred and nineteen years ! 
 The inscription placed upon it by Mr. Ady stipulates that it shall 
 remain in the church of St. Mary-le-Port for ever. 
 
 A recessed altar-tomb of Perpendicular English architecture is in the 
 north aisle, and is the only one in the church having any claim to 
 antiquity. It is constructed in the wall of that part of the edifice, and 
 is surmounted by a horizontal testoon, at each corner, and in the centre 
 of which are mutilated demi-angels holding uninscribed shields. The 
 spandrils are occupied by foliage belonging to a very late period of the 
 Pointed style. The date of this tomb may, therefore, be fixed at the 
 commencement of the sixteenth century, and in the reign of Henry VIII. 
 The front of the monument, beneath the altar part, is adorned with seven 
 niches, and as many shields; the latter without charge of any kind by 
 which it might be known who was buried beneath it. 
 
 Against the wall in the north aisle is a monumental slab inscribed, 
 
 “ To the Memory of Thomas Smith, Apothecary, 
 of this Parish, Son of Bernard Smith, Apothecary, 
 twice Mayor of Taunton in the county of 
 Somerset, 
 
 and of Katherine his Wife, Daughter of 
 Nicholas Standfast, Apothecary, and Grand 
 Daughter to Richard Standfast, A.M., Chaplain 
 in Ordinary to His Most Sacred Majesty 
 King Charles 1st who on account of 
 
 * Ante, p. 136. See also Evans’s Hist, of Bristol, vol ii., p. 426, 
 and Appendix XXIX. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 231 
 
 his Inviolable Loyalty to the King, and firm 
 Attachment to the Establish’d Church, was 
 for 14 Years Depriv’d of his Rectory of Christ 
 Church in this City, whereof he was Incumbent 
 upwards of 51 Years. But on the Restoration of 
 the King Restor’d to his Benefice, and moreover 
 Promoted to the Dignity of a Prebendary of 
 the Collegiate Church of this City, wherein 
 Notwithstanding a Totall Privation of his 
 Sight He continued to Discharge the 
 Respective Duties of each Province as an 
 Able, Diligent, and Orthodox Divine. 
 
 Thos. Smith Departed this Life 8* 1 * Oct*'- 1730. 
 
 Katherine his Wife 15tli April, 1743.” 
 
 Richard Standfast is spoken of as a very respectable divine. He 
 assisted to prepare Yeomans and Boucher for death;* they were 
 executed in Wine Street, May 30th, 1643, for conspiring to deliver up 
 the city to the Royalists. Mr. Standfast was the author of “A Handful 
 of Cordial Comfits,” also, “ A Caveat against Seducers.” 
 
 On the west side of the burial-ground adjoining the church is an old 
 mooring-post, attached to which, until a few years since, was an iron 
 ring, much the worse for wear, to which vessels lying in the 
 neighbouring river were fastened. Mr. Barrett says, “The church¬ 
 wardens used to receive a sum for the penns for sheep and swine, which 
 used to be placed every market day in front of the church and the 
 houses there, before the new present market was laid out.” + 
 
 THE INDEPENDENT CHAPEL, Bridge Street, It is not quite 
 certain when the members of this Christian community were first 
 formed into a separate church, but it is probable it was about the year 
 in which Charles II. was restored to his throne, “ but no minister is 
 mentioned, till, all at once, we find a licence granted by (that king) in 
 1672, in pursuance of the indulgence to Protestant Dissenters he had 
 then yielded, to ‘Mr. John Weeks, of the Presbyterian persuasion, to be 
 a teacher of the congregation allowed by us in a room, or rooms, in the 
 house of John Lloyd, lying on St. James’s Back, in the city of 
 Bristol.'”£ This Mr. Weeks is mentioned as “a noble and excellent 
 man,” and one who “had been a regularly educated and ordained 
 
 * Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 504. 
 t Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 527. 
 
 Caston’s Independency in Bristol, p. 82. See also Appendix XXX. 
 
232 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 minister of the Church of England, fixed at Buckland Newton, in 
 Dorsetshire, and by the passing of the ‘Act of Uniformity,’ in 1662, 
 was ejected, like many others, because he would not declare his 
 unfeigned assent and consent to everything which human authority saw 
 fit to impose in matters of religion and the worship of God. ” * He 
 twice suffered six months’ imprisonment for his Nonconformity, being 
 once carried to prison from his pulpit; and he endured much unmerited 
 persecution from the authorities, until his death, which took place 
 November 23rd, 1698. 
 
 In the meantime the place in which the members of this church had 
 been accustomed to meet had been destroyed by an infuriated mob, 
 somewhere about the year 1682, in which, and the preceding year, at 
 the sessions, “ Many persons were presented for not going to church, 
 and many for keeping inmates in their houses. Many persons were 
 presented for riots in December and this month (January 1682), and 
 joining in conventicles.—The constables of Redcliff parish presented a 
 list of about 200 names of such as were recusant within the parish of 
 Redcliff and St. Thomas, in not going to church and receiving the 
 sacraiii ut, from the — day of October last to the 27th of January, 
 together with their children of nine years and upwards, and then- 
 servants.” + 
 
 On the destruction of their place of meeting as above, the members 
 of this church assembled in the open air, where they could do so with 
 the greatest security, being “even here pursued, and by wicked men 
 interrupted and abused;” until they obtained possession of an old 
 theatre in Tucker Street, where they settled about the year 1686; it 
 was here that Mr. Weeks, already mentioned, was the minister during 
 the latter part of his life. Under the superintendence of various 
 succeeding pastors, the church established here continued to flourish 
 until the Rev. James Davies, of Wotton-under-Edge, was settled over it, 
 in March, 1775; during whose ministry an Act of Parliament being 
 passed for improving the city, by removing so much of Tucker Street 
 as was required for that purpose, the old meeting house was sold, and 
 the present building in Bridge Street erected for the accommodation of 
 
 Caston’s Independency in Bristol, p. 83. 
 + Evans’s Chronological Outline. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 233 
 
 the church and congregation before assembling in the old theatre, and 
 opened for public worship August 24th, 1786. 
 
 A mural tablet in the chapel, erected by his people, is inscribed: — 
 
 “ In Memory of 
 The Rev. James Dawes, 
 
 Who was for more than twenty-two years 
 The faithful and affectionate Pastor of this Church. 
 
 He departed this life, esteemed and lamented, 
 
 On the lCth of December, 1797, 
 
 Aged 65 years. 
 
 This Chapel was erected during his ministry (the 
 congregation having formerly met in Tucker Street), and was 
 opened for public worship on the 24th of August, 17S6.” 
 
 Mr. Davies was born at Curreria, in Carmarthenshire, where his 
 father was a minister; his brother was the Rev. Dr. Benjamin Davies, 
 of Fetter Lane, London. He was educated at the academy in his 
 native town, and proceeded from thence, in 1767, to Wotton-under- 
 Edge, where he was ordained pastor of the Independent church meeting 
 at that place. In 1775 he was invited to undertake the pastorate at 
 Bridge Street, which he accepted, and the duties of which he continued 
 to discharge until his death as recorded above. 
 
 Another tablet, erected in this chapel, has the following inscribed 
 upon it: — 
 
 ‘ ‘ In Memory of 
 The Rev. Samuel Lowell, 
 
 Who finished his course with joy on the 19th of November, 1823, 
 
 Aged 64 years. 
 
 He succeeded the Rev. James Dawes 
 As Pastor of this Church, 
 
 And continued in the faithful discharge of the duties of that office 
 for more than twenty-four years. 
 
 This tablet is erected by his bereaved flock, 
 
 In affectionate remembrance of 
 His character and services. ” 
 
 Mr. Lowell was born at Birmingham in 1759, and early entered into 
 connexion with the Rev. John Wesley, for whom he preached, first in 
 the vicinity of his native place, and subsequently at Brighouse, in 
 Yorkshire, where he was stationed; but his religious views becoming 
 Calvinistic he was invited to settle as pastor of the Independent church 
 at Woodbridge, Suffolk, which he accepted. Whilst engaged there he 
 
234 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 frequently supplied tlie pulpit at the Tabernacle, Penn Street, in this 
 city, and his addresses being popular and attractive he was offered the 
 pastorate of Bridge Street, then vacant, which he consented to undertake, 
 and entered upon his duties, accordingly, in 1799. His death was 
 caused by a severe cold, caught in October, 1823, when returning home 
 from a church meeting; and his remains were interred in Portland 
 Chapel, Kingsdown. 
 
 St. Mary-le-Port Street, with some others in Bristol, was first 
 pitched or paved in 1490; it is of very narrow proportions throughout, 
 particularly at the west end, where the houses almost meet at top, and 
 nearly overhang the entire thoroughfare beneath. At the corner of the 
 house next High Street are some curious figures in wood, which act as 
 supports to that part of the fabric; they were erected subsequent to the 
 year 1550, and probably before that of 1600. Some of the houses in 
 this street once belonged to the company of brewers, whose arms 
 appear on their plastered fronts. 
 
 THE PARISH OF CHRIST CHURCH joins that of St. Mary- 
 le-Port on the south; and crosses Wine Street to the river Froom, 
 eastward of the Cheese Market and the Pithay, both of which it 
 embraces. On the west it is bounded by Broad Street, to a point just 
 beloiv Cider House Passage; and northward it takes in part of Tower 
 Lane, Wellington Street, All Saints’ Street, and Duck Lane, to the 
 before mentioned river; thus is included within its limits nearly the 
 whole of Wine Street, in which are situated some of the best and 
 handsomest shops in the city; and that part of Broad Street in which 
 are two of its best hotels. 
 
 The CHURCH of this parish, which was originally dedicated to the 
 Holy Trinity, stands in the centre of the city, and is a modern structure, 
 occupying the site of an old one pulled down in 1787. The building 
 thus destroyed was a low edifice, with a tower and spire, the former 
 containing a peal of ten bells, with chimes; two figures on the sides of 
 the clock dial being made to strike the quarters on a bell placed 
 between them. It was repaired in 1751 at an expense of £1,500, the 
 renovations occupying two years and ten months in completing; yet in 
 1783 the walls and the roof were found to be so ruinous and decayed 
 that it was resolved to pull it down and rebuild it, which was at once 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 235 
 
 effected; the date of its erection is uncertain. From this church a 
 procession of priests and others sung the Litany in English, for the 
 first time in Bristol, in 1543; proceeding thence to the church of 
 St. Mary Redcliffe, singing all the distance. 
 
 The new church was opened for Divine worship in 1790. It is built 
 of freestone, and is divided into three aisles by Corinthian pillars, the 
 chancel being adorned with a stained glass window, and the west end 
 with an organ gallery and a good instrument. The tower contains a 
 peal of ten bells. The height of the spire is 160 feet; and beneath the 
 church is a spacious crypt, apparently not ancient. 
 
 The most interesting monumental records in this church were 
 removed from the old structure. The first deserving notice is a brass 
 in the north aisle thus inscribed: — 
 
 ‘ ‘ Heare before lyeth llie bodee of Thomas 
 Fearmer somtyme Maior and Aider- 
 man of this Cittee Aged 83. As also 
 of Johane his Wife who both departed 
 this Life in the month of November 1G24, 
 wethin six daies each of ® other in a filiall 
 and dvtifvll remembrance of home Thomas thare 
 Sonne hath cavsed this Monvment heere to be 
 placed.” 
 
 Mr. Farmer was one of the sheriffs of this city in 1602, and mayor 
 in 1616; beyond this brief notice nothing is recorded of him. 
 
 On another brass plate in the north aisle is inscribed 
 
 “ Neare this place lieth the body of Mr. Richard Standfast 
 Master of Arts, of Sidney Colledge in Cambridge and Chaplaine 
 in Ordinary to King Charles the First, who for his Loyalty 
 to J. King, and steadfastnesse in the Established Religion suf¬ 
 fered fourteene yeares sequestration. He returned to his 
 place in Bristol at the Restauration of King Charles the 
 Second. Was then made Prebendary of the Cathedral Church 
 of Bristol, and for twenty yeares and better (notwithstand¬ 
 ing his blindnesse) performed the Offices of the Church ex¬ 
 actly, and discharged the Office of an Able, Orthodox, and 
 Diligent Preacher. 
 
 He was Rector of Christ Church up- 
 
236 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 wards of 51 Yeares and Dyed August 
 ® 24tli in ® 78th. Yeare of his Age, and in ® yeare 
 of our Lord MDCLXXXIV. 
 
 He shall Live againe.” 
 
 “ These following verses were composed 
 by Himself to be put upon his Monu¬ 
 ment, and were taken from his owne 
 
 mouth two dayes before his Death. 
 
 Jacob was at Bethel found 
 
 And soe may we, tho’ underground; 
 
 With Jacob there God did indent 
 To be ^ him where e’re he went, 
 
 And to bring him back againe 
 Nor was that promise made in vaine: 
 
 Upon < ^. 1 words we rest in confidence 
 
 That he ^ found him there will fetch us hence. 
 
 Nor without cause are we perswaded thus, 
 
 For where God spake him spake he with us.” 
 
 A brief account of Mr. Standfast has already been given,* but as this 
 church and parish was the real scene of his labours, it may be somewhat 
 enlarged. This memorial is described by Mr. Barrett t as “ a plain 
 white marble table, with an hour-glass in a kind of pediment on the 
 top, and a death’s head below it.” It is not so now, but simply a brass 
 plate, inscribed as above. 
 
 “ This worthy divine (says Mr. Barrett) suffered greatly in the time 
 of the rebellion; besides being deprived of this, his living, which was 
 given to one Evans, a taylor, he was, in March, 1645-6, confined in Bristol 
 Castle for his disaffection to the Parliament of England and their pro¬ 
 ceedings, which in his printing, praying, and preaching, he had ex¬ 
 pressed. However, during his sequestration and troubles he was so 
 well beloved by the vestry of Christchurch, that they contributed to his 
 support by an annual salary during his absence from them. 
 
 “ Dr. Standfast was so noted and well-received a preacher in this 
 city, that he was appointed by the mayor and corporation (of which 
 
 * Ante, p. 231. 
 t Hist, of Bristol, p. 469. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 237 
 
 body some of his ancestors had been *) to preach the public lectures at 
 several churches, gift-sermons appointed by benefactors to the city. 
 
 “ He was once pursued by his malicious accusers, but putting on the 
 habit of a thatcher, where he lay concealed near Thornbury, in Glouces¬ 
 tershire, he was, when they came to look for him, actually upon the 
 house, pretending to be busy at his work.” + 
 
 “ We must not omit to mention, that in this church repose the re¬ 
 mains of the original founder of the Bristol Infirmary, John Elbridge, 
 Esq.” | This is an error which I should not have noticed, but that the 
 local guide books have copied the mistake ; after which, of course, it is 
 likely to obtain credence. John Elbridge’s name is recorded on the 
 Aldworth monument in St. Peter’s Church, beneath which he was 
 interred with his father and many other members of his family.§ It is 
 also, perhaps, worth while to notice here a discrepancy in the date of 
 this gentleman’s death. The inscription beneath his portrait at the 
 Infirmary states that it took place February 22nd, 1738 ; on the 
 Aldworth monument it is recorded February 22nd, 1739 j and in the 
 register of St. Peter’s parish I read “Elbridge, John son of Giles 
 Elbridge buried at St. Peter’s February 2G th 1739”—the latter date is 
 doubtless the correct one. 
 
 The churchyard is a confined space, surrounded with houses, and 
 containing no monumental record of interest. It is kept remarkably 
 neat and clean; all the inscribed stones lying flat on the ground. There 
 is another small burial-ground belonging to this parish, in Duck Lane, 
 near Broadmead. 
 
 THE PITHAY CHAPEL belonged to the Baptist denomination of 
 Nonconformists for nearly two centuries, when they left it for their new 
 place of worship in Old King Street, “in 1817, the meeting-house in 
 the Pithay being much too small for the congregation.” || It is the first 
 Baptist chapel that was erected in Bristol, and has been variously 
 
 * Walter Standfast was Sheriff in 1577, and Mayor in 1591. 
 
 + Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 470, who quotes no authority for the state¬ 
 ment. Nothing is said of his troubles in “Walker’s Sufferings of the Clergy.” 
 The statement, except his sequestration, therefore, cannot be relied on. 
 
 7 Eccleske Bristolian®. § Ante, p. 217. II Fuller’s Dissent in Bristol, p. 252. 
 
238 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 occupied since it was vacated in 1817. It is now filled by the Baptist 
 church and congregation meeting under the pastorate of the Rev. Evan 
 Probert, who, for the last quarter-of-a-century, has there been a laborious 
 and faithful minister in that denomination. They are, however, about 
 to remove to a more commodious new chapel, in Stokes’ Croft, now 
 building; when this takes place, the Pithay Chapel will be occupied by 
 the Baptist church and congregation now meeting at Coopers’ Hall, 
 King Street, under the ministry of the Eev. James Davis. 
 
 In 1623 a corn market was erected in the centre of Wine Street, at 
 one end of which the pump (still in the street) was placed; the well, 
 also, for supplying it with water, being sunk at the charge of the city. 
 This market continued to be used for the sale of grain until 1726 ; but 
 on the erection of two more convenient places for that purpose, in Corn 
 Market Lane, the old structure was removed. In the new buildings, 
 also, a market for the sale of cheese was opened in January, 1787 ; but 
 both have been long discontinued. 
 
 The meal market was likewise in Wine Street, to which the Guard¬ 
 house Gate, so called, formed an entrance. Here was the cage for con¬ 
 fining bakers who offended against the assize of bread, the mayor being 
 empowered, as a punishment, first to draw them through the streets on 
 sledges ! 
 
 The first time T find this spot mentioned as a military post is in 1643, 
 when, in the attempt made by Yeomans and Boucher to betray the 
 city into the hands of the king’s partisans, it is said “ That (the) same 
 night the Royalists met at Mr. Robert Yeomans’ house in Wine Street, 
 which was on the north side of the street, nearly opposite to the guard 
 house," &c., and immediately afterwards it is said that “the main 
 guard was kept at what they called the grand Court of guard, now 
 called the Guard house, in Wine Street.” * It is evident from these 
 passages that this place was then, for the first time, occupied as a 
 guard house. In 1644 there were twenty-three courts of guard in the 
 city, of which that in Wine Street was the principal, or head quarters. 
 When the Meal Market was built is not mentioned, but it was probably 
 constructed after the sale of the property, or the removal of the last of 
 the family of Yate, who owned it. Over the “ Guard-house Gate” i3 
 
 Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 342. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 239 
 
 their badge or cognizance, which is a gate —a rebus or heraldic pun 
 upon their name, with initial letters of some one of their family 
 connections; and over an interior gateway is the date 1612. William 
 Yate was sheriff of Bristol in 1580, and mayor in 1596. Henry Yate 
 was mayor in 1631, and surviving all his ten sons, died without male 
 issue: who Robert Yate, one of the sheriffs in 1648, was, is uncertain;* 
 but perhaps he was related to one of them; the name does not occur 
 again in the city annals until 1685. The archway, or gate, in Wine 
 Street, was doubtless the entrance into a small court-yard or open 
 space, around or beyond which was the mansion. 
 
 Edward Shaw, who possessed the living in 1618, “ Had a rectory- 
 house in the Pithay granted him, and taken away 1683;” t meaning, 
 probably, from a Nonconforming successor, 65 years occurring between 
 the two events. Opposite to the entrance from Wine Street is a large 
 house on which is imprinted some ornamental characters resembling a 
 coat of arms, perhaps those of the Brewers’ company; from these two 
 circumstances we are led to believe that the neighbourhood was once a 
 respectable locality ; but no visitor would be so greatly impressed in 
 its favour as to select it for a residence now. The gate which defended 
 the Pithay during the wars of Charles I., and was mounted with two 
 pieces of cannon, was demolished in 1764. The name Pithay, or Pittey, 
 comes from the Norman Puit, a well, and Uai, or Hey, a hedge, or 
 inclosure of stone. 
 
 The “ White Lyon (Hotel), in Brode-street,” is mentioned in a list of 
 old Bristol inns and taverns in 1606. On the 10th of May, 1610, the 
 Duke of Brunswick visited Bristol, and took up his quarters at this 
 house. In 1684 it appears to have been, as it still is, the occasional 
 hostelry of the Duke of Beaufort, for in that year, during Monmouth’s 
 rebellion, His Grace of Badminton was in Bristol, where he commanded 
 several regiments of militia against the insurgents; and on that occasion 
 “ The backward stables of the White Lyon, in Brode-street, were sett 
 on fire, and therein were burnt to death two of the Duke of Beaufort’s 
 best saddle horses. It was supposed to have been done by the malice 
 
 * Unless he was the same person whose death is recorded by Mr. Barrett, 
 in his Hist, of Bristol, p. 471, “Robert Yate, of this city, merchant, who died 
 the 31st of December, 1682, aged 67.” 
 
 t Ibid, p. 469. 
 
240 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 and envy of the fanaticks, of whom a great many were sent Prisoners 
 from Bristol to Gloucester, and there secured till the Rebellion was 
 over.”* Whether the White Hart Inn, adjoining, ever formed part of 
 the White Lion or not I am unable to determine, but it certainly was 
 a distinct hostelry in 160G, although no mention whatever is made of 
 it in the annals of Bristol at any subsequent period. There is nothing 
 in the architectural detail of either house to carry us back further than 
 the age of Queen Elizabeth, at the latter part of whose reign they were 
 probably erected. The white hart was the badge of King Richard II. 
 
 There were several other noted houses of “ Entertainment for Man 
 and Horse ” in this parish, some of which have entirely disappeared. 
 The Plume of Feathers, in Wine Street, is first mentioned in 1629, and 
 again in 1656, when it was known as “ The Prince’s Arms,” the plume 
 of feathers being the badge of the Prince of Wales, and set up as a 
 public sign in compliment to the reigning sovereign, James I., but 
 during the Commonwealth the badge was so disliked that the sign was 
 changed to “ The City of Bristol Arms,” which still appears over the 
 fire-place in the dining-room. Here, in 1654, during the Protectorate, 
 a man named Charles Evans was confined, having been taken in 
 mistake for King Charles II., for whose capture a reward had been 
 offered. He was committed for present keeping to the “Feathers,” the 
 modified name given to “ The Prince’s Arms,” by the Republicans. 
 
 Another house of entertainment in Wine Street was the Nag’s Head, 
 first named in the city annals in 1643, when it is said that Yeomans and 
 Boucher were executed on a gallows erected in Wine Street, “opposite 
 to the Nag’s Head Tavern.” The site of this inn is now occupied 
 by the house and premises of Mr. Nattriss, confectioner. At the Nag’s 
 Head was first made the celebrated cake which received its name from 
 the inn, and it is still to be obtained on the same spot from the successor 
 of the original vendor. In 1743 the Mercers’ and Linendrapers’ 
 company held their meetings at this tavern. 
 
 In this street was also the Three Tuns, kept by Alderman Olive, at 
 which, on September 11th, 1674, the Countess of Castlemaine, after 
 riding “ into this cittie in her coach in pomp alighted at Alderman 
 Olive’s at the three Tuns, in Wine Street, and was there entertained at 
 the cost and chardges of Sir John Churchill.”! 
 
 * Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 526. + Ibid, p. 515. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 241 
 
 In New Market Passage, Broad Street, in this parish, is inscribed on a 
 beam running across it: 
 
 “THIS BVILD1NGE IS AT THE CHARGE OF ROBART KITCHEN, 
 LATE ALDERMAN OF BRISTOLL, FOR THE RELIEFE OF THE POOR.” 
 
 In the centre of the beam is the merchant’s mark of the donor, on a 
 shield, and beneath it the date 1598. 
 
 The meaning of the above is, that the executors of the said Robert 
 Kitchen, in pursuance of his will, had “ purchased with part of the 
 moneys raised by sale of some of the lands and personal estate of the 
 said Robert Kitchen, certain houses and a void ground, in the parish 
 of Christ Church, in the city of Bristol, on which void ground they 
 had erected certain flesh shambles, for butchers to sell their meat ou 
 Saturdays, and which were then called the New Market; and had built 
 divers tenements (<tc., and) declared, that the profits of the houses and 
 shambles were the gift of Robert Kitchen, and to be settled for 
 charitable uses; (and) that the mayor, burgesses, and commonalty, 
 should undertake the trust, and disposing of the rents of the said 
 shambles and tenements; all those new buildings of the higher and 
 lower flesh shambles; and also all those new rooms and chambers 
 erected over part of the said shambles,” <fec., &c .—“ The corporation are in 
 possession of the place described as the New Market, conveyed to them by 
 indenture of the 21st August, 1654, or, more properly, of the ground 
 whereon it stood. There has been no market or shambles there within 
 the memory of any man living. The whole of these premises coming 
 from Alderman Kitchen, now form the passage in Broad Street, called 
 the New Market Passage. It is in a poor part of the city, and covered 
 by mean dwellings.”* 
 
 There was, in Cider House Passage, formerly Beer Lane, in the same 
 street, until recently an old building, crossing or erected over this 
 thoroughfare, standing due north and south, its general character, in 
 point of style, being that of Perpendicular English. As it is not 
 mentioned by William Wyrcestre, it was probably not raised until after 
 his death, perhaps not before the year 1500, or thereabouts, with which 
 date its principal architectural features agreed. Traditionally it was 
 
 * Manchees’ Bristol Charities, vol. i., pp. 138, 9. 
 
 T 
 
242 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 called a chapel; in Skelton’s “ Etchings of the Antiquities of Bristol ” 
 it is styled “ part of a monastery,” but it is far more rational to believe 
 that it had been the dining-hall of some mansion of a middle age 
 merchant prince of Bristol. It was destroyed by an accidental fire, 
 January 4th, 1859. 
 
 THE CHURCH OF ST. EWEN stood opposite to Christ Church, 
 the site of which is now occupied by the Council House. It was, 
 perhaps, the smallest in Bristol, but it lay claim to considerable 
 antiquity. “ The parish church of St. Auden (St. Ewen) with the 
 chapel of the fraternity of St. John the Baptist is situated in a direct 
 line betwixt the church of St. Werburgh on the west and the street 
 called Broad Street on the east, and the great east window of the altar 
 of the said church is situated in Broad Street. It has one nave on the 
 north part of the aisle, and one aisle which is the chapel of the 
 fraternity of St. John the Baptist.” * It appears to have had a tower 
 built to it in 1631, at a cost of £196. 
 
 The chapel here mentioned was “ dedicated to St. John the Baptist* 
 belonging to a fraternity, called the Masters, Wardens, or Keepers, and 
 Society of Taylors, consisting of brethren and sisters, who always kept 
 it in repair till its dissolution. It had two altars, one to St. Catherine, 
 and the other to St. Margaret. This gild was erected and the chapel 
 founded by John Thorp and John Sherp, burgesses, who obtained a 
 charter of King Richard 2d. October 13th, 1398, and the 22d. year of 
 his reign, to found a chapel for a chaplain to celebrate Divine service for 
 the good estate of the king and queen whilst alive and for their souls 
 when departed, and for the fraternity here perpetually founded and 
 incorporated, and he gave them power to choose a custos or warden 
 always to be chosen by the co-brethren,” f &c. “ The old chapel in St. 
 
 Ewen’s church in 1551, 4th of Edward 6th, was granted by the parson 
 and parishioners, with all their right and title, to the mayor and 
 commonalty of Bristol. Upon this the corporation, taking down this 
 chapel, being one aile of the church, built on the same ground a Council 
 
 * William Wyrcestre, p. 227, &c. 
 
 t Ante, p. 194, where it is said—following Mancliees’ Bristol Charities —to 
 have been the year subsequent, which, 1 have no doubt, is incorrect, as King 
 Richard resigned liis crown September 29th, 1399—before tliis charter is here 
 said to have been obtained. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 243 
 
 House in the year 1552, with a shed covered with lead, supported with 
 five stone pillars before it for the council to walk under in the dry, 
 which must have greatly darkened the room below.” 
 
 “In 1787 this church was consolidated with that of Christ Church, 
 and an act of parliament obtained for taking this down and for re¬ 
 building Christ Church, which last was compleated in 1788.” * 
 
 The Council House, mentioned above, was taken down in 1704, and 
 another built on its site. This also was removed in 1824, and in its 
 place the present commodious structure was erected and opened in 1827. 
 On its summit is a figure of justice, from the chisel of E. H. Bailey, 
 Esq., It. A., a native of Bristol, as before mentioned. 
 
 THE PARISH OF ST. JOHN embraces the greater part of the 
 Guildhall, and the houses intervening between it and Bell Lane, which 
 it crosses, and also Quay Street, until the boundary line terminates on 
 the west side, at the River Froom, which it compasses towards the 
 north and east, as the parish of Christ Church does towards the south. 
 
 THE CHURCH OF ST. JOHN THE BAPTIST. “ The founder 
 of the church was Mr. Walter Frampton, who had been three times 
 mayor.” “ The gate of St. John Baptist, upon which is built a square 
 tower and a spire above it of freestone with two battlements upon the 
 tower, was built anew with the church of St. John by Walter Frampton, 
 a noble merchant of the town of Bristol. ”+ From these quotations it 
 would appear that the original structure was so decayed as to need 
 either a considerable reparation, or to be entirely rebuilt, for it is 
 certain that a church existed here long before the time of Walter 
 Frampton, as we find mention made of it in a deed dated 1174, 
 wherein William, Earl of Gloucester^ gave to the priory of St. James, 
 and the monastery of Tewkesbury, the church of St. John the 
 Baptist, which was his fee. Of this fabric, however, nothing remains. 
 Our attention, therefore, will be entirely confined to the present edifice. 
 
 In the pedigree of Walter Frampton,§ he is not only said to have 
 been “ the founder of St. John Baptist’s Church,” but that he was also 
 
 * Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 477. 
 t Ibid, p. 486. J Appendix XXXI. 
 
 § Dallaway’s William Wyrcestre, p. 87. 
 
 T 2 
 
244 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 “buried iu it in 1357, 30 Edw. 3.” We shall, however, look in vain 
 for any portion of the church erected during the lifetime of the first 
 Walter Frampton, whose death is above recorded. The present structure 
 is built in an architectural fashion unknown at the date of his decease, 
 it being a very early example of the Perpendicular style of English 
 architecture, which took its rise at the commencement of the reign of 
 Richard II., and is generally dated as beginning to be developed about 
 the year 1380. 
 
 Many churches founded during the middle ages were not erected for 
 a number of years after the death of the person who bequeathed of his 
 substance for that purpose, and this will account for the discrepancies 
 which frequently appear between the date of the founder’s death and 
 the architectural peculiarities observable in the style in which the 
 structures themselves are built, which are often extremely contradictory, 
 and tend to mislead the inquirer after their history. The very 
 interesting crypt of this church is, without doubt, the oldest part of the 
 edifice; it is divided into two distinct portions by an unadorned space, 
 or blank wall, of about three feet in breadth, and which appears to refer 
 us to two separate erections. This is also clearly indicated in the 
 vaulting of the two divisions, the line of intersection not running in a 
 straight direction from end to end. The western part of this crypt I 
 regard as the latest portion; it is several feet wider than the eastern 
 division; and the vaulting, which is more depressed, is of a less 
 elaborate design, the groining consisting of ribs or cross springers 
 rising, not from columns, but mouldings, immediately from the floor. 
 As this was a very unusual mode of supporting the roof of a building 
 during the fourteenth century, but was not uncommon in that which 
 succeeded, we may ascribe this portion of the structure, with tolerable 
 certainty, to the commencement of the fifteenth century, to which 
 period the mouldings and bosses adorning the roof also direct us. The 
 centre of the vaulting of this western part is of the same elevation 
 throughout, which is not the case with the eastern portion. Both 
 consist of three arches, but those of the latter are each raised at the 
 line of intersection, and branch out into an increased number of ribs 
 springing from single columns, and spanning the vault in numerous 
 angular divisions. The eastern portion, which is elevated one step 
 above the western part, was used in the middle ages as a place of 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 245 
 
 religious worship, and comprised, I have no doubt, the whole of the 
 original church founded by Walter Frampton. It was dedicated to the 
 Holy Cross, and had its altar and other appendages common to the 
 Romish worship. The entrance, which is from the north, is by a small 
 doorway, recently re-opened; close to which is a stoup immediately on 
 entering. It is well lighted on the north side with several windows in 
 the Perpendicular style of English architecture, and two windows, only, 
 on the south side, in the same style. 
 
 It is worthy of remark, that the same peculiarity observable in the 
 building of the crypt of this church occurs also in the super-structure, 
 for here also the vaulting does not run in a direct line from east to west, 
 the chancel corresponding with the eastern crypt, and the nave with 
 the western. From this circumstance it would appear that the eastern 
 portion of the crypt and chancel are of the same age, or nearly so, 
 which I have no doubt is the case; the nave being, like the western 
 crypt, a subsequent erection, or, rather, a continuation of the building 
 by another founder. There is a difference, also, in the design of the 
 windows of the chancel and the nave, which, to me, clearly indicate 
 two totally different erections. 
 
 From the whole, then, I am disposed to believe that, as the eastern 
 part of the crypt, together with the chancel of the church, is built in 
 the style which prevailed at the commencement of the reign of Richard 
 II.; and the western part of the crypt, together with the nave of the 
 church, is more decidedly of the Perpendicular style of English 
 architecture, so no part of the edifice was built while this first Frampton 
 was living, and probably not under thirty years after his death, if his 
 death took place in 1337. We must not forget that there were four 
 Framptons bearing the name of Walter—the son, grandson, and great 
 grandson of the first, to whom is ascribed the founding of the church in 
 question. The first Walter doubtless left a portion of his wealth for 
 that purpose, and was buried here, as stated in his pedigree, in an 
 older church, subsequently demolished to make way for the present 
 structure, which, I think, owes its origin rather to the piety of the 
 second Walter, who was also interred in this church, and whose will is 
 dated in the year 1388, at a time when the style of architecture in 
 which the edifice is constructed began to prevail in all ecclesiastical 
 buildings—the commencement of the reign of Richard II. The style 
 
246 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 of embellishment observed also on the tomb of Walter Frampton, in the 
 church, is confirmatory of this opinion. And further, the first Walter 
 Frampton was never raised to any civic dignity; the remark of Mr. 
 Barrett’s, before quoted, cannot, therefore, refer to him; it does, 
 however, to his son, who was mayor of Bristol in 1357,1365, and 1374, 
 the number of times specified by our local historian in which he filled 
 the civic chair. 
 
 The interior of this church is in good preservation, and consists of a 
 nave and chancel, with a square tower at the west end, surmounted by 
 a spire; in the former is the best example of the square-headed 
 window of the middle ages, in Bristol. The communion table, the 
 reading-desk, the gallery at the west end of the church, and the pews, 
 appear to have been constructed in the reign of James I., or late in that 
 of his predecessor, Queen Elizabeth; the pulpit and font are of stone, 
 and are good examples of modern Perpendicular English; the chancel 
 and centre of the aisle are paved with encaustic tiles, and there is a 
 small quantity of stained glass in the windows. 
 
 The tomb of Walter Frampton now stands beneath a depressed arch 
 on the north side of the chancel of the church, having been removed 
 from the centre of that part of the building, where it was originally 
 placed. The side next the spectator is adorned with seven shields of 
 arms, in as many square compartments without cusps, and referable to 
 the early part of the fifteenth century. Upon this altar-tomb lie the 
 effigies of a person apparently not more than fifty years of age, habited 
 as a merchant of that period. The figure is represented bare-headed, 
 with flowing locks, and is clad in a long loose robe or gown, reaching to 
 his feet, on which are shoes not so pointed at the toes as on many 
 effigies of this date. Beneath the robe, which is open at the wrists, is 
 an under kind of loose fitting body dress, which extends partly over the 
 hands, the latter being without gloves. Suspended from the neck by a 
 broad ornamented band is a short cross-hilted sword; the hands are 
 raised in devotion, and the placid expression of the countenance gives 
 an unusual degree of dignity and sentiment to the features of this 
 beautiful effigy. A drop moustache appears ou the upper lip, and the 
 beard is divided into two distinct portions or drops, after the manner 
 of that which is seen on the figure of King Richard II., who died 
 in 1399. 
 
 The arms on this tomb are, on four of the shields—Argent a chevron between 
 three lion’s jambs erased, within a bordure engrailed, gules, for Frampton ; on 
 another the arms of Berkeley ; the two others are unknown. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 247 
 
 Inserted in a slab on the floor of the aisle is a brass with the effigies 
 of Thomas Rowley and his wife, with a Latin inscription, in English 
 thus:—“Beneath is deposited Thomas Rowley, formerly a merchant 
 and sheriff of the town of Bristol, who died, on the 23rd January, 
 1478; together with Margaret, his wife, who died 1470.’’ From the 
 mouth of the male figure issues a label inscribed in the same language, 
 “ Holy Mary, pray for us,” and from that of the woman, “ IIolj Trinity, 
 one God, have mercy on us.” 
 
 This brass has been removed from the stone in which it was 
 originally placed, and which, a few years ago, remained near the 
 position it at present occupies. When Mr. Barrett wrote, in 1789, we 
 are told that it contained also figures of the “ six sons and six 
 daughters ” * of Rowley, but these have disappeared if ever they were 
 there, which T question. Thomas Rowley, as depicted in this brass, is 
 dressed in the habit of a merchant of his time, in a long coat or gown 
 reaching to the feet, with full sleeves. Encircling the waist is an 
 ornamented belt or girdle, from which is suspended a rosary and a wide 
 tasselled pouch, purse, or gipciere, which, although worn much earlier, 
 is very seldom found on effigies before the reign of Edward IV. Over 
 the coat is thrown a mantle faced or bordered with fur. The dress of 
 the female chiefly consists of a long loose gown with full sleeves, but 
 without ornament of any kind; and the head-dress, which is remarkably 
 simple, bears some resemblance to the mitred head-dress worn at about 
 the time when her decease is recorded to have taken place. 
 
 From the church we shall now descend again to the crypt, where, 
 says Mr. Barrett, there “ is a large tomb of alabaster, and on its side the 
 figures of the six sons and six daughters, with their father and mother, 
 without epitaph, but supposed to be for the above Thomas Rowley.” t 
 The tomb referred to is on the south side of the crypt, and upon it lie 
 the effigies of a man and his wife, and their children are represented on 
 the front beneath them, the centre having been once occupied, in all 
 probability, by armorial bearings or an inscription, which has been 
 obliterated, and there is nothing left by which to identify the persons 
 for whom the monument was erected. Mr. Barrett is in error in 
 
 Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 488. 
 t History of Bristol, p. 488. 
 
248 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 supposing it to belong to Thomas Rowley, to whom the brass is inscribed, 
 for the style of decoration, both on the tomb itself as well as on the 
 figures it sustains, is of a later date; and instead of six sons being 
 represented on it there are but Jive. 
 
 The attire of the effigies on the supposed tomb of Thomas Rowley 
 and his wife in the crypt, particularly that of the latter, differs so 
 materially from those on the brass, as to leave no room for doubt that 
 they were intended to represent some other persons. The male figure 
 has long flowing hair, and is habited in a loose garment reaching to the 
 feet, over which he wears a cloak. He was, I have no doubt, one of 
 Bristol’s merchant princes. The lady is richly dressed in a loose robe, 
 which is open at the neck, so as to expose the bosom. Over this 
 another robe is secured round the middle by a band tastefully tied in a 
 double bow, a little on the left side. The wrists are adorned with 
 worked cuffs. A mantle or cloak is w 7 orn over the whole, which is 
 fastened by a cordon across the breast, having a jewelled clasp in the 
 centre. The head is surmounted with the pedimental head-dress, which 
 furnishes a clue to the date of the monument, as that description of 
 head-gear did not come into fashion until the reign of Henry VII., and 
 at the very close of the fifteenth century. It is certain, therefore, that 
 this tomb could not have been erected before the year 1500 : but the 
 embellishments at the angles .appear to refer us to a later period still, 
 and to one bordering upon the decline of the Pointed style of archi¬ 
 tecture, after the dissolution of religious houses, and when the Anglo- 
 Italian or Debased English became the prevailing fashion in all our 
 public buildings, as well as in all kinds of dress. The heads of both 
 figures recline on pillows, and their feet rest each against the mutilated 
 remains of a fish, apparently intended for a dolphin, which may be 
 a rebus or heraldic pun upon the name of the persons represented on the 
 tomb. It is not improbable that this monument belongs to some relative 
 of the founder of the church, one of the shields on the tomb of Walter 
 Frampton, in the chancel, being charged with a dolphin or, on a field 
 azure, if the colours are correctly given. The arms of Thomas Rowdey, 
 as they appear on the brass, seem to be a hart proper, on a field 
 sanguine. He founded a chantry in this church, and served the office 
 of bailiff of the town in 1466, and sheriff in 1475. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 249 
 
 Beneath a highly wrought four-centred, or Tudor arch, on the south 
 side of the western division of this crypt, is an altar tomb, on which 
 is a representation of a man and, apparently, his two wives, cut in 
 outline upon the plain surface of the alabaster slab, after the manner of 
 an engraved brass. The spandrils of this arch are adorned with foliage 
 of a late character, as used in architectural enrichments, with a shield 
 in each, charged with the merchant’s mark of the deceased. The front 
 of the tomb is ornamented with eight shields, but the whole are without 
 heraldic bearings ; we have no means of knowing, therefore, for whom 
 this tomb was intended, as an inscription at the feet of the figures has 
 become unintelligible through damp and injury. The date of this 
 monument is about the early part of the sixteenth century, when the 
 sketchy delineation of the effigies of those intended to be commemorated, 
 as is observable on this tomb, first came into fashion. 
 
 There are several other altar-tombs in this crypt, upon which are the 
 remains of incised crosses and inscriptions; but the whole are greatly 
 injured and rendered unintelligible by length of time and want of care. 
 
 Two chantries appear to have been founded in this church, besides 
 that by Thomas Rowley. One of these was by Walter Frampton, 
 and called Cantaria St. Mariae, of which Richard Coke was chantry 
 priest. The name of the second does not appear ; but John Poppeley 
 officiated as priest in 1521. The schools belonging to this church are 
 in Nelson Street, and were built by voluntary contributions. 
 
 The tower and spire of this church is supported (as before said) 
 by one of the gates originally inserted in the walls of the old 
 town, two of which only remain, and both of them are in this parish. 
 St. John’s Gate, like the church, is constructed in the Perpendicular 
 style of English architecture, and at an early stage of its invention ; we 
 may, with confidence, therefore, place the date of its erection at the 
 close of the fourteenth century. The present gate must then be at least 
 the second erection on its site.* Another entrance to the old town was 
 by the tower gateway at the foot of St. John’s Street, where the arch, 
 opening through the original wall, is from ten to twelve feet in 
 
 * There are two ancient figures seated on the south front of this arch, under 
 niches, which are said to represent Belinus and Brennus, who are popularly 
 believed to have founded old Bristol. This story is untrue. They are more 
 Likely to represent two functionaries belonging to the castle. 
 
250 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 thickness. Over this gate was formerly situated a “ Dove Tower,” the 
 approach to which was by a winding staircase, long since either destroyed 
 or built up. 
 
 “At the west side of the tower (and gate of St. John) was an old 
 CHURCH formerly DEDICATED TO ST. LAWRENCE. When it 
 was built is uncertain ; but it is of a very old foundation, and going to 
 decay, and having but a small parish belonging to it. It was united 
 and incorporated with St. John’s in the 22d of Elizabeth, 1580.* This 
 church has been so destroyed, that a few years since nothing remained 
 of it save a stoup of the fourteenth century, in a stable which since then 
 has been, with the rest of the premises, transferred into a large tailoring 
 establishment. With this alteration, in all probability, every vestige of 
 the structure has disappeared. 
 
 The burial-ground belonging to the parish of St. John is situated at 
 the end of Tailor’s Court, and is separated from St. John’s Street by a 
 high brick wall. Here was interred the remains of Robert Strange, 
 who died in the year 1191, and also those of his wife. He was mayor 
 of Bristol in 1171, 1182, and 1189, and he is said, by Mr. Barrett, to 
 have founded a hospital or almshouse in this parish, at the foot of St. 
 John’s Steps ; “but that, by the wicked proceedings of the people then 
 in trust for this charity, they had embezzled the revenues of it.” f 
 According to Mr. Manchee, however, “ there appears to be no foundation 
 for Mr. Barrett’s surmise with respect to that part of the church 
 property.” J The almshouse, becoming ruinous, was taken down and 
 rebuilt in 1721. 
 
 In this parish are situated the Bristol Trade and Mining Schools, 
 formerly the Diocesan Schools, where it is proposed to give, with a 
 sound moral and religious education, an insight into the physical sciences, 
 and a knowledge of their application to manufactures. The Mining 
 School is a distinct establishment. 
 
 The Guildhall, in Broad Street, has entrances from the street to the 
 Law Court, County Court, those of Bankruptcy, <tc., with separate 
 apartments for consultation, and for the judge, council, and others. The 
 principal front is designed in the last stage of the Perpendicular English 
 
 * Barrett’s History of Bristol, p. 489. t Ibid, p. 487. 
 
 J Bristol Charities, vol. ii, p. 3. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 251 
 
 style of architecture, and is adorned with statues of King Edward III., 
 Queen Victoria, two of the recorders of Bristol, Dunning and Sir 
 Michael Foster, and two of our local benefactors, Colston and Whitson— 
 gentlemen in full-bottomed wigs of the 17th century on a building 
 purporting to be at least 200 years older ! There are also the armorial 
 bearings of some eminent natives. 
 
 “The Taylor’s Hall is also in this parish, built on void ground given 
 to the fraternity of Taylors of St. Ewen’s, wherein they meet on festival 
 days in their gowns to wait on the mayor, and where they transact the 
 business of their society.” * The custom is now obsolete, and the 
 society defunct. 
 
 “Bridewell, of old called Monkenbridge, or Munkbridge, the common 
 prison of the city, was once an old tower and fortification, new built in 
 1577, and rebuilt in 1721.” f In 1831 it was destroyed in the 
 memorable riots, the rioters burning the two massive outward gates by 
 which it was secured, and reducing the whole to ashes. A new 
 structure has since been erected, of a more spacious character; and by 
 demolishing some houses, room has been made, also, for a Central Police 
 Station upon its eastern side. 
 
 THE PARISH OF ST. WERBURGH is small, and is bounded on 
 the north and east by those of St. John the Baptist, Christ Church, and 
 All Saints; on the south and west by St. Nicholas’, St. Leonard’s, and 
 St. Stephen’s. 
 
 THE CHURCH IS “DEDICATED TO ST. WERBURGA, 
 supposed to be the daughter of Wulferus, King of Mercia.” No 
 satisfactory information has been conveyed to our times respecting the 
 building of the original structure, although a church of some kind must 
 have existed here in the reign of Edward II.; for we find it was confirmed 
 to the Priory of Keynsham by that monarch, for its better support. It 
 is not clear that there was any tower to the church here mentioned; 
 but in 1385 John Warwyke, the rector of the parish, assigned a house 
 in Corn Street for the purpose of erecting one; and Walter Derby, who 
 died in the same year, gave, by will, forty pounds towards rebuilding 
 the church. As the date of the tower may be safely referred to about 
 the year 1400, it is highly probable that it rose through the munificence 
 
 Barrett's Hist, of Bristol, p. 493. + Ibid. 
 
252 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 of the above-named individuals, assisted by other wealthy citizens; but 
 it is by no means certain that the church was re-constructed at the 
 same time. The former is built in four stages, each sufficiently adorned 
 to render it an object of interest, The summit is crowned with open 
 worked lattice battlements, in the Perpendicular style of English 
 architecture. It being much decayed, and obstructing the upper 
 entrance of Small Street from the Exchange, it was partly taken down 
 and rebuilt, and opened again for Divine service the Sth of February, 
 1761. In this rebuilding, the tower and the north porch of the previous 
 church were preserved and repaired. 
 
 The interior is divided into nave and aisles, which are separated by 
 light columns supporting five arches on each side. The altar-piece is 
 composed of Corinthian architecture! The roof describes a pointed 
 arch, and the porches on either side of the church are fan-groined. 
 The whole is erected in the Perpendicular style; the new portion being 
 so blended with the old as to form, together, a structure somewhat 
 interesting. 
 
 Several chantries and obiits were founded in the former church of 
 St. Werburgh. In 1245 Simon Clerk, mayor of Bristol, gave twelve 
 pence annually for a lamp to burn in the choir of the chapel founded 
 and dedicated to the Virgin Mary; and Peter Martur, in 1261, granted 
 three shillings for the performance of Divine service in the same chapel, 
 as did Nicholas le Barber, also, in 1304, who gave two shillings for the 
 same purpose; many others also contributed in like manner. 
 
 It appears that when the church which preceded the present structure 
 was pulled down, several of the monuments were destroyed. Among 
 those which have been preserved, however, is a very interesting brass, 
 inscribed to the memory of Nicholas Thorne and his family, as follows, 
 in Latin— 
 
 “ In this tomb lies Nicholas Thorne, O gentle Reader, 
 formerly a famous and upright merchant; 
 whose words were governed by truth and whose deeds 
 were ruled by justice and by virtue. 
 
 Bom in Bristol, there also he died being more worthy 
 
 of the gift of everlasting life, for he ruled the city as chief magistrate, 
 
 and enriched it with a noble school at his own 
 
 and his brother’s expense, and the whole community 
 
 of Bristol acknowledged him as a munificent father 
 
 by whose bounty they were bless’d. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 253 
 
 The old and the young, boys and maidens, 
 and the inhabitants at large weep and lament 
 that he should so soon have been taken from them, 
 but the Almighty has seen fit to remove him 
 from these scenes of misery, blest though he was 
 in the affection of his second wife and ten children. 
 
 This tomb contains only his earthly remains, 
 his soul has entered the regions of the skies. 
 
 The same tomb contains the ashes of his first beloved wife 
 and also of their first born son. 
 
 He died 19. August A.D. 1546. aged 50 years.” 
 
 Nicholas Thorne was one of the founders of the Bristol Grammar 
 School in conjunction with his brother Robert; he was born in Bristol 
 in the year 1-196; he was chamberlain of Bristol, and appears to have 
 been not only eminent as a wealthy merchant, but equally so in 
 authority, for when mayor of his native town, he “ kept his Admiraltie 
 Court at Clevedon.”* His portrait, with that of his brother, is preserved 
 in the Grammar School, and is supposed to have been painted by 
 Holbien; copies of them are hung up in the Council House.t 
 
 On a second brass in this church is represented a man and his six 
 sons, and a woman with her four daughters, kneeling at a desk, with 
 this inscription: — 
 
 “ My frind who so this place of myne thow be that shall be houlde, 
 
 With patiencs pause and heare a frind his mynde to the unfould ; 
 Seacke not with lieapes of worldly toyes to furnishe thy delighte, 
 
 Nor let him fancie liighe degrees that hopes to live arighte; 
 
 If thow have Wealthe supply tlner Want that languishe in decaye, 
 
 And linger not thy good Intent vntill thy latter daye ; 
 
 If pouertye opresse thy mind let pacience be thy guyde, 
 
 Let rigoure faille hould faist the faithe what hap so the betide ; 
 
 Ffor as from dcathe no waye thar is they selfe for to deffend, 
 
 So happye may no Creature be beffore the finall end; 
 
 Wliearfore of god his mercye craue who hath of mercye store, 
 
 And vnto him comend my soule my frind I craue no more. 
 
 Heare lithe buried the body of William Cystyns late of the Cittie of Bristoll 
 Marchaunte & one of the Common Counsell of the same, who had one only wife 
 Named Marye, by whom he hadysshue VI souns & iiji daughters; who departed 
 This trancitory lief the xxv day of Ffebruary a ° 1586. 
 
 In and for wlios memery the said Marye his louinge wife hath made this 
 
 [monement.” 
 
 Bristol Memorialist, p. 41. 
 + Appendix XXXII. 
 
254 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 On an altar tomb, with columns supporting a flat testoon, is extended, 
 resting his head on his hand, and his elbow on a cushion, the figure of 
 a civic functionary; and above him is inscribed, 
 
 “ To the Pious Memory 
 of John Barker, Esqr 
 
 late Mayor and Alderman of the City. 
 
 If Virtue, Learning, Piety, & Wit, 
 
 Could free from Death, thou had’st not died yet 
 If Zeal or Wisdom, could a Man reprieve, 
 
 Thou had’st been spar’d & mad’st been yet alive; 
 
 Thou Pious, Prudent, Upright wast & Just, 
 
 Thy Virtues live tho’ thou art turn’d to dust. 
 
 Thy Soul’s immortaliz’d & tow’rs above 
 The Reach of envy, nothing’s there but love 
 Where with ® Saints & Angells thou dost sing 
 Sweet Hallelujah’s to the glorious King.” 
 
 Arms, azure five escliallops or, quartered with gules, a chevron argent, 
 three goats’ heads of the second. 
 
 Mr. Barrett says “He was mayor in 1607, and died in his 
 mayoralty;”* and immediately afterwards he adds in the same 
 paragraph, “He died 1636.” Upon what authority either of the 
 statements are made does not appear; Mr. Seyer mentions neither. 
 Under date of September 13th, 1607, Mr. Evans writes, “the Mayor 
 died. He was buried in St. Wei-burgh’s Church, where his monument 
 bears a carved figure; ” f but we hesitate to receive such testimony 
 until we know from whence the information was obtained. If from a 
 manuscript calendar, which is probable, it is another proof of the utter 
 worthlessness of all such documents treating on our local history. 
 
 Close to the church are the Commercial Booms, a respectable building 
 opened in 1811. The entrance is beneath a pediment supported by 
 Ionic columns; on the summit of the front are three figures representing 
 the city of Bristol, commerce, and navigation. 
 
 In Small Street are the remains of some fine old mansions, once the 
 domiciles of some of Bristol’s wealthy merchants, and in which kings 
 
 * Hist, of Bristol, p. 482. 
 t Chronological Outline, p. 165. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 255 
 
 have been lodged and feasted. At the office of the Bristol Mirror 
 newspaper is a fine old hall of the middle ages; in some adjoining 
 apartments, in the occupation of an attorney, is a costly room of the 
 reign of Henry VII; whilst at the Road Office, lower down the street, 
 is one of the age of Queen Elizabeth. 
 
 THE PARISH OF ST. STEPHEN has, on its east side, part of 
 that of St. Nicholas, with those of St. Leonard and St. Werburgh; on 
 the west and south it has the Floating Harbour; and towards the north 
 it runs nearly to a point at the Stone Bridge. 
 
 THE CHURCH OF ST. STEPHEN was once reckoned among the 
 many ecclesiastical edifices which adorn the West of England. It was 
 constructed during the prevalence of the latest fashion in English 
 architecture, by some known as the Perpendicular, by others as the 
 Florid style. There was, undoubtedly, a church erected here many 
 years before the present structure had existence; but this, requiring 
 renovation, was rebuilt in the style in question. This re-construction 
 was effected at the joint expense of the abbots of Glastonbury (who were 
 the patrons) and the inhabitants of the parish, between the years 1450 
 and 1490; but the tower was built at the sole expense of John 
 Shipward, who was mayor of Bristol in 1455, and also in 1463, having 
 previously filled the office of sheriff in 1441; before which time there 
 was no tower to this church. 
 
 “ More than half-a-century has now elapsed since my observation 
 was first directed to the singular beauty of St. Stephen’s tower, by one 
 who well knew how to discriminate its excellence, and who fixed upon 
 my young mind an indelible image of this paragon of Gothic* 
 architecture, as the pride of my native city. 
 
 “Since that period I have wandered ‘far and wide;’ but, in my 
 occasional visits, I was never an hour in Bristol before I took my 
 original station, and refreshed my imagination by contemplating the 
 fairest form ever effected by the taste and skill of the architects of the 
 last Gothic school. 
 
 * I object to this term as applied to architecture, as it conveys no distinct 
 and definite idea. The style was invented in England, or at least first practised 
 by English artists, and ought to be designated English architecture. See Fact 
 versus Fiction, p. 22. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 25 G 
 
 “ The very graceful effect of St. Stephen’s tower is caused by the 
 smallness of the diameter in proportion to its height—the accumulation 
 of ornament upon the highest story, as contrasted with the plainness of 
 the other three; and that the whole elevation is free from the 
 incumbrance of buttresses.” * 
 
 A peculiar feature in this beautiful tower is the loftiness of the upper 
 story, in proportion to the rest of the structure, which greatly adds to 
 the light and graceful character of the whole, and raises its summit, in 
 appearance, much above its real altitude, which is 133 feet. The very 
 light pierced battlements and turrets which surmount it are common in 
 the West of England, of which those at Gloucester Cathedral appear to 
 have been the archetype.f 
 
 The only other portion of the exterior of this church worthy of 
 notice is the very rich and elaborate south porch, the entrance to which 
 is formed by an ogee arch, beautifully adorned, having a costly groined 
 rcof of exquisite workmanship, and which is the only ecclesiastical 
 specimen of the pendant capital in Bristol. 
 
 The interior of this church has been sadly ill-used. The roof, of 
 handsomely carved oak, separated by ribs into square divisions, with 
 l'ich bosses at the intersections, has been painted a dirty white! The 
 east and west windows are original and in good Perpendicular English, 
 but the former is concealed to half its height by an altar screen of the 
 Corinthian order ! with a pulpit and font carved in the most offensive 
 manner to the man of taste. The columns dividing the nave from its 
 aisles are good, and instead of the usual capital are surmounted by 
 demi-angels holding shields or labels. The windows in both aisles and 
 clerestory are modern, excepting two at the west end of the latter, but 
 from these an idea may be formed of the beauty of the originals, which 
 were destroyed to make way for such unworthy successors. Beneath 
 the tower, the windows of which are very excellent, sufficient remains 
 of the roof to show that the vaulting of that part of the structure was 
 fan-groined; the corbels and pillars once supporting it are still standing. 
 
 In the north aisle is a small pointed doorway, of the middle ages, 
 conducting to an octagonal turret containing a flight of steps once 
 
 * Dalla way’s Notices of Ancient Church Architecture in Bristol, pp. 13, 15. 
 t Appendix XXXIII. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Zt)l 
 
 leading to a rood loft. At the extremity of this aisle, towards the east, 
 is an arch now closed up, and there are two others on the north side of 
 the chancel, which no doubt originally looked into a mortuary chapel; 
 this is also indicated on the exterior of this part of the building. 
 
 In the year 1844 a beautiful, though somewhat mutilated tomb 
 (since restored), was discovered beneath an arch in the wall of the north 
 aisle, on removing the high panelled pews, which had long concealed it 
 from view. It is pure Decorated English in its character, and was 
 constructed at a time when the tombs of the middle ages may be 
 regarded as the most chaste and beautiful in style of any ever erected 
 in this or any other country. The front, like those of persons of rank 
 in the fourteenth century, is adorned with small sculptured figures, 
 within canopied recesses, from which we may trace the peculiar 
 enrichments in architecture, and acquire a knowledge of the various 
 dresses worn by different grades in society, at the time of the erection 
 of the monument. This is the only example of the kind in Bristol of 
 ■which we have any knowledge. 
 
 It is not known for whom this costly tomb was erected, but it is not 
 improbable that it was to perpetuate the memory of Edward Blanket, 
 who founded a chantry in this church, and perhaps in this very aisle. 
 Two figures (a male and female) recline beneath the richly adorned 
 recessed canopy surmounting the altar part of this tomb, both of which, 
 it is evident to the examiner, w T ere not originally placed there. The 
 dress of the male figure precisely agrees with the costume of the time 
 in which Edward Blanket lived, and may, with certainty, be referred to 
 the reign of Edward III., when the short surcoat formed part of the 
 fashionable attire of the day; this, and the remainder of the dress in 
 which this figure appears to be habited, is much after the style observed 
 on the effigy usually ascribed to Sir Henry de Gaunt.* The dress of 
 the female reclining on this tomb is of the same period; the person 
 being arrayed in a close bodied garment, with flowing drapery towards 
 the feet. The hands of both figures are raised in devotion, and on the 
 head of the female is worn the reticulated head-dress which first 
 appeared on monumental effigies about the middle of the fourteenth 
 century, and was, I have no doubt, introduced into England, from the 
 Continent, by Philippa, of Hainault, Queen of Edward III., who died 
 in 1369. 
 
 Ante, p. 145. 
 
 v 
 
258 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Edward Blanket, to whose honour I believe this tomb was erected, 
 appears to have been the eldest of three brothers, named Edward, 
 Edmund, and Thomas. Each of them seem to have been extensively 
 engaged in the manufacture of coarse woollen cloths, for which, at that 
 time, Bristol was famous; and the reader, when he lays his weary head 
 upon his pillow at night, and is about to close his eyes upon the world, 
 in sleep, will scarcely fail to remember, after reading this, that the 
 covering which adds warmth and comfort to his reclining limbs, owes 
 its origin to, and is called after, the name of its inventor, who was a 
 native of Bristol. Blankets soon came to be used by sportsmen, 
 soldiers, and travellers, in lieu of the loose mantle and puckered cloak 
 and cape, which, as well as the long loose robe or gown, were 
 inconvenient; the former could be readily thrown across the shoulders, 
 or used to wrap about the wearer in cold or wet weather; and 
 Edward I. found them very useful to his army when encamped against 
 the Welsh and Scots.'"' Edward Blanket was member of Parliament 
 for Bristol in 13G2. 
 
 Contiguous to the monument just described, is an altar tomb, on 
 which, extended at full length, lie the effigies of a male figure in the 
 costume of a burgess or merchant, and so very like in its general 
 character to that of the person of Walter Framptonf as to render 
 extended remark in this place unnecessary. With the exception of the 
 arrangement of the hair, which is straight, the outer and under 
 garments, the drop moustache and small bifid beard, the pointed shoes, 
 and short sword suspended from an ornamented belt passing round the 
 neck, are so strikingly like those found on the effigy in St. John’s 
 Church, as to leave no doubt of both having been constructed at, or 
 about, the same time, namely, late in the reign of Edward III., or early 
 in that of Richard II. 
 
 There is some uncertainty attached to the name of the person here 
 represented; but I find that Walter Tyddestille or Tyddeley, who was 
 one of the bailiffs of Bristol in 1377, by his will dated March 20th, 
 1380, and proved March 23rd, 1385 (the year in which he died), desires 
 that his body be buried in St. Stephen’s Church, to which he 
 
 Memorials of the Canynges’ Family, &c., p. 54. 
 + Ante, p. 246. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 259 
 
 bequeathed twenty pounds for the repair of the missals ; to the rector 
 ten marks; to the chaplain thirteen shillings and fourpence; and to 
 Richard, the clerk, six shillings and eightpence. To the memory of this 
 person, therefore, I would ascribe this effigy; the style of dress, and 
 other peculiarities in relation to it agreeing with the time of his death, 
 and leaving no doubt in my mind on the subject. 
 
 On a brass over the vestry door, at the eastern extremity of the south 
 aisle, are represented a man and his wife kneeling at a desk, with hands 
 upraised as in prayer; and beneath them is inscribed as follows :— 
 
 “ Deceased the 5 of September An Dni 1594. 
 
 Robert Kitchin, Alderman, and his Wife, 
 
 I.ieth neare this place, Closed in Earth and Clay; 
 
 Their Charities alike in Death and Life, 
 
 Who to the Poor gave all their goods away; 
 
 Leaving in trvst such men to act the same, 
 
 As might in trvth perform their good intent, 
 
 So that the poore indeed, and eke in name, 
 
 To lasting Ages in this City meant, 
 
 And other places of this Kingdom faire, 
 
 As Kendall towne & Stockland field both have; 
 
 With Bath, the native place of her first ayre, 
 
 The Countie of their gvyftes they to them gave. ” 
 
 Robert Kitchen’s name has been mentioned before in these pages.* 
 He was a sheriff of Bristol in 1572, and mayor in 1588; his residence 
 was in Small Street, where, on the 15th of April, 1587, he entertained 
 the Earls of Leicester and Warwick. By his will dated June 19th, 1594, 
 he bequeathed “ his capital mansion-house, situate in Small Street,” &c., 
 to be sold, and the money realized by such sale, together with that 
 obtained by the disposal of his other property, to be “ employed to the 
 best benefit and relief of the poor within Bristol and the town of 
 Kendal, in the county of Westmoreland, and to other good and 
 charitable uses, in such order, manner, and form, as to his executors, 
 or the survivors or survivor of them, or the most part of them, should 
 seem most meet and convenient.” f 
 
 On a large and costly monument, adorned with a variety of carved 
 devices in accordance with the fashion of the age, and beneath a canopy 
 supported by Corinthian columns, at the east end of the south aisle, on 
 
 v 2 
 
 * Ante, p. 241. 
 
 t Manchee’s Bristol Charities, vol. i., p. 34. 
 
260 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 an altar tomb, lie the effigies of Sir George Snygge; liis figure extended 
 at full length in his legal robes of office; his head resting on his right 
 hand, and his elbow on a pillow; in his left he holds a roll of paper. 
 Above him is a Latin inscription, which translated is, 
 
 “ Here lies the body of George Snygge, Knt, sergeant at law, 
 one of the Barons of the Exchequer, a most skilful judge, 
 formerly recorder of this famous city, who in his life time 
 zealously applied himself to the worship of God; he 
 impartially administered justice, was a diligent promoter 
 of virtue, and a severe opposer of vice ; he was always a 
 charitable reliever of the poor and needy. He died to the 
 great loss and grief of this his honoured city and much 
 loved country (whose interest he had always at heart) 
 the 11th day of November, 1617, in the 73d year of his age.” 
 
 Beneath the figure is the following:— 
 
 I 
 
 “ His loving daughter Anne Snygge hath erected and 
 dedicated this monument in perpetual testimony of 
 her pious gratitude and duty to her most dear father. ” 
 
 The following is inscribed in Latin :— 
 
 “ In this tomb lies one who was skilled in the laws and ordinances. 
 
 He administered to others the law of life and death 
 but was unable himself to escape the stern decree of the 
 cruel tyrant who subjects every thing to his dark power. 
 
 Relentless Death has indeed carried off a rich booty, and 
 exulting in his victory, let him sing ‘■Jo ! triumphe ! ’ 
 
 The tyrant has, I will confess, cut short a miserable life oppressed 
 with disease with trouble and anxiety, but unwittingly he has also 
 brought another life full of celestial light in the presence of God, 
 he has snatched away the high honours which this world affords, but 
 given in exchange celestial honours which shall endure for evermore.” 
 
 Little is known of Sir George Snygge beyond what is stated on his 
 monument. He was recorder of Bristol from 1592 till 1604; 
 proclaimed King James I. at the High Cross, March 28th, 1603; and 
 was member of Parliament for the city in 1597, 1601, and 1603. 
 “He is celebrated as a man of great patriotism and of great integrity, 
 and preserved a high character, during a long life, for his ability and 
 integrity as a judge.” * 
 
 Against the north wall of the chancel, surmounted with the arms of 
 the Merchant Venturers, and around and beneath it with numerous 
 allegorical figures in allusion to his profession, is an inscription— 
 
 Evans’s Hist, of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 182. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 2G1 
 
 “ To the pious 
 Memorie of Martin Priuge, 
 
 Merchant, sometyme Generali to the 
 East Indies, and one of the 
 Fraternity of the 
 Trinitie House. 
 
 The liuing worth of this dead man was such, 
 
 That this fay’r Touch can give you but A touch 
 Of his admired guifts ; theise quarter’d Arts, 
 
 Enrich’d his knowledge and ® spheare imparts ; 
 
 His heart’s true embleme where pure thoughts did moue, 
 By A most sacred Influence from aboue. 
 
 Prudence and fortitude ore topp this toombe, 
 
 Which in braue Fringe tooke vpp “ clieifest roome; 
 
 Hope—Time supporters showe that he did clyme, 
 
 The highest pitch of hope though not of Tyrne. 
 
 His painefull, skillfull trauayles reacht as farre, 
 
 As from the Artick to tk’ Antartick starre ; 
 
 Hee made himselfe A sliipp. Beligion 
 His onely compass, and the truth alone 
 His guiding Cynosure, faith was his sailes. 
 
 His anehour hope, A hope that never fades; 
 
 His freighte was charitie, and his returne 
 
 A fruitfull practise. In this fatall vine 
 
 His shipp’s fayr Bulck is lodg'd but ® ritch ladinge 
 
 Is hous’d in heauen, In lieauen never fadinge. 
 
 i Salutatis ) 162G 
 iEtatis \ 46.” 
 
 Obit Anno 
 
 Beneath is inscribed, 
 
 “This Monument was Beautified by Mrs. Hannah Oliver, Widdow, 1733.” 
 
 The only mention of this excellent seaman made in our local annals, 
 is the following, by Mr. Seyer,* “ When the discovery of so many 
 countries and seas hitherto unknown had given a considerable impulse 
 to maritime adventure, the merchants of Bristol were not behind the 
 rest of their countrymen in seeking celebrity and profit by the same 
 means. ‘Mr. John Whitson and Mr. Ilobert Aldworth and others set 
 forth a ship for the discovery of the north-west passage, under the 
 command of Martin Prinne, being then but 23 years of age, who after 
 proved a very good seaman in the East India voyages.’ ” 
 
 Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 259. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 202 
 
 In the south aisle is a marble tablet inscribed as follows :— 
 
 “ Near this place are deposited 
 in the Family Vault the Remains 
 of David Peloquin, Esq., Alderman, 
 
 Eldest Son of Stephen Peloquin, 
 of this City, Merchant; 
 
 He changed this Life for a better, 
 the 21: March, 1766, aged 66 Years. 
 
 This Monument was erected 
 by Mary Ann Peloquin, 
 
 His only surviving Sister.” 
 
 “Mrs. Mary Ann Peloquin, by her will, dated the 27th April, 1768, 
 gave to the mayor and aldermen of the city of Bristol, the sum of nineteen 
 thousand pounds upon trust, that they and their successors should place 
 out the same at interest, under the security of the city seal, and that they 
 should, upon St. Stephen’s-day yearly, pay and apply the income arising 
 from the sum of £300. part of the aforesaid sum of £19,000. unto the 
 rector, curate, clerk, and sexton, of the parish of St. Stephen, for reading 
 prayers and preaching a sermon in the afternoon of that day, in that 
 parish church ; and upon further trust, the income arising from the 
 sum of £15,200, further part of the said sum of £19,000. that they 
 should for ever distribute the same amongst thirty-eight poor men and 
 thirty-eight poor women, not receiving parochial alms, and not occupy¬ 
 ing or keeping public or ale houses,” &c.* Mrs. Peloquin died July 
 23rd, 1778. 
 
 Among the rectors of St. Stephen’s occurs the name of “ Alexander 
 Stopford Catcott, a good poet, profound linguist, well skilled in the 
 Hebrew and the Scripture philosophy, and judicious schoolmaster.”! 
 He was subsequently vicar of Temple, and author of an ingenious 
 treatise on the Deluge. He “ left two cabinets containing fossils and 
 minerals, with a few coins and books,” to the City Library.^ 
 
 In the chancel, on the north side, near the pulpit stairs, is a tablet 
 inscribed 
 
 ‘ ‘ In Affectionate Remembrance of the 
 Rev. Charles Buck, M.A., 
 
 Who was the beloved Rector of this Parish, 
 for 28 years, and whose theme was ever 
 1 Christ Crucified ’ 
 
 Bom Jan)'- the 1st, 1796. Died Octr- 28 t h- 1858. 
 
 * Manchee's Bristol Charities, vol. i., p. 106. 
 
 * Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 512. t Appendix XXXIV. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 2G3 
 
 “ Taken from you in presence, but not in heart! 
 
 < For what is our hope, or joy, or crown of rejoicing? 
 
 Are not even ye in the presence of our Lord 
 Jesus Christ at his coming.’ 
 
 ‘ For ye are our glory and joy.’ 1 Thess. 11 . 19. 20. 
 
 Mr. Buck died at liis residence, Eastwood Villa, Durdkam Down. 
 He had resided in Bristol nearly forty years, having come here, 
 originally, as a curate to the Rev. T. T. Biddulph, at St. James s 
 Church, where his exemplary conduct gained him the esteem of the 
 inhabitants of that populous parish. On the death of the Rev. E. C. 
 Grevile, Mr. Buck was presented to St. Stephen’s, and the parishioners 
 respected him for his mild and unassuming carriage amongst them. 
 His remains were interred at the Cemetery, Arno s A ale. 
 
 In the centre of the churchyard, beneath a flat stone, uninscribed to 
 his memory, lie the remains of Mr. William Tyson, F.S.A., who died 
 September 30tb, 1851. He began his career in life at the office of Mr. 
 Coates, a respectable solicitor of this city, with whom he remained foi 
 about twenty years, and where he contrived to indulge his passion for 
 books, having collected several hundred volumes, which were sub- 
 sequently of great service to him when established as a bookseller in 
 Clare Street. In 1823 he brought out the “ Bristol Memorialist,” a 
 work containing essays and other articles, the joint contributions of 
 himself and a few friends. He also contributed occasionally to the 
 “Gentleman’s Magazine,” and assisted in other works. For the last 
 twenty-five years of his life he was intimately associated with the conduct 
 of the “ Bristol Mirror ” Newspaper, and was the confidential and 
 esteemed friend of the proprietor. The columns of that periodical were 
 constantly enriched by the quaint stores of his industrious mind, more 
 particularly with expositions of the antiquities of Bristol, and 
 chronicles of bygone families and events. He expired at his residence 
 in Dove Street. 
 
 Another helper in the science of antiquities lies in this churchyard, 
 without memorial to tell the passer-by his tale of sorrow and of death. 
 Beneath the second window from the south porch of this church, rests 
 all that was mortal of Hugh O’Neill, an antiquarian artist of no 
 common merit, who died April 10th, 1824. His numerous drawings, 
 illustrative of the Antiquities of Bristol, are scattered amongst many 
 possessors, but the chief portion are in the collection of the late George 
 
264 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Weare Braikenridge, Esq., at Broomwell House, Brislington, near this 
 city. 
 
 Connected with this church is “The Society of St. Stephen’s Ringers,” 
 which seems to have existed many years before Queen Elizabeth visited 
 this city, in 1574; the exact date of its establishment, however, is 
 unknown. On the occasion alluded to the Queen certainly promised 
 them a charter for their guidance, which was granted by her successor, 
 James I., in 1620. By this curious document it was enacted that 
 “Alle Memberres were to bee of peaceable and goode connversation—to 
 be readie to acceptte alle challenges, soe asse notte onely toe stoppe the 
 mouthes of alle those whoe exassperate themselves against usse, butte 
 also toe gainne creditte bye tkcirre musicalle exercises,”—that others of 
 their “riche neighboures, hearinge these loude Cymballes with theirre 
 earres, maye, by the sweette harmonie thereoffe, be ennlargedd in 
 theirre hearrts toe pulle one stringe, and make it more sweete.”—There 
 were to “bee foure Quarterres in the yeare, eache Memberre (was to) 
 paye thereonne a pennie, (and none were to) enterre the Societe whoe 
 wille notte give usse a Breakfaste, or forfeite three shillinges and four 
 pence; (and) if any manne curse, sweare, or use improper language, he 
 (was to) forfeite three pence; of the whiehe one pennie shalle be paide 
 toe the Sextonne, and the otherre twoe shall be spente uponne the 
 Companie. If anie manne bee soe saucie as toe touche a rope before 
 the Masterre or Seniorre Wardenne shalle bee settledd, hee (was to) 
 forfeite three pence.—Everie Masterre (was to be) chosenne on 
 Michaelmasse Daie betweene the houres of jive and eighte o’clock bine 
 the mominge ;—and iffe the Masterre neglect to send hisse Wardennes 
 toe warne the Companie, hee (was to) forfeite and paye six shillinges of 
 his owne proper monie; (and) if anie onne shalle misse toe strike hisse 
 belle, at the seconde swaye in the rising of a pealle, he shalle forfeite a 
 pennie;—(or) if anie one touched a rope in hisse fellowe’s hande, 
 whenne the Belle’s do welle ringe, soe asse toe make them flye offe, or 
 come tooe nearre, he (was to) forfeite a pennie.—Eache Wardenne, when 
 chosenne, (was to give the) Worshipful Mastcrra a pinte of wyne, or be 
 finedd three shillinges and four pence,—(and) Iff the chosenne Manne 
 (would) notte seryg asse Wardenne he (was to) paye onne shillmge and 
 sixpence;—(alsoMIff anie onne were so rude asse toe runne into the 
 belfrie, before he kneeled down, and prayed, asse everie Xtian oughte 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 205 
 
 to doe, Lee (was to) paye, forre Lisse firste offennce, six pence; and 
 forre the seconde, bee caste owtte of ye Societc d— (and further,) Iff anie 
 onne doe refuse toe paye the Fines, (it was ordained that he should) bee 
 utterlie excludedd, withoute bailie or mainnprize.” 
 
 By the provisions of this society it was ordered that, in remembrance 
 of deceased members or supporters, they should annually celebrate their 
 obit by a peal on the bells in St. Stephen’s tower; thus there was to 
 “ bee a Pealle onne everie 8th day offe Octoberre, in remembraunce off 
 Mr. Wm. Eaton, deaceased 1656; and hee whoe refused to assiste inne 
 ye same, (was to) forfeite four pennce—said W. E. having left unto ye 
 Societie £4 forre same.—On 20th of Novemberre, a Pealle (was to be 
 rung) inn remembraunce off George Witherby.—One on the 24th of 
 Octoberre inn remembraunce off William Nicholas;—and others for 
 Isaac Elton, Samuel Wyat, George Escott, John Maddick,” &c., etc. 
 
 There is a resolution on the records of this society for an increased 
 contribution from each member, towards its support (passed at an early 
 stage of its existence), as follows:— 
 
 “Whereass Quarrtridges of this Societie is butte onne pennie a 
 Quarterre, and itte notte beinge sufSciente toe supporte the rynnging 
 of Belles withoute inntrudinge uponne the Stocke, and we being 
 willinge toe keepe soe laudable a Societie, doo now a Gree toe paye a 
 sum of four pence.” 
 
 Tn the year 1701 it was resolved that, “Whereas a Bean-feast is held 
 for the Society of Ringers, all persons warned, and not coming, shall 
 forfeit twelve pence.” At this time the Society numbered about fifty 
 members. For many years they held their meetings “at the Goat on 
 the Key,” but in 1745 they removed to the Custom House Coffee 
 House; in 1751 to the Marine Coffee House; in 1771 to the New 
 Assembly Room Coffee House; and finally, in 1803 to the Montague, on 
 Kingsdown, where their annual festival still continues to be held. 
 
 The Merchant Venturers, now the only trading company or guild 
 remaining in the city, have a Common Hall in tills parish built in 1701, 
 but considerably altered and new fronted in 1790. This Society was 
 incorporated by King Edward VI., December 14th, 1551; and sub¬ 
 sequently confirmed by Queen Elizabeth, and King Charles I. “They 
 possess manors and lands to the amount of upwards of £3000 per 
 annum, in trust for the maintenance and support of certain almshouses 
 
266 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 in this city, and for other charitable uses.” * The principal merchants 
 of Bristol are members of this society, whose best energies are 
 continually engaged in promoting the welfare of the city, and the 
 interest of its trade and commerce with all parts of the world. 
 
 Contiguous to the Merchant Venturers’ Hall, is their hospital or 
 almshouse, in King Street, begun in 1696, and finished in 1698, so as 
 to complete the square of which the structure consists. Over the 
 centre of the building are the following lines, alluding to the aged 
 inmates of this charity:— 
 
 “Free from all storms, the tempest, and the rage 
 Of billows, we securely spend our age : 
 
 Our weather-beaten vessels here repair,— 
 
 Have from the generous merchants and their care 
 An harbouring here: we put no more to sea 
 Until we launch into eternity. 
 
 But lest our widows, which we leave behind, 
 
 Should want relief, they here a shelter find; 
 
 Thus all our anxious cares and sorrows cease, 
 
 Whilst our kind founders turn our toils to ease ; 
 
 May they he with an endless sabbath blest, 
 
 Who have afforded unto us this rest.” 
 
 There are nineteen seamen and twelve seamen’s widows maintained 
 in this hospital. 
 
 The Assembly Room, on the west side of Prince’s Street, has a 
 freestone front, and supported by Corinthian columns, with a central 
 projection, is an open pediment and a frieze inscribed in Latin, “ Music 
 dispels Care.” This room is 90 feet in length, and of lofty proportions; 
 with a good orchestra; formerly assemblies were held here every 
 Thursday during the winter, and conducted by a regularly appointed 
 master of the ceremonies, but they have been for some years discontinued. 
 
 Opposite the Merchants’ Almshouse in King Street, is an old house 
 adorned in front after the manner of the seventeenth century, w r hich, 
 with “ Its pointed gable, its curious ornamental and decorative work, 
 called pargetting, that covers the spaces between the diamond-paned 
 windows, and other peculiar and pleasing features of the period, indicate 
 its years and its past importance. What we now see is the back of the 
 house; the front faced the Marsh, then a green sw r ard, of which it had 
 an uninterrupted view, terminated by the winding river, and the hill 
 
 Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 181. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 267 
 
 of Redcliffe, crowned with its magnificent parish church. This was the 
 residence of the town clerk of Bristol, the noted John Romsey. Within 
 a room whose windows looked on the Marsh, and whose interior 
 decorations, high chimney piece, pannelled walls, and traceried ceiling, 
 correspond in character with the exterior of the house, (was) entertained 
 the Lord Chief Justice North, and his brother. The former having 
 just returned from opening the assizes,”* August 16th, 1680. 
 
 In Virgin Tavern Lane, in this parish, King Henry VI. directed a 
 chapel to be built in the year 1445. It was erected adjoining the old 
 Merchant’s Hall, which was also situated in this thoroughfare. The 
 Reformers in the sixteenth century objecting to everything that savoured 
 of honouring the Virgin Mary, changed the name of this lane into that 
 of Maiden Tavern Lane, by wdiicli it is still known. The Merchants’ 
 Hall stood at about its centre on the left hand side as the passage is 
 entered from Marsh Street; the site of the chapel is now a blacksmith’s 
 forge, the original entrance to which is the modern door of the smithy. 
 On the opposite side of the way was the Virgin Tavern, but of which 
 nothing remains. 
 
 The chapel here mentioned had a religious guild attached to it, which 
 the above-named monarch instituted “ for the soul’s health and good of 
 the king, the mayor and commonalty, and for the prosperity of the 
 mariners who were exposed to manifold dangers and distresses; (and 
 he ordained that) there should be a fraternity erected to the worship of 
 God, our Lady, St. Clement, St. George, and all the saints of heaven, for 
 a priest and twelve poor mariners to pray daily, as above,” Ac., &c. f 
 
 At the bottom of Clare Street, so named in compliment to Lord 
 Clare, member of Parliament for Bristol, the Floating Harbour is 
 crossed by the Drawbridge, first erected in 1714, at a cost of 
 £1066 6s. Id., and re-built in 1755; the former is skirted by the 
 Quay, which extends from the Stone Bridge round the west and south 
 sides of this parish, and further on along the banks of the rivers Froom 
 and Avon for upwards of a mile. 
 
 THE PARISH OF ST. LEONARD is divided from that of St. 
 Stephen on the west by St. Leonard’s Lane and part of Baldwin Street, 
 
 * Garrard’s Life of Colston, p. 304. In this house was lodged the infamous 
 Judge Jefferies when he held the Bloody Assize in Bristol, in September, 1686. 
 t Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 180. 
 
268 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 the line of separation crossing various back premises and yards in the 
 rear of -Marsh Street; then proceeding between the Merchants’ Alms¬ 
 house and the City Library, which it divides ; the latter building being 
 just within its limits, southward. On the east the line extends from the 
 back of the Theatre and the Coopers’ Hall to Baldwin Street, Nicholas 
 Street, and Corn Street, each of which it crosses, and terminates near 
 the Stone Bridge. 
 
 THE CHURCH OF ST. LEONARD stood upon one of the three 
 arched gateways, which, together, formed a triangle, the first leading to 
 Baldwin Street; a second to the Quay ; and that on which the church 
 was erected crossed Corn Street. This structure, which appears to 
 have been very small, was, together with the three gateways, removed 
 in 1771 for the purpose of widening the streets, then become necessary 
 through the increased traffic of the city. The parish was consolidated 
 with that of St. Nicholas, and the altar-piece belonging to the church, a 
 piece of modern woodwork in the Corinthian style of architecture, now 
 “ beautifies” the east end of Backwell Church, Somerset, one of the 
 most elegant little Perpendicular English structures in the West of 
 England ! 
 
 On building Stuckey’s Bank, in the year 1854, at the corner of St. 
 Nicholas’ Street, the crypt of this church was found to extend somewhat 
 under the thoroughfare, and was removed to the rear of the houses at 
 Cornwallis Terrace, Clifton, where it now stands. The vaulting is 
 singular, having but one rib on the south side, springing from the wall, 
 without corbel or support of any kind, and extending to the centre of 
 the arch, where it branches off in two directions, terminating in the 
 wall on the north side, after the manner of those on the south side. As 
 the roof of this crypt describes an equilateral arch, the date of its 
 erection appears, from this circumstance, and the character of the bosses 
 in the centre of the vaulting, to be about the middle of the thirteenth 
 century. There is an apartment very like the crypt of a church beneath 
 the Old Bank, in Corn Street, which by some is assigned to an eccle¬ 
 siastical structure ; but this is an error, as no such edifice ever extended 
 so far in that direction. It is more likely to be one of the cellars used 
 by the merchants of Bristol, in the middle ages, to deposit their mer¬ 
 chandize in, similar to those in High Street. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 269 
 
 The City Library was founded in 1613, when the Common Council 
 agreed, on the 6th day of December in that year, “ that if Mr. Robert 
 Redwoode, will give his Lodge adjoining to the Towne Wall neere the 
 Marsh of Bristol, to the Mayor and Commonalty to be converted to a 
 Librarye or place to put bookes for the furtherance of learninge, then 
 the same shal be thankefully accepted ; and that such bookes as shal 
 be given to the citie by the reverende father in God the Lord Arch¬ 
 bishop of Yorke, or any other well disposed pson for the furnishinge of 
 a librarye, shal be thankefully accepted, and preserved in the place 
 aforesayed.” This was the beginning of the City Library. Robert 
 Redwood gave his lodge, in King Street, Queen Square, to be converted 
 into a suitable building for such a purpose; and Dr. Tobias Mathew, 
 Archbishop of York, who was a native of Bristol, leaving, at his death, 
 in 1628, “a great portion of his books ‘to the merchants and shop¬ 
 keepers of this city,’” for their free use. Donations of books were 
 subsequently made by Robert Redwood, and “Mr. Vickris gave money, 
 and much money had been laid out by the city from time to time." * 
 
 In the course of years the lodge given by Robert Redwood, f became 
 “ ruinous, the books much damaged and in danger of being spoiled.” J 
 It was, therefore, resolved to build a new library, which was accordingly 
 proceeded with, and in 1740 the central portion of the present structure 
 was erected, at a cost to the city of £1301 8s. Id. In 1766, a gift of 
 books was made by John Heylin, Esq., which increased the number 
 then in the institution to about 2,000 volumes. A subscription library 
 was formed here in 1772, by the predecessors of the “ Bristol Library 
 Society," now located at the Bishop’s College, Queen’s Road; from 
 which date the citizens were virtually excluded from all access to their 
 own books, the Corporation giving “ the said society the use of the 
 Library House,” at a trifling nominal rent, and which they continued to 
 occupy until possession of it was recovered by the Town Council a few 
 years ago, when it was opened as a Free Library, September 15th, 1856. 
 
 On quitting the premises the Bristol Library Society removed their 
 books, leaving behind them, in the City Library, those only which 
 belonged to the citizens, which, as before stated, comprised about 2000 
 
 * Tovey’s Bristol City Library, p. 14. 
 t Appendix XXXV. f Appendix XXXVI. 
 
270 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 volumes. Of these (writing in 1810), the Rev. John Evans says, “The 
 condition upon which these books are accessible to the public are 
 unknown. Some years since, the Author applied to the Librarian of 
 the Society upon that subject, but the gentleman who then held the 
 office could give no information, nor did he even know that any 
 catalogue of these books was in existence.” * For twenty-five years, 
 too, the present writer was allowed occasionally to visit the institution 
 on sufferance, to consult some old volume which could be found 
 nowhere else in Bristol; yet at the same time, as a citizen, he had a 
 right to read that very book, but did not know it. On remonstrating 
 with the late librarian, when coming into office himself, as to his 
 keeping him in ignorance of his right to visit the library, he replied, 
 “You never asked me!” In this way the citizens of Bristol have been 
 excluded from their books by being kept in ignorance of their right 
 of access to them. Happily, this state of things is altered, and “ every 
 citizen of Bristol has (now) an undoubted right to inspect the curiosities, 
 and peruse the books contained in the Library. And they will not 
 abuse this privilege; for they well know that, by conforming to every 
 judicious regulation,—by handling carefully every book entrusted to 
 them,—preserving order and decorum,—they will assist those who are 
 striving to make this Library what it was intended to be by its 
 founders,—not an institution under a dominant power, smothered and 
 absorbed by a private Society, who envelope, as with a cloud, the 
 citizen's books and the citizen’s privileges,—but an institution for the 
 free dissemination of knowledge, without reference to party, sect, or 
 creed.” + 
 
 “ In February, 1785, a memorial was presented to the Corporation, 
 praying for a grant of void ground adjoining to the front of the library, 
 for the purpose of erecting a wing for the reception of their (the 
 Society’s) books, which were too numerous for the former building. 
 The Corporation not only granted the request, by resolution dated Feb. 
 16, 1785, but contributed also £100 towards fronting the proposed 
 building with freestone, which was finished in the spring of 1789. 
 The whole expense of building, erecting the gallery and fitting up the 
 
 * Evans’s Hist, of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 364. 
 t Tovey’s Bi-istol City Library, p. 44. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 271 
 
 new library-room with shelves, together with the expense of finishing 
 the rooms below, amounted to £894, of which £100 was the gift of 
 the Corporation,” who had, in 1740, paid £392 of public money for 
 the void ground referred to upon the memorial of the Bristol Library 
 Society, “the latter having, since 1773, the exclusive controul and use 
 of the City Library, besides an annual contribution, paid by the citizens, 
 of between £25 and £30 towards its support; (besides which 
 advantages) the Society derived a rental from the under portion of the 
 building.” * 
 
 “ It is a source of regret that the Bristol Library contains so few 
 publications relative to the City, which are of necessity only of local 
 interest; and that the productions of Bristol authors, merely as such, 
 are not to be found in the only Library in which we should expect to 
 find them. It might be presumed that every publication illustrating 
 the history, antiquities, or literature of our native city, would readily 
 find a place in this repository.” t The regret here expressed was written 
 in 1823, but it no longer exists, for since the library has again been 
 possessed by the corporation for the benefit of the citizens, its shelves 
 have been enriched by upwards of 500 volumes of books published in 
 the city, or written by natives and residents, on subjects more or less 
 interesting to Bristolians; besides upwards of fifty additional volumes, 
 containing more than 500 tracts and pamphlets, the whole collected by 
 the librarian, and preserved for reference only; many of these are of 
 great scarcity and value. Altogether the City Library now contains 
 upwards of 4,000 volumes of useful books which have been added to the 
 original collection of 2,000, free of cost to the city. The number of 
 readers availing themselves of the advantages of this institution annually 
 amount to more than 30,000. 
 
 The interior of this institution is substantially fitted up, and bears 
 some resemblance to the Bodleian Library at Oxford. On entering, the 
 first thing that attracts the visitor, is a very beautiful chimney piece, 
 ascribed to Grinling Gibbon,J consisting of representations of dead 
 game, fruit, flowers, &c., surmounted by an earl’s coronet, no doubt that 
 of a former earl of Burlington, for whom I believe this elegant piece of 
 
 * Bristol Memorialist, p. 205, and Tovey, p. 54. 
 
 + Bristol Memorialist, p. 206. I Appendix XXXVII. 
 
272 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 work was executed, muck of this kind of art being preserved at 
 Ckatswortk, the noble seat of the Duke of Devonshire, to which title 
 and estate a later Earl of Burlington has succeeded. In the centre of 
 this masterly carving is an oil painting, supposed to be the work of the 
 younger Weenix, who was born at Amsterdam in 1G44, and who 
 excelled as a painter of animals, flowers, and fruit, but particularly in 
 representing dead game, of which this picture chiefly consists. 
 
 THE PARISH OF ST. NICHOLAS has those of St. Stephen and 
 St. Leonard on the west; those of St. Werburgh and All Saints on the 
 north; and the Floating Harbour on the south and east sides. 
 
 THE CHURCH OF ST. NICHOLAS. The dedication of a church 
 upon this spot seems to have been at a somewhat remote period, probably 
 during the sway of the Saxons over the destinies of Britain. Of any 
 structure, however, of so early a date, there are no remains in the present 
 building, the oldest portion being the crypt, a good example of Per¬ 
 pendicular English architecture, and the only part of the edifice meriting 
 attention; this portion of the church was built early in the sixteenth 
 century; and its restoration is thus recorded on a brass plate at the 
 east end of the south aisle :— 
 
 11 This Crypt 
 
 is traditionally an ancient cemetery 
 of the original church of St. Nicholas, 
 which was founded in the reign of Canute the Great, 
 about the year of our Lord 
 MXXX ; 
 
 it appears to have been repaired and beautified during the reign of Edward III, 
 
 in the year 
 MCCCLXI; 
 
 a head of his Queen Phillippa being still perfect in the Key-stone of the first 
 It was afterwards [groin in the south aisle, 
 used by the Fraternity of the Holy Ghost 
 as 
 
 A Chapel, 
 in the year 
 M.D.III, 
 
 and was religiously preserved, when the ancient church was taken down and 
 
 in the year [rebuilt, 
 
 MDCCLXyill; 
 
 so long a period of time, having injured some of the arches, 
 the foundations were carefully examined and repaired, 
 and the whole building was restored to its original strength and beauty, 
 in the year of our Lord 
 MDCCCXXIII, 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 273 
 
 under the immediate superintendence 
 of 
 
 Mr. Jacob William Attwood, 
 one of the Churchwardens; 
 
 To Record whose indefatigable zeal in the prosecution of so laudable a work, 
 The Revd John Eden, B.D. Vicar, 
 and the other Members of the Vestry 
 have caused 
 This Tablet 
 to be erected.” 
 
 This crypt consists of two aisles; the roof is supported by massy 
 piers, with attached columns, from which spring the ribs of the 
 vaulting; the bosses at the intersection being in good keeping with 
 the rest of the structure. There is no boss or keystone in the groining 
 of this crypt, on which is a representation of the head of Queen 
 Philippa; the head dress in her time was quite of a different character 
 to that of any figure now existing in the structure. 
 
 The edifice raised above this crypt cannot be described architecturally; 
 the exterior of the body of the church is a bad imitation of the Per¬ 
 pendicular English style; the interior is a mixture of the Greek and 
 Roman orders; and the adjuncts altogether unworthy to be associated 
 with a crypt so fine as that which supports a building undeserving such 
 companionship. There is a spire to this church 205 feet in height. 
 
 Before the Reformation this church contained as many as eight 
 chantries. One was established by Richard Spycer, who built the 
 demolished chapel at the old Guildhall. Four others were founded by 
 Everard Le French, one by William Spencer, and two by Thomas 
 Knapp, who also founded the chapel of St. John the Baptist, in this 
 parish. The old church of St. Nicholas was pulled down in 17G2, and 
 the present architectural abortion erected in its room and finished 
 in 17G9. 
 
 In the crypt is an ancient altar tomb, or stone coffin, discovered 
 in November, 1821, which had once contained the bodies of two 
 persons, but only one skeleton was found in it entire, the other, 
 excepting the skull, having been burnt to ashes. On the lid of the 
 coffin is a foliated cross, and part of an inscription round the edge, from 
 which we gather that it perpetuates the memory of Mabel and Richard 
 Draper, one, or both of whom, according to the date on this relic, died 
 in 1311. Above the cross there appears to have been a human face 
 sculptured in relief, but all resemblance to features is totally obliterated- 
 
 w 
 
274 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 At the west end of the north aisle of this crypt, beneath an arched 
 canopy of the seventeenth century, in all the stiff formality of the 
 times, lie the effigies of one of Bristol’s magnates, with the following 
 inscription:— 
 
 “ 1741 
 
 In memory of that great benefactor to ® city 
 John Whitson, Mercht. Twice Mayor & Ald“ 
 
 & four times Member in Parliament for y City, 
 
 Who died in the 72 (i Year of his Age, A.D. 1629. 
 
 A worthy pattern to all that come after him.” 
 
 On a very costly modern tomb in the Perpendicular English style of 
 architecture, beneath the tower entrance at the west end of the church, 
 is another figure of this gentleman, habited in magisterial robes, the 
 dress not at all in harmony with the very elegant canopy beneath which 
 he reposes, and presumed to be of the age of Henry VII., whilst the 
 deceased flourished at least a century later. Beneath the above 
 inscription on the tomb in the crypt is added, 
 
 “ Out of his several estates he bequeathed as follows:—- 
 
 per annum. 
 £ s. d. 
 
 To Fifty-two Child Bed Women . 52 0 0 
 
 To the Red Maids’ Hospital . 120 0 0 
 
 To the Redcliff Free School . 8 10 6 
 
 To the Merchants’ Almshouse . 26 0 0 
 
 To poor Scholars at Oxford. 20 0 0 
 
 To poor Housekeepers. 52 0 0 
 
 To poor Widows . 26 0 0 
 
 To St. Nicholas Church . 3 0 0 
 
 £307 10 6 
 
 £500 to the use of Merchants and poor Tradesmen, interest free.” 
 
 John Whitson was born of obscure parents at Clearwell, in the parish 
 of Newland, Gloucestershire, and coming to Bristol a rustic lad, he 
 applied for work, and became the apprentice of Nicholas Cutt, a wine- 
 cooper and general merchant, whose residence in St. Nicholas Street 
 was afterwards the noted Queen Bess Tavern, pulled down in 1853 to 
 make way for the Bristol Athenaeum. By diligent conduct as a menial 
 servant he was so esteemed, and for his honesty so much respected, that 
 he was elevated to a clerkship in his master’s counting-house, whose 
 business flourished under his management, and was greatly increased by 
 
IIISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 275 
 
 his skill and industry. His master dying, he continued to conduct it 
 for his widow, whom he ultimately married. He was now raised to 
 affluence, and was chosen a member of the corporation of the city, 
 serving the office of sherilf in 1589, and mayor in 1G03, and 1615, and 
 was elected to serve in Parliament for Bristol in 1605, 1614, 1620, and 
 1625. He retired from business, and having buried all his children, 
 intended that his nephews should inherit the bulk of his fortune, but 
 overhearing them conversing one day about the great fortune they were to 
 inherit at his death, at the same time declaring their intentions of 
 spending it like gentlemen of fashion, in pleasurable and expensive 
 pursuits, he indignantly told them “ that since he heard from their own 
 mouths their resolution with respect to his fortune, they should now 
 hear his: that he had long been witness to the vicious and abandoned 
 course of life they were getting into, and had often remonstrated to no 
 purpose against it; that they now stood self-convicted, and to prevent 
 the infamy they might entail upon him, the public, and themselves, by 
 such irregular excesses, he was determined to put it entirely out of 
 their power.” Accordingly he made his will the 22nd of March, 1627, 
 and left the bulk of his fortune, after his wife, to charitable uses.* 
 
 Mr. Whitson “married three wives, the first Bridget, who had one 
 daughter, of the same name, by her former husband Trenchard, and 
 two by him, viz., Catharine and Ann, all buried in St. Nicholas Crowd. 
 His second wife was Magdalen; and he married late in life, thirdly, 
 Rachel, whom he left executrix to his will, giving her his house in 
 St. Nicholas Street, all his plate, £400 in money, a third part of £3000 
 the residue of his fortune, his small pointed diamond ring and his 
 chain of gold; and charges her faithfully and religiously to execute his 
 will, leaving £3 per annum to repair the church of St. Nicholas, and 
 20s. for two sermons, one on the 7th of November, for ever, that being 
 the day when he was stabbed by Christopher Callowhill with a knife, 
 which went through his nose and lip, into his mouth, but without the 
 effect of killing him, as intended; which attempt on his life was made 
 by reason of his having given an award in disfavour of the said 
 Christopher Callowhill, in a matter of debt, which was referred to him 
 (as an arbitrator) to settle.” t “He was buried the 9th of March, 
 
 TV 
 
 Catcott's Account of John Whitson, p. 34. 
 + Ibid, p. 34. 
 
 9 
 
276 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 1629, in the same grave where his three wives and daughters lie, 
 which is close before the monument. He was hurt by a fall from his 
 horse, which was supposed to have hastened his death, and being 
 Captain of the City Train’d Bands, they attended his interment, and 
 performed the usual honors over his grave, according to military 
 custom.” * 
 
 Against the east wall of the church, on a neatly sculptured marble 
 slab, is inscribed. 
 
 ‘ ‘ This monument (raised by voluntary subscription) is designed to perpetuate 
 
 [the memory of 
 
 Nathaniel Bridges, D.D. 
 
 for thirty-five years afternoon lecturer of this Church. He died on the 17th day 
 
 [of July, 1834, Aged 84. 
 
 He preached Christ crucified with ‘ Simplicity and Godly sincerity,’ his boldness, 
 [his energy, his affection, were of no common order. 
 To ‘ rich and poor,’ in private as in public; to the living and dying, he rejoiced 
 
 [to speak of Christ and of his ‘ Great Salvation.’ 
 Being ‘ led by the Spirit of God he lived to his glory,’ and died ‘ looking unto 
 
 [J esus. ’ 
 
 Rev. 3. 5—‘ He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; 
 and I will not blot out his name out of the Book of Life, but 1 will confess his 
 name before my Father, and before his angels.’ ” 
 
 Dr. Bridges was of Magdalen College, Oxford, where he graduated 
 M.A. in 1773, B.D. in 1780, and D.D. in 1784; and he was presented, 
 by that society, to the living of Willoughby, in Warwickshire, in 1792; 
 of this parish lie was vicar, and also of Hatton, a parish near Warwick, 
 where he was successor to the celebrated Dr. Samuel Parr. Dr. 
 Bridges was distinguished by a compass of mind, a vivacity of thought, 
 and a strength of memory, which were very remarkable in such an aged 
 minister; a pointed originality of language served him as a medium of 
 communication upon all subjects, more especially upon those of weighty 
 and important matters. 
 
 Erected against the north wall is a neat mural monument in the 
 Perpendicular English style of architecture, with engraved shields, 
 bearing initial letters of the names of the united parishes of St. Nicholas 
 and St. Leonard, Ac., beneath which, on wreaths or scrolls, is, “In the 
 hour of Death and in the Day of Judgment Good Lord deliver us;” 
 and, underneath, this inscription:— 
 
 Catcott’s Account of John Whitson, p. 36. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 277 
 
 “ By Parishioners and Friends in pious memory of John Eden, Bachelor 
 in Divinity and for forty one years vicar of the parishes of S. S. Nicholas 
 and Leonard, who deceased on the Feast of the Nativity in the year of our 
 Lord God MDCCCXL : being the LXXVIIPti year of his age.” 
 
 The remains of the Rev. John Eden were interred in the crypt of St. 
 Nicholas. He was a man of good general talent, and his classical 
 attainments were of first rate order; his acquirements, too, in literary 
 and scientific pursuits, and his love of such subjects formed a prominent 
 feature in his character. As a clergyman his learning was deep and 
 profound, and by practical Christianity he shewed the genuineness of 
 his faith. His charity was unostentatious ; his object being to alleviate 
 the sufferings of others rather than to appear himself in the act 
 performed. Few men have left a memory more revered for philan- 
 throphy and general benevolence. 
 
 There is a burial-ground belonging to this church, on the Welsh 
 Back, but it contains neither tombs nor inscriptions of interest. 
 
 “In this parish was formerly a chapel dedicated to St. John, and 
 another on Bristol Bridge, erected and founded by King Edward 3d. 
 and his Queen Philippa, and endowed by the mayor and burgesses of 
 Bristol, to which many left legacies. John Hanker and John Hackston 
 gave two messuages and three shops on the Back of Avon to John 
 Gweyn, chaplain there, to pray for their souls and their wives, &c., 49 
 Edward 3d. Pope Boniface, the 11th year of his pontificate, by a 
 special letter denounced the wrath of the Almighty and of the apostles 
 Peter and Paul against anyone who should hinder divine offices being 
 performed in this chapel, saving nevertheless to the church of St. 
 Nicholas its proper rights, dated at Rome the 11th year of his 
 pontificate, which chapel however has long since been desecrated.”* 
 
 The chapel above spoken of as dedicated to St. John the Baptist, was 
 situated on the Welsh Back, and “was founded by Thomas Knapp, for 
 an early Mass to be celebrated by two priests for the sailors leaving the 
 Port of Bristol; ” and it was ordained that the master and fellowship 
 were to have at their will, not only the chapel, but also “ the draught 
 chamber at Spicer’s t Hall to assemble in, paying 20s. per annum.” 
 
 * Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 505. Ante, p. 19. 
 
 + Dallaway’s Antiquities of Bristow, p. 135. Appendix XXXVIII. 
 
278 
 
 HISTOKY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Spicer’s Hall is now called tlie Back Hall, “ wliere (says Mr. Seyer) 
 was the chapel of St. Baldwin, (which) still forms a part of that 
 extensive messuage. The chapel is about 30 feet long by 20 wide, and 
 was, as I should suppose, the private chapel of the family. Another 
 room of smaller dimensions is also shewn as a chapel, which was more 
 probably a dining-hall. The strength of the whole building, the 
 number and size of the rooms, and the form of the doors and windows, 
 shew that this house was built in very ancient times, and for the use of 
 a large and wealthy family, although now reduced to bare walls, and 
 used as a warehouse for leather. Spicer’s Hall was bequeathed to the 
 Mayor and Commonalty in 1377 by Richard Spicer, merchant, who then 
 lived there.” * If so, what is now called the Back Hall must have once 
 formed two distinct properties, for we read that in 1569, John Willis, 
 the chamberlain, “ had obtained the Back Hall for a gift to the city, 
 wherein himself dyed,”f Spicer's Hall having been given almost two 
 centuries before. In 1588 the Back Hall seems to have been used for 
 warehousing goods, for “ All the canvass brought to St. James’s fair, 
 and deposited in the Back Hall for sale was bought, to make tents for 
 the camp at Tilbury;” that is, it was bought for the government, whose 
 custodian in 1611 was William Cary, mayor of Bristol, and keeper of 
 the Back Hall; now used as a market for raw hides and skins, which the 
 corporation were empowered to establish by Act of Parliament in 1788. 
 The entrance to what I believe was the part of the property comprising 
 Spicer's Hall, is from the Welsh Back, by a very beautiful doorway of 
 Decorated English architecture, which was the prevailing style of 
 building used in this country when Richard Spicer bequeathed his Hall 
 to the mayor and corporation of Bristol, in 1377- 
 
 The Coopers’ Hall, in Great King Street, is one of the very few halls 
 remaining of the chartered companies which once existed in Bristol. 
 It is a handsome modem freestone building, erected from a design 
 furnished by Halfpenny, the architect, and is of the Corinthian order; 
 but has long ceased to be used for the purpose it was erected for, and 
 is now occupied by a church and congregation of Baptist Nonconformists. 
 
 In the same street is St. Nicholas’ Almshouse, which has a row of 
 pointed gables surmounting it, and is one of the neatest structures of 
 
 * Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. i., p. 366. 
 t Bristol Memorialist, p. 44. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 279 
 
 the kind in the city. Beneath the ceiling of its chapel is inscribed, 
 
 This is 
 
 Saint Nicholas Alms House 
 1652. 
 
 In Great King Street is also the Theatre Royal. The first theatrical 
 representations in Bristol of which we have any account, were by those 
 persons who were, emphatically, “strolling players;” they were, for a 
 time, located in different parts of the city—in Tucker Street, in Stokes’ 
 Croft, and in St. Augustine’s Place. In Tucker Street the place of 
 performance subsequently became the meeting house of the church and 
 congregation of Protestant Nonconformists, afterwards removed, on 
 pulling down the premises, to Bridge Street Chapel; in Stokes’ Croft 
 they performed opposite the Baptist Academy; and in St. Augustine’s 
 their temporary theatre has become a chapel, where meet a body of 
 Christians under the ministry of the Rev. Messrs. Muller and Craik. 
 The first distinct building called a theatre was erected at Jacob’s Wells; 
 the company of performers, under Mr. Power, having been presented at 
 the general quarter sessions, in 1706, for acting of plays within the 
 liberties of the city, and in the parish of St. Augustine. They continued 
 at Jacob’s Wells until 1766, when a new theatre was erected, in Great 
 King Street, from a design by Mr. James Paty, architect, at a cost of 
 £5,000, and it was opened May 30th, in that year, and has been ever 
 since continued in the same place. It is said to have been pronounced, 
 by Mr. Garrick, the most complete in Europe, of its dimensions.* 
 
 The Bristol Athenaeum is situated in three parishes; St. Werburgli, 
 in which is part of its front entrance; that of St. Leonard, which 
 claims the other part; and the remainder, or the largest portion of the 
 entire structure, being in St. Nicholas. It stands on the site of the 
 premises once occupied by Alderman Whitson, afterwards the well 
 known Queen Bess Tavern, Nicholas Street, the tavern having been 
 demolished, as before stated, to make way for the present building. 
 Here stood a very interesting relic of the middle ages; the remains of 
 one of the halls belonging to a guild or fraternity of that period. It 
 was situated between Corn Street and St. Nicholas Street, at the back 
 of the Queen Bess, with which, also, it was destroyed. The structure 
 in question was erected due north and south, and was about forty feet 
 long and twenty wide. At the south end was an early Decorated 
 
 Appendix XXXIX. 
 
280 
 
 HISTOEY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 English window, and another had evidently been opened in the gable 
 above it. Beneath was a doorway which, with the windows, were 
 constructed in the reign of Edward II. 
 
 The interior of this hall had once been an object of much architectural 
 excellence; by far the most interesting portion of it was on the west 
 side, which displayed some fine examples of the architecture in fashion 
 even at an earlier period. Here was the Anglo-Norman pilaster 
 column, with the sculptured capital and circular arch mingling with the 
 slender pillar of a purely Early English character; carrying us back to 
 the year 1200. The building was traditionally called Alderman 
 Whitson’s Chapel, because that respected functionary resided in the 
 house to which it once belonged, and where he is said to have 
 entertained Queen Elizabeth in one of her progresses through the 
 kingdom; it w T as erected, however, some ages before he was born. 
 
 The Athenaeum was opened October 25th, 1854, and is a commodious 
 building, with lecture room, reading room, library, &c., and refreshment 
 rooms attached. 
 
 The Bristol Law-Library Society deposits its books, and holds its 
 meetings, in what w ? as once the state or banquetting-room of Hugh 
 Brown, who was one of the city sheriffs in 1G42, and, as such, sat with 
 his brother sheriff, Joseph Jackson, and the mayor, Richard Aldworth, 
 in Fiennes's Committee, levying taxes for the Parliament. He was 
 mayor in 1650, when the walls about the Royal Fort w T ere constructed 
 by order of the people’s House of Commons, who gave £100 towards 
 the work. 
 
 The state-room of Hugh Brown is a costly specimen of the style of 
 architecture which prevailed in the reign of Queen Elizabeth and her 
 successor, James I., and is well worth attention on account of its rich 
 tracery and carved work. 
 
 Up to the seventeenth century the space now occupied by Queen 
 Square, Prince Street, and the neighbourhood, was known as the Marsh, 
 and was a receptacle for the rubbish of the city; subsequent to this it 
 seems to have been a public promenade, and used also for military 
 exercises, particularly that kind of artillery practice called shooting at 
 butts. There w r ere pleasant walks made about the Marsh, which a 
 person was paid to keep in order; the mayor, Robert Aldworth, in 
 1610, with some of the magistrates, taking the Duke of Brunswick for 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 281 
 
 “ a walk about the Marsh, to show him some pleasure ; and in the 
 mean time the ordnance was discharged.” In 1698 the building of 
 Queen Square w r as commenced, which, in remembrance of the visit of 
 Queen Anne to the city, in 1702, was so-named. In 1710 it was 
 planted with cross rows of lime trees, but it was not completed until 
 1726 ; the equestrian statue of King William III., by Rysbrach, 
 accounted one of the finest works of art in Europe, being erected in the 
 centre, at a cost of £1800, in 1735; the rows of trees crossing the 
 square were cut down in 1776. In this square are the Custom House 
 and the Excise and Inland Revenue offices. 
 
 Baldwin Street is supposed to have been so called in compliment to 
 the Queen of William I., whose father was Baldwin, Earl of Flanders. 
 On the Welsh Back, at Messrs. Franklyn’s, tobacconists, are some very 
 beautifully carved apartments, the house having been once the residence 
 of Arthur Taylor, mayor of the city in 1731; the carving, however, was 
 the workmanship of a much earlier date than his year of office. In 
 Back Street are situated the newly erected Free Schools for the united 
 parishes of St. Nicholas and St. Leonard, built by voluntary contributions. 
 The structure is very neat and substantial. At the rear of this street is 
 the Rackliay, which obtained its name from being the Rackhithe, or 
 place where the cloths made in the neighbourhood by the manufacturers, 
 were extended and bleached. The Angel Inn, High Street, is by far 
 the oldest hostelry in the city of which there are any visible remains; 
 excepting, perhaps, the Hospital or Nunnery of St. Mary Magdalen, 
 now the King David Inn, St. Michael’s Hill, which appears to be of the 
 same date, that is, at least four hundred years old. When the Angel Inn 
 became a tavern is unknown, but it was once known by the sign of the 
 Bull, by which name it appears to be described in all agreements 
 relating to it; this animal is sculptured over a fire-place on the first 
 floor of the house. 
 
 THE PARISH OF ALL SAINTS has St. Nicholas and St. 
 Werburgh’s on the south and west, St. Mary-le-Port on the east, and 
 St. Ewen and Christ Church on the north. 
 
 THE CHURCH OF ALL SAINTS. The original structure 
 erected upon the site of the present fabric was of ancient date, and 
 probably built before the Norman Conquest. There are, however, no 
 
282 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 traces of the first church remaining, unless we suppose that the circular 
 columns at the west end of the interior support a portion of the wall 
 of that building, which is likely. The rest of the structure has been 
 restored since I last described it,* and it now presents a very pleasing 
 example of Perpendicular English architecture, with the exception before 
 mentioned at the west end, and the font, which is also Anglo- 
 Norman. The east window is filled with stained glass. 
 
 Over the north, or Jesus aisle, was the library of the kalendaries ; 
 their house was situated at the north-west end of the church, but of 
 which no traces are left. At the opposite corner is the vicarage-house, 
 which rests partly on the Anglo-Norman pillars before spoken of as 
 being at that end of the church, into which it obtrudes its unseemly 
 blank walls. It was built in 1422, by Thomas Marshall, vicar, one of 
 the kalendaries. The entrance doorway and some other portions of the 
 structure still remain in All Saints’ Court. 
 
 Chantries and altars were established in this church for the celebration 
 of obiits, by John Haddon, vintner; Sir Thomas Marshall, vicar of the 
 parish, who died January 17th, 1434; Sir William Rodberd, vicar, June 
 6th, 1453 ; Thomas Holway, December 13th, 1454; Everard French, 
 date not named; and Henry Chester, who died February 14th, 1470, 
 for himself and his wife Alice, who deceased December 16th, 1485. 
 Obiits were also kept here for John Snigg, and Sir Nicholas Parker, 
 vicar, the latter giving eight shillings per annum to provide ten pounds 
 of wax for two tapers to burn before the high altar. 
 
 A highly interesting relic of the middle ages was brought to light in 
 this parish on rebuilding the house, No. 41, High Street, in 1850, now 
 occupied by Mr. Fendick, chemist and druggist. Included within the 
 walls of these premises, at the west end, are the remains of a structure 
 which has every appearance of having been a chapel; the timber roof is 
 still preserved in its original position, and seems to belong to the reign 
 of Edward IV., but this is all that remains of this once beautiful little 
 sanctuary. The arches supporting this roof spring from corbels of 
 demi-angels and shields, but are greatly mutilated. 
 
 From the circumstance of this relic being immediately contiguous to 
 the Rummer Tavern, and also from other matters in relation to it, I 
 
 * Notes on the Ecclesiastical and Monumental Architecture and Sculpture 
 of the middle ages in Bristol, p. 217. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 283 
 
 have no doubt it was once the chapel of The Almys house,” a very 
 ancient building existing on this spot. It is not unlikely that the 
 passage to the Rummer, from High Street, formed the entrance to this 
 almshouse from the east, for on an oak beam, crossing this passage, is 
 part of an inscription as follows:— 
 
 “ 1581. THAT. WE : MATE . PRATE : WHYLES : WE : HAV ” 
 
 Here the inscription stops, the remainder of the beam on which it is cut 
 being built into the adjoining wall. This portion of an admonitory 
 sentence appears sufficient evidence that a religious house was once 
 established here, of which the almshouse, doubtless, was a part. 
 
 The monuments in All Saints’ Church are very interesting. “ Sir 
 John Duddlestone, Bart., lies buried with dame Susanna his lady under 
 the first pew coming into the church, on the right hand, at the north 
 door.—He was created a baronet January 11th, 1091. He was the 
 first baronet of his family, and was an eminent tobacco-merchant in the 
 house fronting the south side of St. Werburgh’s tower, the back part of 
 which is now called Shannon Court, within the parish of St. Werburgk, 
 who, on Prince George of Denmark’s arrival to see this city, was the 
 first person that invited him to his house, whereupon when that Priupe 
 came to London, he got him first knighted and afterwards a baronet’s 
 patent.” * This story is regarded as a mere fable.+ As the prince had 
 visited Bristol hi 1G8G, with his father-in-law, King James II., when 
 he partook of the hospitality of the city, and was paraded by the 
 corporation through its streets, it seems very unlikely that he was so 
 unknown here as to be indebted to a stranger for that entertainment 
 which many amongst men in office would have felt themselves honoured 
 to have invited him to. 
 
 All Saints’ Church has been, for generations past, the sepulchre of the 
 Colston family. Against the west wall of the north aisle is a monument 
 with emblematical figures, supported by Corinthian columns surmounted 
 by the arms of the deceased, and inscribed as follows:— 
 
 “To the 
 Dear Memory 
 of his Father William 
 Colston, Esq., & his Mother 
 
 * Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 445. 
 
 t See its exposure noticed in Notes and Queries, 2nd S. x., Oct. Gth, ’60, p. 268. 
 
284 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Sarah Colston, interr’d near this 
 place in ® Sepulchre of his Ancestors, as also 
 their four Sons, William, Thomas, 
 
 Robert and William, & their two 
 daughters Martha & Martha, 
 who were all Natives & Inhabitants 
 of this City. William his Father 
 died ® 21 Nov. 16S1, Aged 73 Years; 
 
 & Sarah his Mother ® 22 December, 
 
 1701 Aged 93 years. 
 
 Edward Colston their 
 Eldest Son born likewise in 
 this City, but Inhabitant of 
 London, hath Dedicated 
 this Monument.” 
 
 William Colston, whose name is here recorded, the father of the 
 philanthropist, was descended from Robert de Colston, of Colston Hall, 
 Lincolnshire, whose ancestors were a family of consequence at the time 
 of the Norman Conquest. His grandfather, Thomas Colston, was an 
 eminent Bristol merchant; sheriff of the city in 1561, mayor in 1577, 
 and died after a life of honour and usefulness, and was buried in 
 All Saints’ Church, where, according to Mr. Barrett, “On an old stone 
 under the reading desk was the following: — 
 
 “Thomas Colston, 
 
 Mayor and Alderman of this City, 
 died 16 November, 1597. 
 
 Death is no death, now Thomas Colston lives, 
 
 Who fourscore years hath lived to his praise : 
 
 A joyful life now Christ doth to him give, 
 
 Who wrong’d no wight, each man commends his ways. 
 
 Death him commands to bid this world adieu ; 
 
 Thrice happy those who die to live anew. ” * 
 
 William Colston, the son of this Thomas, and the father of Edward 
 Colston, bom in 1608, was married January 23rd, 1635, to Sarah, 
 daughter of Edward Batten, Esq., barrister-at-law of the Inner Temple. 
 He served the office of sheriff of Bristol in 1643, and was also deputy- 
 lieutenant of his native city. He had the command of a small fort at 
 Kingsdown, which, from him, was called Colston's Mount, and he had 
 
 History of Bristol, p. 443. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 285 
 
 the honour of entertaining Charles I. and his two sons at his house in 
 Small Street. “ His commercial pursuits, followed with strict integrity 
 and honest industry, appear to have been generally successful; but in 
 the latter part of 1657, he sustained a heavy loss in the capture of a 
 vessel by the Spaniards, called the Society of Bristol, and commanded 
 by William Hale. The greater part of the freight consisting of wine 
 and oil, was the property of Colston. She was on her homeward 
 voyage from Marcella, in Provence, and w T as taken into Alicant, where 
 her cargo was sold. Previous, however, to this trial, he had arrived at 
 that period of life when the City was to be deprived of the services of 
 an active Magistrate, and the King of a most loyal subject. Deafness, 
 with other infirmities incident to old age, had now taken possession of 
 his frame. He would only hold office while he felt that his faculties 
 were equal for the discharge of its duties. His intention was notified 
 to the Corporation June 7th, 1664, when he bade adieu for ever to the 
 great theatre of public life.” * 
 
 At the east end of the south aisle of All Saints’ Church is a noble 
 monument of the Corinthian order, beneath the pediment of which 
 reclines the recumbent figure of Edward Colston (son of the above), by 
 Rysbrach; the whole of white marble, surmounted with his arms.f On 
 this tomb, upon two tables, is inscribed a list of his charities,$ and on a 
 slab beneath the figure is— 
 
 “ Edward the son of William Colston, Esq ; 
 and Sarah, his Wife, was born in this City, 
 
 Nov: 2<1 1636. Dy’d at Mortlake in Slurry, 
 
 Oct: 11th 1721 and lyes buried near this 
 Monument.” 
 
 Edward Colston was baptized at Temple Church, in this city, 
 November 8th, 1636. We know very little of his early life, but when 
 “ at years of maturity he was sent as a factor to Spain, where he 
 behaved with great diligence and prudence; ” § his uncle being consul 
 there. He appears to have made much wealth by cultivating a trade 
 in fruit and oil with that country; and it is thought that great riches 
 
 * Garrard’s Life of Colston, p. 12. 
 
 + Argent, two barbels, respecting each other sable, conjoined with a collar 
 and chain pendant or. 
 
 t Appendix XL. § Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 654. 
 
286 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 came to him by descent, but that is matter of uncertainty; that he was 
 very successful in all his undertakings cannot be doubted, for he never 
 insured a ship, nor did he ever lose one, and immense sums flowed into 
 his coffers as the result of his fortunate speculations. 
 
 It has been seen that Colston’s father resided in Small Street, in this 
 city, and there, too, resided the son when his business called him to his 
 native place, but, perhaps, quite as often in the metropolis, keeping no 
 establishment at either, until he finally settled in the neighbourhood of 
 the latter, at Mortlake, in Surrey, about the spring of the year 1689. 
 There “ His style of living was simple; conformable to his position as 
 a private gentleman. Economy, the habit of his life, regulated his 
 expenditure. If he had any pursuit beyond that to which the energies 
 of his declining years were devoted, it was the indulgence of a taste for 
 ornamental gardening. Choice shrubs and evergreens were cultivated 
 in his grounds. The walks were gracefully laid out, carefully maintained, 
 and decorated with statuary.” * In this retirement he spent the re¬ 
 mainder of his days; and in anticipation of the final change that 
 awaited him, he, “ nine years before his death had written directions 
 for his funeral (with) an interesting estimate of the expenses ! ” + From 
 these directions we learn that “ his corpse was to be carried (from 
 Mortlake) to Bristol in a hearse, and met at Lawford’s Gate, and 
 accompanied from thence to All Saints' Church by all the boys in his 
 Hospital on St. Augustine’s Back, and by the six boys maintained by 
 him in Queen Elizabeth’s Hospital in the College Green. And also by 
 the twenty-four poor men and women (or so many of them as were able) 
 in his Almshouse on St. Michael’s Hill. Likewise by the six poor old 
 sailors that were kept at his charge in the Merchants’ Almshouse in the 
 Marsh. And likewise by the forty boys in Temple parish, that were 
 clothed and otherwise provided for by him.” And we learn further, 
 “That the funeral procession consisted of a hearse and six horses, 
 covered with plumes and velvet, attended by eight horsemen in black 
 cloaks, and followed by three mourning coaches, with six horses to each. 
 Twelve pages with caps and truncheons, and additional mourning coaches, 
 accompanied it to Brentford. The dismal parade was a week on its 
 
 Garrard’s Life of Colston, p. 323. 
 + Ibid, p. 464. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 287 
 
 slow and melancholy journey; and where it rested on the road, the 
 rooms were hung with deep mourning. A large velvet pall, edged with 
 silver (was used). Shields and eight large silver candlesticks were 
 placed around the coffin; and a lid with plumes of fine ostrich feathers, 
 surrounded by a rail, enriched with silk escutcheons and accordant 
 plumes. Upon this solemn garniture, the dark livery of death, a 
 brilliant light was cast from six wax candles in large silver candlesticks, 
 and from four dozen tapers in silver sconces, which, with escutcheons, 
 were arranged around the room. And all this preparation for the tomb 
 that sank cold and dead upon the hearts of the gazers, was for one 
 whose living presence had ever been the herald of comfort, happiness, 
 and peace. Thus, with all the furniture of the grave, which the cunning 
 of man could devise, to give a moral and an impress to the solemnity of 
 death, were the remains of the honoured dead borne from Mortlake.” * 
 The body was interred under the communion table in All Saints’ 
 Church, where it was found in 1843, when the structure was being 
 restored. The features were perfect, and strikingly like those of the 
 figure by Eysbrach, on his monument. 
 
 Colston is renowned for his charity, but it would seem that he only 
 was worthy of his bounty who was a firm supporter of Church and 
 State, and an adherent to things as they were. He was himself what 
 is known as a high churchman, and high also in politics; and perhaps, 
 too, a little intolerant of others. His hatred of, and “ antipathy to, 
 Dissent, it must be acknowledged, approached the confines of bigotry; ”f 
 this, the writer calls a weakness, if so, it was a pitiable one. Colston 
 was a steward of the wealth he had accumulated, and in doing good 
 with it he only did his duty. He was but a man, with all his ex¬ 
 cellencies, and subject, like others of his kind, to error; and it is only as 
 such that we can regard him. Yet the fulsome adulation paid to his 
 very failings, by some writers, is positively sickening. With such 
 persons we can have little sympathy, for “ Those biographers who exalt 
 every merit of their hero, and defend all his actions, either deceive 
 themselves or wish to impose upon the world. That which is instructive 
 in itself, is the study of men as they were, whether heroes, or statesmen, 
 
 Garrard’s Life of Colston, pp. 464, 466. 
 t Ibid, p. 435. 
 
288 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 or poets, when they have been swept away by the storm, or have fallen 
 in natural decay and are scattered.” * * * § 
 
 The Rev. John Evans says, “ In the centre of Bristol stood the 
 celebrated High Cross, and round it were four Churches; three of which 
 are All Saints’, St. Ewen’s, and Christ Church. The name of the 
 fourth is conjectured (from information the source of which we do not 
 at present recollect), to have been St. Andrews.” t 
 
 It is somewhat remarkable that no mention should have been made 
 of this church until the year 1816, when the above quotation appeared 
 in the appendix to the work I have cited. In 1843 it was repeated by 
 the editor of the “Archaeological Magazine of Bristol,” &c., who, at page 
 55, says, “ St. Andrew’s (church) stood upon the spot now occupied by 
 the Castle Bank.” This article furnished a third writer (who should 
 have known better) with the outline of a paper contributed by him to 
 an Archaelogical society, in which he re-asserts, without caring to 
 inquire whether correct or not, what he already finds in print in that 
 periodical, although no proof whatever has been offered, by any writer, 
 that a church ever stood upon the spot indicated, which is in the parish 
 of All Saints, whether set apart to the honour of St. Andrew or to any 
 one else.J 
 
 Although we have no positive testimony that a church did not stand 
 at the corner of High Street and Wine Street, the site of the old Castle 
 Bank§ during the middle ages, we have sufficient negative evidence that 
 such was not the fact. William Wyrcestre, who is by far the best 
 authority we can consult on the subject, made a survey of this, his 
 native town, between the years 1470 and 1480. With his usual 
 accuracy and painstaking minuteness he has carefully noted every 
 particular relating to the position of Christ Church, St. Ewen, and 
 All Saints’ churches, but makes not the slightest allusion to any fourth 
 structure, monastic or otherwise, at the angle of the streets mentioned. 
 Leland, too, who visited Bristol about half-a-century later, although he 
 enumerates every church and religious house in the town, says not a 
 
 * Lord John Russell. Appendix XLI. 
 
 t Hist, of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 441. 
 
 X Proceedings of the Archaeological Institute for 1851, p. 119. 
 
 § This building is now occupied as a shop, Stuckey’s Banking Company 
 having removed to their new premises in Corn Street. Appendix XL1I. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 289 
 
 word about any building at the place named; nor does he make the 
 slightest reference to any church whatever being dedicated to St. 
 Andrew. And further, the name does not appear, either before or 
 subsequent to the Reformation, in any list of Bristol churches included 
 in the archdeaconry—in fact, it cannot be found anywhere, except in the 
 visionary speculations of the writer of the paragraph with which the 
 subject of St. Andrew’s church was introduced, and who “ conjectured 
 (from information the source of which he could not recollect) that the 
 name of the fourth (church) must have been St. Andrew’s.” We may, 
 therefore, safely affirm that in Bristol, at least, such a structure never 
 had existence. 
 
 In continuation of the paragraph quoted above, Mr. Evans adds, that 
 “ the crypt of the church is at this moment nearly entire, constructed 
 of massive walls and arches; and the houses erected thereupon seem to 
 have been raised within part of the outer walls of this ancient edifice.” 
 
 The idea that a pariah church was ever erected on this spot I have 
 before repudiated,* there being no parochial appointments or boundaries 
 belonging to it—a circumstance which I regard as sufficient evidence 
 that, as a distinct church, it never had a being. Since then an 
 examination of this so-called crypt, as well as the adjoining premises, 
 shows that the roof of the former is supported by ribs springing from 
 quadrangular corbels. In the centre of the groining were formerly two 
 bosses, but one only remains, and this is wrought into leaves of good 
 design in the Perpendicular style of English architecture. Descending 
 a few feet from this apartment westward, underneath the pavement of 
 High Street, is a narrow pointed arched passage, Without ribs or 
 ornament of any kind, and through which tradition says that prisoners 
 were conveyed from the Guard House, in Wine Street, down to the river, 
 where is a corresponding passage at the corner of Bridge Street, with a 
 small doorway, now walled up, but once opening to the river Avon, t 
 This passage, in all probability, originally extended the entire length of 
 the street, as did arched cellars, like that presumed by the Rev. John 
 Evans to be the crypt of St. Andrew’s Church, under every house in 
 
 * Notes on the Ecclesiastical and Monumental Architecture and Sculpture 
 of the Middle Ages in Bristol, p. 200. 
 
 + The tradition referred to is clearly a mistake, as there was no guard 
 house in Wine Street before the Civil Wars, in the reign of Charles I. 
 
 X 
 
290 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 High Street, several of which remain ; and as they are all constructed 
 in the same style of architecture, we have no reason to conclude that 
 any one of them was ever the crypt of a church, or of an ecclesiastical 
 structure of any kind. They were, in short, nothing more than 
 subterranean apartments, in which the merchants of the fifteenth 
 century kept their heavier goods. 
 
 The only objects of interest in the superstructure of the houses 
 adjoining, and which have the slightest reference to the middle ages, are 
 two small door-frames of stone, in the same style of building as the 
 cellars described, and which we may presume “ have been raised within 
 part of the outer walls of the ancient edifice,” whatever that may have 
 been. They are not, however, “ large arches, sufficiently large for the 
 support of buildings of considerable altitude,” * but merely doorways, 
 of no greater magnitude than most of those which are continually met 
 with in old domestic structures, and to some such erection, alone, I 
 regard them as having originally belonged. 
 
 Opposed to the statement of the Rev. John Evans is that of Mr. 
 Barrett,f who says, “ Before the Kalendaries were removed to All 
 Saints (in the twelfth century), and had their library in the rood-loft or 
 chamber (built in 1461), adjoining to the street on the north side of 
 that church, their house and school were in Wine Street, near Christ 
 Church, probably at the corner of High Street, where was their church, 
 formerly one of the four churches round the High Cross.” In this 
 passage we have (not the church of St. Andrew, but) the house and 
 school of the Kalendaries at the vacant corner of High Street, “where 
 (he says) was their church.” 
 
 From this statement we are to believe that, during the interval 
 between the removal of the kalendaries from Christ Church, in the 
 twelfth century, to their new library over the north aisle of All Saints’ 
 Church, which was built in 1461, “their house and school were in 
 Wine Street, probably at the corner of High Street.” William Wyrcestre 
 has already been a negative witness in this matter, but here his jyositive 
 testimony annihilates, at once, all our author’s probabilities upon the 
 subject; for he speaks distinctly of the rebuilding of the south (not the 
 
 Proceedings of the Archaeological Institute for 1851, p. 120. 
 + Hist, of Bristol, p. 457. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 291 
 
 north, observe, as stated by Mr. Barrett) aisle of All Saint’s Church, 
 when he was a boy of five years of age, that is to say, about 1420— 
 full forty years before that writer tells us the new h'brary was occupied 
 as a school by the kalendaries. Furthermore, William Wyrcestre adds 
 to his notice of the rebuilding of the south aisle of All Saints’ Church, 
 that the college of the kalendaries was adjacent, and served for a 
 chapel ! * 
 
 Here, then, we are furnished with the key by which to explain the 
 true meaning of Mr. Barrett’s unpardonable blunder, and it is this— 
 that the house and school of the kalendaries did not stand, as he says, 
 with their church, at the corner of High Street and Wine Street, but 
 at the south-east end of All Saints’ Church, now occupied by the shops 
 and passage, and perhaps the National Provincial Bank, at the corner of 
 High Street and Corn Street. On this spot, without doubt, the college 
 and chapel of the kalendaries were situated at that time, and not on the 
 opposite side of the street, as stated by Mr. Barrett. If it were not so, 
 it is difficult to know how it could be said, with propriety, that 
 All Saints’ Church, which is at a distance from the corner of High 
 Street, could be regarded as one of the three churches which surrounded 
 the High Cross on as many sides. 
 
 The Exchange is chiefly situated in this parish, and so also are the 
 principal markets. The former was erected by the Chamber of Bristol, 
 at a cost of nearly fifty thousand pounds; the foundation being laid 
 March 10th, 1740, and the structure opened for public use in 1743. 
 “As it is the sole property of the corporation of Bristol, so it was 
 ordered that the ceremony of opening it should consist in the corporation 
 meeting the society of merchants and other traders of the city at the 
 Guildhall, in Broad Street, and in walking with them from that hall in 
 procession to the Exchange.” This was done with every demonstration 
 of joy and rejoicing, and a day of general festivity followed, which was 
 on September 27tli in the year before mentioned, the market having 
 been already opened on March 27th previously; the architect was 
 Mr. Wood, of Bath. 
 
 In front of this building are erected four pillars of brass, which, 
 more than a century ago, stood between the columns which supported 
 
 Dallaway’s Topography of William Wyrcestre, p. .34. 
 
292 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 the shed or penthouse called the Tolzey, a structure extending the whole 
 length of the north side of All Saints’ Church, against which it was 
 raised. At the west end it joined the house of the kalendaries, at the 
 base of which was All Halon conduit. The Tolzey was the place where 
 our merchant ancestors met for business, and when, in 1771, the 
 pavement in and about it, and also before the Council House, on the 
 opposite side of ths street, was altered, the brass pillars were removed 
 to the place they now occupy; previous to which, our merchants paid 
 for their purchases on them; hence, I believe, originated the phrase, 
 “pay down upon the nail,” that is, upon either of these pillars, which 
 were then called nails. 
 
 The first of these pillars of brass (travelling from east to west), 
 appears to be somewhat older than the rest, and bears on its face a 
 shield charged with a chevron; but there are no perceptible marks 
 indicating the colours ; all traces, also, of an inscription are entirely 
 removed. On the pedestal is a small ornamented band, divided into 
 compartments, containing birds volant or animals rampant; and beneath 
 it is scroll work with acorns. Still lower down, in two bands, is a leaf 
 ornament with acorns at intervals. This pillar appears to be of a date 
 late in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, or early in that of James I. 
 
 The second pillar, westward, is inscribed in Latin on its face, and in 
 Roman capitals, as near as I can decipher it, “ They have related that 
 which is unworthy of note; what is worthy of praise they have omitted. 
 No man lives to himself.” Between this inscription appears a very 
 large Roman letter P, extending its entire depth, and under it appears 
 
 to be, “ Hilarlidatore d.cli (probably part of a date) Devs.” 
 
 There have been some other words beneath, but only a few straggling 
 letters can now be made out. In a circle or garter surrounding the 
 above, in the same character, is, “ This post is the gift of Master 
 Robert Kitchin, Merchant, sometime Maior and Alderman of this city, 
 who dec. 5 Septemb. 1594.” Round the upper edge or rim of the 
 pedestal of this pillar is inscribed, “ His execvtors were fower of his 
 serrvants, John Barker, Matthew Haviland, Abell Kitchin, Alderman of 
 this city, and John Rowborrow, Sheriff, 1G30.” 
 
 Encircling the face of the third pillar is, “ Praise the Lord O my 
 soule, and forget not all his benefits. He saved my life from destruction 
 and.to his mercy and loving kindness. Praise.; ” 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 203 
 
 and round the rim, or upper edge, beneath is, “ Thomas Hobson made 
 me, Nicholas of London gave me to this honourable citty, in 
 remembravnce of God’s mercy, in Anno Domini 1625. N.C.” 
 
 Inscribed round the face of the fourth pillar is, “ This is the gift of 
 Mr. George White of Bristoll, Merchaunt, brother vnto Doctor Thomas 
 White, a famous benefactor to this citie, A.D. 1631 and upon the 
 rim beneath is, “ The Chvrch of the livinge God is the pillar and 
 grovnd of trevth. So was the worke of the pillars finished.” There 
 appear to have been engraved on the face of this pillar, six lines in 
 verse, and a shield, the latter most probably bearing the arms of White; 
 but the whole is greatly obliterated There is no ornament whatever on 
 the pedestals of the three last-mentioned pillars. 
 
 The colonnade or covered way, called the Tolzey, which had served 
 as the Exchange, or business place of our merchants, since its erection 
 in 1616, was taken down in 1782, the necessity for its continuance 
 having been removed by the erection of Mr. Wood’s noble building 
 contiguous to it. There was also a place of justice called the Tolzey, 
 which was built in 1550. 
 
 It is not known when inns and taverns were first established in 
 Bristol, but the first we read of is in connection with this parish, and 
 occurs in the year 1350, when “ Stevyn Gnowsale zaue (gave) to the 
 Chvrch (All Saints’) xijd. goyng owte of I Tenement next Abyndon ys 
 Inne nowe called ye Almsyshowse.” This inn was situated in Venny 
 Lane, the modern All Saints' Lane, and was named after its owner, who 
 belonged to a very ancient Bristol family long resident in this parish, 
 one of whom, Henry Abyndon, was a distinguished musical genius. * 
 Abyndon’s Inn was rebuilt before 1565, and called the New Inn. In 
 that year some soldiers came to Bristol, on their way to Ireland, but 
 being detained by contrary winds, “ Three or four ruffians of them 
 began a brawl with the citizens at nine o’clock at night,” which, it 
 appears, was quelled chiefly through the instrumentality of “ Captain 
 Gilbert, who being lodged at the New Inn, behind All Saints' Church, 
 came with his sword and target requiring peace.”f The New Inn was 
 subsequently called “Jonas,” alias the New Inn. At what period it 
 
 * Appendix XLIIL 
 
 t Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 239. 
 
294 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 acquired tlie additional name is unknown, but it certainly was before 
 the year 1C0G, when it appears amongst a list of inns to be permitted 
 in Bristol. Before the erection of the Exchange, in 1743, the New Inn 
 had changed its name for the Rummer, by which designation it has 
 continued to be known to the present day. Soon after the last 
 mentioned date the second structure was pulled down, and rebuilt as it 
 now appears, but shorn somewhat of its former dimensions. 
 
 Mention is made by Mr. Barrett of the Guillows Inn, in High Street, 
 which, he says, John Ship ward, a wealthy Bristol merchant, gave to St. 
 Stephen’s Church in 147 3, with other buildings, for two chaplains to 
 celebrate his obiit.* This is doubtless the same hostelry as the celebrated 
 Guilders' Inn, which stood on a large and irregular site, part of which 
 is now occupied by the Exchange. It had two entrances, the principal 
 oue being from High Street, and the other from that of St. Nicholas, 
 which was, of course, by a passage. The Crown, in the market, 
 also occupies part of its site; in fact, in later times, the Crown, and the 
 Guilders’ Inn, were terms used to signify the same tavern. 
 
 One of those calamities to which hostelries were peculiarly subjected 
 during the prevalence of the Plague in England seems to have befallen 
 Henry Hobson, the host of the Guilders’ Inn, in 1608, at which time, 
 although that fearful scourge was not then raging in Bristol, he was 
 compelled to close his establishment, a report having reached the 
 authorities that his house was infected, and, to prevent the contagion 
 spreading, it was guarded by watchmen. 
 
 This inn seems to have been a leading hostelry in the city, for here, 
 in April, 1625, the merchants of Bristol entertained the Turkish 
 Ambassador at a supper, given him on the occasion of his passing 
 through it, on his way to London; and that the Guilders’ Inn retained 
 its high character at a subsequent period, we have the testimony of a 
 Norfolk captain “ of the Military Company in Norwich,” who, with two 
 brother officers, travelling for pleasure in 1634, visited Bristol in the 
 course of their journey. After describing their progress through the 
 county of Gloucester, he says, “And soe wee early ended our fifth 
 weekes trauell with the finit of that Sheere, at the noble City of 
 Bristow & at Guilliards Inne there wee tooke up our 5th weekes 
 
 Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 511. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 295 
 
 Sabbath dayes rest, with Mr. Hobsou, a graue, proper, honest and 
 discreet Host, lately a bounteous, gentile, free & liberall Mayor of that 
 sweet and rich City. Indeed a man more fit for such a place than such 
 a House. There were wee well <fc happily billeted, and no way 
 molested, but by one of his hungry, domestick Servants, who no sooner 
 saw vs every meale, but scar’d vs into an eating ffeauer.” * 
 
 The last notice we have of the Guilders’ Inn is under date of 1740, 
 when its site was required for the Exchange, and the old hostelry 
 was demolished accordingly. With it has also disappeared an old 
 Shakesperian Inn, situated in High Street, known as the “Grene Lates” 
 (Green Lattice), which took its name from the colour of the lattice or 
 chequer painted at the door-posts and windows of taverns, to indicate 
 that the house was a jiublic one. The Three Tuns, too, which stood 
 opposite the new building erected for the accommodation of the West 
 of England and South Wales’ Banking Company, is gone. Here, in 
 1G87, the Pope’s Nuncio was entertained—at his own expence ! This 
 tavern had an entrance, also, in All Saints’ Lane, facing All Saints’ 
 Passage from High Street. 
 
 There is an alms-house belonging to this parish, situated in All Saints’ 
 Street, which was rebuilt in 1813. It is a square building in front, but 
 behind the street it is a neat circular edifice, accommodating eight 
 women. 
 
 The west side of High Street, situated in All Saints’ parish, consists 
 of many very ancient houses, whose gabled super-structures and timber 
 fronts bespeak an age which refers to centuries ago. This street 
 conducts to the river Avon, which is crossed by a substantial stone 
 bridge of three arches. When it was determined to erect this structure, 
 in 1759, various architects sent in designs for the building, but that of 
 Mr. James Bridges was selected; and an Act of Parliament being 
 obtained in 1760, authorizing the erection, a temporary bridge was 
 raised in 1761, by the side of the old one, the houses remaining on 
 which were sold to the highest bidder, and the work of demolition 
 commenced in the early part of July in that year; and on the 25th of 
 June, 1768, the last stone was set in the centre arch of the new 
 
 * Manuscript in the Lansdown Collection in the British Museum. Henry 
 Hobson was sheriff in 1616, and mayor of Bristol in 1632. 
 
296 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 structure, and it was opened, forthwith, for public traffic. By this 
 bridge we quit the Gloucestershire side of Bristol for the present, and 
 enter that part which lies in the county of Somerset. It consists of 
 three parishes as it did before the Reformation. 
 
 THE PARISH OF ST. THOMAS, the first entered on crossing 
 the bridge, is bounded on the north and west by the River Avon or 
 Floating Harbour, on the south by the parish of St. Mary Redcliffe, and 
 on the east by that of Holy Cross, or Temple. 
 
 THE CHURCH OF ST THOMAS THE MARTYR was 
 so distinguished in very early records, being a chapel to Bedminster, 
 and it was so dedicated. The old church was taken down in 1789, 
 with the exception of the tower, which has been denuded of its 
 battlements and every other kind of ornament with which its summit 
 was once adorned. The date of its erection is unknown, but the style 
 of its architecture agrees with the middle of the fifteenth century, about 
 which time I have no doubt it was constructed. 
 
 The church which is attached to this tower is in imitation of a 
 Roman fabric, with angular columns, supporting a circular roof divided 
 into squares and adorned with tawdry ornaments. At the east end of 
 this church is a painting of Thomas, the unbelieving disciple; and at 
 the opposite extremity of the building is a handsome organ gallery (of 
 the kind) and instrument. 
 
 In the old church was a chantry founded by John Stokes, a man of 
 substance, who filled the office of bailiff of Bristol in 1353, 1354, and 
 1359; and that of mayor in 1364, 1366, and 1379; he was member of 
 Parliament also for the old town in 1363, 1372, and 1392; and one of 
 the last two representatives who, in 1372, was returned by the sheriff 
 of Gloucestershire ; afterwards all writs were directed to the sheriffs of 
 Bristol. The chantry referred to was established on the 15th of March, 
 1383, for two chaplains to officiate, every day, before the altar of the 
 Virgin Mary, at the foot of which he was buried.* John Burton also 
 gave lands and tenements, by will, dated March 1st, 1454, “ to find 
 a chaplain for a perpetual chantry in this church at the altar of 
 St. John the Baptist, near which he was buried, to pray for the King 
 
 Memorials of the Canynges’ Family, p. 60. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 297 
 
 and Queen, himself, and Isabel his wife.” Robert Chope, too, left 
 messuages and tenements, in 1410, “for a chantry priest to pray for his 
 soul and that of Agnes his wife, at the altar of St. Nicholas in the 
 church of St. Thomas;” and “Richard de Welles having obtained 
 licence of Mortmain of King Edward 3d did by will bequeath tenements 
 in Fuller's Street for a chantry in the chapel of St. Thomas, at the_altar 
 of the Holy Trinity and the Virgin Mary, which was confirmed by 
 Ralph, Bishop of Bath and Wells, at Bauwell, March 9, 1333.” * 
 
 There are but few monuments of public interest in this church. 
 Against the wall of the north aisle is a tablet inscribed as follows:— 
 
 “In a Vault 
 under this place 
 lie the Remains of 
 John Herman Kater 
 late of this Parish, Sugar-Refiner 
 who died 31st July 1803, Aged 65 Years.” 
 
 Over the above inscription is the representation of a sugar-loaf, and 
 beneath it is the following :— 
 
 “ This Church was Rebuilt and opened for Divine Worship 
 On St. Thomas Day An. Dom : 1793. 
 
 The Rev. Benjo Spry, Vicar ; 
 
 John Herman Kater, 
 
 Church-W arden. ” 
 
 On a stone inserted in the floor is, 
 
 “ Here lyeth the body 
 of Svsanna the Wife 
 of Abell Hvlett of tliis 
 Parish Pinn-Maker who 
 Departed this Life the 
 3d day of October 1092, 
 
 Aged 44 Yeares.” 
 
 In the churchyard are several tombs which have doubtless been 
 interesting in their day, but the inscriptions with which they were once 
 charged are no longer visible. 
 
 The almshouse in Long Row, in this parish, is said to have been 
 founded by Simon de Burton ; and it bears on its front the following 
 modern inscription— 
 
 “St. Thomas Parish. 
 
 This Almshouse 
 was Erected in the 
 
 Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 558. 
 
298 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Year 1292 
 
 for Sixteen Persons by 
 Simon de Burton 
 & Rebuilt 
 Anno Domini 
 1721. 
 
 Ho was five times 
 Mayor of this City 
 and the Original 
 Founder of 
 
 St. Mary Redclitf Church.”* 
 
 Tlie Great House at the Bridge End, in this parish, occupied nearly 
 the whole of the west side of Bridge Parade, and was the residence of 
 Robert Rogers, soapmaker, who was mayor of Bristol in 1621. At this 
 house Yeomans and Boucher were tried by court-martial, for conspiring 
 to deliver the city into the hands of the Royalists in 1643, and were 
 condemned. 
 
 The Talbot Inn, Bath Street and Thomas Street, stands on the 
 site of the Pelican Hostelry, which, on the 13th of August, 1573, was 
 blown up by gunpowder, when ten men perished in the calamity, five of 
 them dying immediately, and the remaining five about a week afterwards. 
 In 1665 the stables of the same inn were burnt, after which its sign 
 appears to have been changed for that which it now bears. 
 
 THE PARISH OF TEMPLE has the Floating Harbour, or River 
 Avon, on the north and east sides; the parish of St. Thomas on the 
 west, and that of St. Mary Redcliffe on the south. 
 
 THE CHURCH OF TEMPLE OR HOLY CROSS derived its 
 name from the military order of Knights Templars, by whom it is 
 believed to have been founded about the year 1145. This, however, is 
 questionable, as churches known to have been erected by them are 
 circular. This society was the first formed, and the earliest abolished, 
 but by far the most powerful of the two great military orders so 
 conspicuous during the Crusades, f It took its rise in the year 1118, 
 at Jerusalem, during the period of the first of those romantic under¬ 
 takings ; and its style and title is supposed, by the best authorities, to 
 
 * Ante, p. 66. 
 
 + Appendix XL1V. The arms of the Knights were the Holy Lamb and 
 Cross ; and not, as now represented on the summit of the church tower, a lion 
 holding the same sacred emblem. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 299 
 
 have been derived from the accidental occupation of some chambers 
 adjacent to the Temple of Jerusalem, by those who were the original 
 members of the order. 
 
 The ground upon which this church stands, as well as its neighbour¬ 
 hood, was, in early times, a swampy marsh, or the bed of a lake, 
 connected with the river Avon; and this fact will account for the sinking of 
 the foundation. Some have supposed that this took place in the year 11G1, 
 and they tell us that the tower was completed at that time as high as 
 the band of trefoils which surround it, just above the middle of the 
 structure. I have no hesitation in saying that no portion of the present 
 church or tower was in existence at that time. It is to be regretted 
 that no satisfactory record has been met with on this subject, and we 
 are, therefore, left to form a judgment ourselves as to the date of its 
 erection, which can only be done by comparing the style of architecture 
 in which it is constructed with that of other churches, the time of 
 whose building is certain. Some writers would have us believe that 
 the lower part of the tower was erected in the reign of King Stephen, 
 when the Anglo-Norman style prevailed; but a very superficial in¬ 
 spection will shew that no portion of it belongs to that era; for the 
 whole of the windows and buttresses are decidedly of the Perpendicular 
 English character, and bear a close resemblance to those seen in the 
 towers of St. Stephen and St. Werburgh, the latter having been 
 erected at an early stage of the prevalence of that style, about the year 
 1385, and the former when it was matured and had reached the highest 
 point of beauty of which it was capable—nearly a century later, about 
 14G0. At the first-mentioned date the Perpendicular English style of 
 architecture, in which the lower part of the Temple Church tower is 
 built, was becoming general; and this is only five years before we 
 have satisfactory evidence that it was in course of erection; for in 
 1390 Bernard Obelly bequeathed a sum of money towards that very 
 object, and in 1397 Reginald Taylor did the same. It is really 
 vexatious that all who have treated on our local antiquities have merely 
 copied what they have found written by others, without, apparently, 
 making any attempt to satisfy themselves of their accuracy, were they 
 competent to do so, which appears questionable. For my own part I 
 believe that the lower portion of this tower was being built in 1390, at 
 which time no doubt the foundation had sunk ; and that seventy years 
 
300 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 having elapsed, and its security having been tested, the upper part was 
 added about the year 14GO, when contributions were made for that 
 special purpose; at which time, also, an attempt was made to correct 
 its leaning inclination by building the latter perpendicularly. 
 
 An examination of the interior of this tower will show that an 
 endeavour was evidently made to prop up or strengthen the lower 
 portion by the addition of strong and somewhat massy columns and 
 mouldings added to the north and south walls, to act after the manner 
 of buttresses. To relieve the plainness of these additions, those on 
 the north side contain a very good corbel, on which it is not unlikely 
 an image was placed; this would lead us to infer that this part of 
 the tower was formerly used as a chapel. The space between the 
 columns on the south side is adorned with panelling in the Perpendicular 
 English style of architecture, the mode in which the whole of the 
 additions are constructed. These, I think, were placed here when the 
 attempt was made, as above stated, to correct the leaning of the tower, 
 about the middle of the fifteenth century—the period to -which they 
 evidently belong. The local legend that the bend in this structure was 
 caused through its being built on woolpacks, simply means, that in all 
 probability, it was either entirely, or in part, raised from its foundation 
 by means of funds procured from the weavers’ company, whose 
 business was almost exclusively confined to this and the neighbouring 
 parish of St. Thomas. 
 
 This tower is now four feet from the perpendicular, having increased 
 three inches in about seventy years. Its leaning position and oscillatory 
 motion has been noticed, in general terms, by many writers. “ When 
 the bells that are in it sound, it is so moved this and that way, that at 
 length by the too great and frequent shaking it has separated from the 
 body of the church, and has made a chink from the very top of the 
 roof to the foundation, gaping so wide as to admit of four fingers’ 
 breadth. Abraham Ortelius wrote me word, that himself put a stone 
 of the size of a goose-egg into this chink, which he saw himself give 
 downwards as the place was narrow or wide, and at length by the 
 frequent collision was squeezed to pieces, and that when he put his back 
 against the tower, he was afraid he should be oppressed by its fall; that 
 the Mayor and others of authority there told him, the whole fabric of 
 this church formerly shook, and was like to fall before this chink was 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 301 
 
 made there, and with such force that the lamps were put out and the oil 
 wasted ; of this there were many living witnesses in that parish. But 
 the church now because it is not affected by the sound of the bells, 
 stands without motion.” * This vibratory action seems to have obtained 
 no inconsiderable notoriety, for even at an earlier period (1567), Thomas, 
 Duke of Norfolk, and other nobles, went “ to Temple, where he had the 
 bells rung, to try the truth of the report of the tower’s shaking at such 
 times.” f Upon “ opening the ground in the year 1774, to put in new 
 gate-posts at the entrance of the church, thick foundation walls extended 
 from the tower into the street fifty or sixty feet, laid there, doubtless, 
 for an additional support to the inclining side of the tower; upon forcing 
 through them the water gushed out, and prevented their being further 
 traced, or the piles being discovered that probably supported them. 
 This, however, shows the great care that has been taken at times to 
 support the tower, built as it is on such marshy and soft ground.” % 
 There is little belonging to this church to interest the examiner, if 
 we except the tower and the Weavers’ Chapel, at the eastern extremity 
 of the north aisle. Against the south wall is the following inscription :— 
 
 “ This 
 
 Chappell and 
 a Piece of grou¬ 
 nd thereunto 
 Belonging 
 Granted in ® 
 
 Reign of Edward 
 the First, to the 
 Company of 
 Weavers for 
 their use for 
 Ever, 1299.” 
 
 This chapel is of no great architectural beauty, nor has it much else 
 to recommend it to the attention of the visitor; and association alone 
 can maxe it at all interesting to the antiquary. On the floor are several 
 monumental stones inscribed to the memory of many families of the 
 
 * Brunius’s Theatrum Urhuim. edit. 1576. 
 t Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 240. 
 7 Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 543. 
 
302 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 weavers, charged with the shuttle and other devices, emblematical of 
 the occupation of the deceased when living. There are also the remains of 
 some good crosses with merchants’ marks in various parts of the floor 
 of the church, but neither these, nor the memorials of the weavers now 
 existing, are of any great antiquity, or perfect enough in themselves to 
 admit of transcription. 
 
 The windows in the Weavers’ Chapel are of the Decorated English 
 character; that at the east end contains several specimens of ancient 
 painted glass, and so also do the windows on the south side of the 
 chancel aisle opposite; the latter are very beautiful specimens of Per¬ 
 pendicular English, and worthy to be classed with the best examples of 
 that style of architecture. These three portions of the church—the 
 chancel, south aisle, and the Weavers’ Chapel, which is parallel to it on 
 the north side, are raised three steps above the floor of the nave and 
 aisles—these steps extending across the entire structure from north to 
 south. From this circumstance the depth of these divisions of the 
 edifice towards the east, and the appearance of a rood-loft having been 
 once erected beneath the arches which divide them from the western 
 portions of the building, I am inclined to think that originally they 
 formed the sanctum sanctorum of the church, or that part where only 
 the most solemn ceremonies of the Romish worship were performed; 
 the nave with its aisles being, as in our cathedral churches, reserved 
 for processions, &c. The Weavers’ Chapel and south aisle of the 
 chancel are about fifty feet long, whilst the chancel itself is some twenty 
 feet deeper. The roof in each division is lower than that of the nave 
 and its aisles; the windows in the Weavers’ Chapel and the chancel are 
 evidently of the same age and style, and the whole wears the appearance 
 of being quite a distinct portion of the fabric, and the oldest part of 
 the entire structure, the nave and tower having been erected at a 
 subsequent period. 
 
 The roof of the nave, which displays a pointed arch, is divided by 
 oak ribs with bosses at their intersections, into squares; but that of 
 each aisle is flat, with the same kind of divisions, supported on the 
 sides by wall-pieces resting on corbel heads, and evidently constructed 
 at a later date than the rest of the church, which, with the exception 
 of the windows, is built in the Decorated English style of architecture; 
 every column of the entire interior, saving those within the tower, being 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 303 
 
 of that character, and not very remarkable for their beauty, the capitals 
 having only single vine-leaf adornments. Over the chancel arch is a 
 Decorated English window filled with modern stained glass of no great 
 value • the same remark will apply also to that in the west window, 
 beneath which is the principal door of entrance, the mouldings having 
 labels, uninscribed, running round it. The arch at the west end of the 
 south aisle, opening into the tower, is a good example of the Per¬ 
 pendicular English style, with a panelled soffit. 
 
 The altar piece in this church is of wood, and of the Corinthian 
 order of architecture! The font is of stone, and of good Perpendicular 
 English in style. In the chancel is suspended a most beautiful 
 sconce or candelabrum, of a very rare and extraordinary character. It 
 has two tier of branches, four in the upper and eight in the lower rank, 
 making the number twelve, which might, probably, symbolise the twelve 
 apostles; or have reference to the twelve tribes of Israel, to recover 
 whose land from the infidel was an object of paramount importance 
 with the Knights of the Temple. The top of this unique and very 
 curious sconce is adorned with a figure, about eight inches in height, 
 representing the Virgin and child; beneath which, a Knight Templar, 
 in a complete suit of mail armour (probably intended for St. George), 
 armed with a spear, and trampling on a dragon, unites the two ranges 
 of lights together. The lower part of this exquisite piece of workman¬ 
 ship terminates in a lion’s head, the whole being wrought in brass, and 
 forming an admirable example of the skill and finished excellence of the 
 worker in metals in the time of Edward III., to which age I consider 
 it belongs, and not to that of the Knights Templars, as some have 
 supposed; the reign of that monarch not commencing until after the 
 suppression of the order. The four-leaved flower which adorns the 
 various branches evidently refers it to the latter period. I am rather 
 inclined to believe its owners to have been the company of weavers, 
 incorporated by that prince, and not the military order to whom 
 tradition alone has assigned it. 
 
 In a gallery at the west end of this church is a fine toned, handsome 
 organ, the fittings of which are in keeping with the altar piece. Over 
 the entrance to the vestry, which is constructed in wood in the style of 
 James I., is inscribed, in Roman capitals, 
 
 “ This is the Hovse of God. Reverence my Sanctvary. 
 
 Remember thy Creator ui the daies of thy Yovth, 1620.” 
 
 Anno 
 
304 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 There were evidently, at a former period, many brasses inserted in 
 the floor of Temple Church, of which, however, two only remain. In 
 the chancel is one representing a priest in full canonicals, with this 
 inscription in Latin :— 
 
 “ Thou art a witness, 0 Christ! that this stone 
 is not intended to ornament the body, hut 
 to commemorate the spirit, into which thou 
 has passed, great Mediatory Son : pour out 
 thy prayers for me and thus give me pardoning hope. ” 
 
 The date, which has disappeared, was 1396. 
 
 Inserted in the pavement of the Weavers’ Chapel is another brass, 
 which, however, is only the bust of a similar figure. Both are in the 
 usual attitude, with hands upraised as in prayer. 
 
 In the north aisle is a tablet with this inscription:— 
 
 “ Sacred to the Memory 
 of the 
 
 Eevd Joseph Easterbrook 
 many years Vicar of this Parish 
 and Ordinary of Newgate, 
 a faithful and Laborious 
 Minister of the Gospel 
 Whose life corresponded with his Profession 
 And having finished his course with Joy, 
 departed to his Eternal Rest 
 on Friday the 21st January, 1791 
 in the 40th Year of his Age. 
 
 The Inhabitants of this Parish 
 desirous of transmitting to Posterity 
 Then - cordial Esteem for a Character 
 so worthy of Imitation 
 Have caused this Monument 
 to be erected.” 
 
 “ To tbe piety and the benevolence of Mr. Easterbrook’s character, 
 the general esteem and approbation of his contemporaries bear an 
 honourable and an indubitable testimony. It is true that the credulity 
 which induced him to countenance the imposture of George Lukins,* 
 the pretended Demoniac, gave grounds to suspect a weakness of intellect, 
 and rendered both his name and his character the object of ridicule. 
 But it should also be remembered, that this was as much the credulity 
 of the age as of the man ; and that it requires the exertion of a vigour 
 of intellect conceded only to a few, to rise superior to the prejudices of 
 
 Appendix XLV. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 305 
 
 education, and to be able to reject opinions which are held sacred by a 
 vast majority of our contemporaries. That Mr. Easterbrook was not 
 able to do this, is no reflection on his memory, which is still affectionately 
 cherished by those who knew and appreciated his moral worth.” * 
 Against the wall of the south aisle is a tablet inscribed 
 
 “ To the Memory of Matthew Brickdale, Esquire, 
 who died 011 the VIII September MDCCCXXXI, yEtat XCVII, 
 and lies buried near this place. 
 
 He formerly represented the city of Bristol in 
 four parliaments with zeal and independence. ” 
 
 At the west end of the south aisle, at the entrance to the church, is 
 another tablet inscribed as follows :— 
 
 “ In a Vault in the adjacent Church yard 
 are deposited the Remains of 
 Csecilia Elwyn 
 
 and of Creed ia Eleanor her Daughter; 
 
 Crecilia was the eldest Daughter of Thomas Eagles, Esq., Collector of 
 the Customs of this Port, and Wife of William Brame Elwyn, 
 of Queen’s College, Oxford, L.L.D., a Barrister at Law, and at 
 the time of her Decease Recorder of Deal in Kent. 
 
 She died June 3rd 1811, aged 34. 
 
 Crecilia Eleanor was their only child: she survived her Mother 
 but nine Days, and died in her 15th year. 
 
 Pulmonary Disease was fatal to them both. 
 
 Thou, of whose home some vestige here below 
 Death yet has spar’d, amidst his wastes of woe. 
 
 With whom some fond endearment stays and cheers 
 A Husband’s sorrow, or a Father’s tears, 
 
 Survey the story of this letter’d stone, 
 
 And learn from larger grief to bear thine own ! 
 
 To thee, perhaps, some tender child has prov'd 
 A living emblem of a Wife belov’d ; 
 
 Inspir’d new hopes, as years were stealing on, 
 
 Nor left thee here unsolac’d, and alone, 
 
 Won from thy heart despairs’ o’erwhelming gloom, 
 
 And brought with smiles her Mother from the tomb. 
 
 But oh, belov’d! to you my thoughts return, 
 
 You, once their fondest objects, still their bourn ; 
 
 The world may call that cherish’d feeling vain 
 Which leaves recorded here a private pain, 
 
 Seeks from remoter days a stranger’s sigh, 
 
 And asks some future father’s sympathy. 
 
 Yet he, that mourns his home for ever gone, 
 
 Finds ease and solace from this faithful stone. 
 
 Evans’s Hist, of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 271 
 
 Y 
 
306 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 To Her ’tis due, who from her own short skein 
 Wound many a thread to sooth her Daughter’s pain, 
 
 Who in death’s grasp a Mother’s toils supplied, 
 
 And, trembling for her dying patient, died. 
 
 Heav’ns best reward on earth repaid this care, 
 
 Bestow’d on life’s last hour peace, hope, and prayer. 
 
 To Thee too due, my Child ! in whose pure mind 
 Truth dwelt with early Piety enshrin’d, 
 
 Faith stript of terror the Destroyer’s hour, 
 
 And, as warm summer ripens spring’s weak flow’r 
 Open’d thy worth, inspir’d Devotion’s flame. 
 
 And, breathing fervour o’er thy wasted frame, 
 
 Sublim’d thy virtues:—Heav’n approv’d and gave 
 A light beyond the darkness of the grave.” 
 
 Upon a flat grave-stone in the churchyard is an inscription thus:— 
 
 “ In Memory of 
 Mr. Richard Smith, 
 
 Senior Surgeon to the 
 Bristol Infirmary 
 who died 24th January 1843 
 Aged 70 Years.” 
 
 Mr. Smith was the eldest son of an eminent surgeon in this city, of 
 the same name; his mother was the daughter of the Rev. Alexander 
 Stopford Catcott, LL.B.,* master of the Bristol Grammar School, and 
 rector of St. Stephen’s, in this city, who was also a descendant from 
 Alderman Whitson, the founder of the Red Maids’ School. He was 
 educated under the Rev. Nathaniel Lee, at the Grammar School above 
 mentioned, and he was subsequently sent to the Rev. Dr.Yalpy’s academy, 
 at Reading. Having thus received a liberal education, and evinced con¬ 
 siderable talent for the medical profession, he was apprenticed to his 
 father, in consequence of whose death before his apprenticeship was half 
 completed, he finished his time with Mr. Godfrey Lowe. In 1796 he 
 was elected one of the surgeons to the Bristol Infirmary, which post he 
 held for the long period of forty-six years, and it terminating then only 
 with his life; during a great portion of which he was the senior 
 surgeon to the institution. In 1803 he was appointed surgeon to the 
 regiment of local volunteers then newly formed, which office he 
 continued to hold until it was disbanded, in 1814; and he was also 
 Deputy Provincial Grand Master of Freemasons for the district. When 
 the Municipal Deform Act was passed he was elected to represent the 
 
 Ante, p. 262. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 307 
 
 Ward of St. Augustine in the council of the corporation of his native 
 city, and also one of the charity trustees. He was a man of considerable 
 literary attainments, a good classical scholar, and had obtained a fair 
 share of knowledge in the science of antiquities. He was a successful 
 surgical operator, and in all difficult cases was constantly consulted by 
 the members of the profession; and he bequeathed to the Infirmary, to 
 which he was so many years professionally attached, a most valuable 
 museum of preparations of diseased parts of the human frame, and 
 morbid anatomy, as well as of whatever was curious and instructive in 
 relation thereto. 
 
 THE JEWS’ SYNAGOGUE is situated in Temple Street, and is 
 an elegant building; it was consecrated as a place of public worship 
 for the people of that persuasion, with great ceremonial observances, in 
 August, 1842, their former place of worship being the Weavers' Hall 
 in the same street. 
 
 At the Countess (popularly called Counter) slip, at the top of 
 Temple Street, the Baptists have a large chapel, which was built in 
 1805, and is, perhaps, the largest Nonconformist place of worship 
 in Bristol. It was erected for a number (not quite fifty) of the members 
 who separated from the Pithay Baptist Church, and who have built a very 
 commodious and handsome place of worship, with another large structure 
 adjoining, having a noble frontage said to be in the Corinthian style of 
 architecture; the upper part of which is devoted to schools for the 
 accommodation of five hundred children, the lower stories being used as 
 warehouses, for which purpose they were erected. This building w r as 
 opened in October, 1844, and together with the chapel was raised by 
 voluntary contributions. 
 
 In Temple Street is a school, with a dwelling house for the master; 
 over the central window of which, inscribed on a tablet, is the 
 following :— 
 
 “ This Charity School 
 was erected and endowed by 
 Edwd. Colston, Esq., 
 
 Native of this Parish, 
 
 Anno Dom. 1711, 
 
 For the Educating in 
 Reading, Writing, Cyphering, 
 and Perfecting in the Church 
 Catechism as it is now 
 
 Y 2 
 
308 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Established by Law, 
 
 And also for Clothing 
 Forty Poor Boys of this 
 Parish for Ever.” 
 
 In this street also is a school built for the education and board of 
 forty girls, which, until 1798, was supported by voluntary contributions; 
 after which, this mode of sustaining it was rendered unnecessary from 
 the large amount of donations and legacies bequeathed to it by the 
 charitable. There are infant schools, too, in Tower Street, Great 
 Gardens, in this parish, founded by the late John Hare, Esq., in which 
 about two hundred children are carefully taught. 
 
 Temple Hospital, in Temple Street, was founded and endowed by Dr. 
 Thomas White, in the year 1G10, for six men and six women, which 
 the increase in the value of the property left to support it has augmented 
 to thirty-two. These occupants have each two rooms, one upstairs and 
 one down, with six shillings weekly, and a number of other donations, 
 periodically, which makes the inmates very comfortable. Within, this 
 hospital or almshouse, with its gabled dwellings, and the grass plot 
 running up the centre before them, looks like a college on a small 
 scale; without, it is entered from the street, beneath a good gateway, 
 under a front erected in 1824, in the Perpendicular English style of 
 architecture, and in which resides the bailiff, or custodian of the 
 hospital. 
 
 Dr. White, the founder of this almshouse, was born in Temple Street, 
 and in 1566 entered Magdalen College, Oxford, where he finished his 
 studies and became subsequently rector of St. Dunstan’s in the West, 
 London; he proceeded Doctor in Divinity in 1584, and became a 
 prebendary of St. Paul’s, and canon of Christ Church, Oxford, in 1591; 
 and canon of St. George’s Chapel, Windsor, in 1603. He was a some¬ 
 what noted preacher in his day. He died March 1st, 1623, “full of 
 years and of sound intellect.” 
 
 There is, in this street, another almshouse, the founder of which was 
 Alderman Stevens, who also founded one already mentioned,* in Old 
 Market Street. They are both substantial stone buildings, the former 
 containing twelve apartments, with a fire-place in each room. 
 
 Ante, p. 207. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 309 
 
 The almshouse erected by Dr. White is believed to stand on “ the 
 site of the Hospital of the Knights Templars, and afterwards of the 
 prior and brethren of St. John of Jerusalem. The present site of Dr. 
 White’s Hospital, and the houses adjoining, seems to be the spot, where 
 old arches still appear to point it out.”* “ At the demolition of the 
 houses, to form the new communication from St. Philip's Bridge to 
 Temple Street, some ancient ecclesiastical remains were exposed to view 
 at the lower part of the old public-house called the Giant’s Castle. It 
 is not improbable that these vestiges point out the site of the house of 
 the Knights Templars, belonging afterwards to the Prior and brethren 
 of Saint John of Jerusalem.” f Temple Meads, now occupied by the 
 buildings of the Great Western Railway Company, and the New Cattle 
 Market, were lands once belonging to the house of the Knights Templars. 
 “ In this parish (too) and in Temple Street on the north side within the 
 gate was a friery of brothers Eremites of St. Augustine.” J 
 
 “Temple conduit was built in 15G1. This water course is kept in 
 very good order, and the fountain head is yearly visited by the parish 
 officers, and they have expended great sums to preserve it at different 
 times, and to prevent the springs from being stopped. You enter the 
 cavern by a door at the side of the hill, on the very bank of the Avon, 
 on the left hand of the Bath road, at Totterdown, and passing through 
 a narrow cut in the solid rock for 125 yards exactly in length, you 
 come to the reservoir, or large trough of freestone, into which, three or 
 four springs, rising with force through crevices in the bottom of the 
 rock, are continually flowing in bubbling streams, from hence the water 
 is conveyed in large leaden pipes laid at the bottom of the channel cut 
 in the rock, which pipes you walk upon in going to the cistern, the 
 roof above in the rock being from 10 to 20 feet high in some places; the 
 water is conveyed from the pipe-head, through the fields next it, quite 
 to Temple Gate, where is a cistern arched over for public use; a feather 
 conveyed it to the religious house adjoining (the friary of the Eremites of 
 St. Augustine). From the gate it is now led through Temple Street to 
 the Neptune, and to a large cistern the south side of the church, and 
 
 * Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 546. 
 t Tovey’s Cursory Observations on the Churches of Bristol, p. 221. 
 Appendix XLVI. £ Ante, p. 54. 
 
310 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 from thence with a small feather, to the vicarage house (on the north 
 west side of the church), which serves the street with great conveniency 
 as well as the neighbourhood.” * 
 
 The figure of Neptune here mentioned, has been the subject of special 
 enactments. It formerly stood very near the approaches to Bristol 
 Bridge, which, being about to be widened, and the site occupied by the 
 statue required, a clause was introduced into the act for Neptune to be 
 removed to another place, in Temple Street, which, on the passing of 
 the act referred to, was subsequently done, the new situation being very 
 near to where Dr. White’s almshouse now stands. When the trustees 
 of that charity w r ere about to rebuild the front of that house, the statue 
 was found to be in the way, and they endeavoured to obtain its removal, 
 but this was declined by the authorities unless the trustees found a site 
 for it, which they did; a piece of glebe land belonging to the vicar of 
 Temple parish being available, the statue was removed to its present 
 site, the trustees of Dr. White’s charity paying three pounds per annum 
 for its use. 
 
 We have now no means of ascertaining when, or by whom, this figure 
 of Neptune was given to the parish, but being of lead, the tradition is, 
 that it was the gift of a plumber who was a parishioner; some say it 
 was given to commemorate the destruction of the Spanish Armada, but 
 this is merely conjectural. The corporation of Bristol has no power 
 over the Neptune, as it belongs to the vestry of Temple parish, t 
 
 THE PARISH OF ST. MARY REDCLIFFE is the last to be 
 described of those which constituted Bristol at the time of the 
 Reformation. It is bounded on the north by the parishes of St. 
 Thomas and Temple, and by the latter, also, on the east side; on the south 
 by Bedminster and the new course of the river Avon; and on the west by 
 the Floating Harbour and part of the newly formed Borough of Bristol. 
 
 THE CHURCH OF ST. MARY REDCLIFFE.$ “The beautiful 
 church of St. Mary’s, at Redcliffe, has ever been an object of attention 
 
 * Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 554. + Appendix XLVII. 
 
 + Although the history of this church has been several times before 
 discussed by me, it cannot be omitted in a Popular History of Bristol, of which 
 it forms so interesting a portion, especially as 1 am more than ever convinced 
 that the opinions by me expressed elsewhere are founded in truth ; see Notes 
 on the Ecclesiastical and Monumental Architecture and Sculpture of the Middle 
 Ages in Bristol ; Memorials of the Canynges’ Family and their Times, &c.; 
 Archaeologia, vol. xxxv.; and Fact versus Fiction. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 311 
 
 and admiration; and curiosity concerning its founder and its history 
 was particularly awakened by the publication of the works of Chatterton, 
 whilst the appearance of the poems ascribed to Rowley, which were said 
 to have been found there amongst some old parchments, drew upon it 
 the attention of the antiquary and the learned world in general.” * 
 Notwithstanding the interest thus excited, little has been done to 
 make clear the history of this magnificent structure; and the statements 
 of most writers, founded on tradition, are so opposite to the evidence 
 which the architecture of the church itself affords, that the means for 
 making out the true story of this building, and its real progress towards 
 completion, have been thereby considerably increased. It is said to 
 have been “founded by one Bristol merchant, completed by another, 
 and re-edified by a third.” Tradition ascribes the first to Simon de 
 Burton, the second to William Canynges, senior, and the last act to 
 William Canynges, junior; but “In examining the history of the 
 church, the inquirer is alternately confounded by the opposite statements 
 of different historians and topographers ; discouraged by the absence of 
 all satisfactory information, and perplexed amidst the mazes of falsehood 
 and forgery. Many of the particulars recorded by former writers 
 depend for their authenticity on no better authority than the manuscripts 
 of Chatterton ; and even those statements that have been collected 
 and published from original documents are deprived of their appropriate 
 weight, by the suspicion that attaches to every historical record 
 connected with the subject. The writers who have paid the most 
 assiduous attention to the early history of the church are perpetually 
 at variance, and the manuscript memoranda contained in different 
 collections, and relating to the more recent stages of inquiry, are equally 
 uncertain and unsatisfactory.” f Of these manuscripts I am exceedingly 
 sceptical, and should on no account think them trustworthy on any 
 subject connected with our local history; and although they have been 
 copiously transcribed by the Rev. Samuel Seyer, in his “ Memoirs of 
 Bristol,” in illustration of events which occurred many centuries ago, he 
 tells us that “ Most, but not all, were written within the last 200 years;”X 
 
 * Bristol Memorialist, p. 283. 
 t Britton’s Ilist. of Reddiffe Church, p. 3. 
 t Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, p. x. 
 
312 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 thereby at once arraigning the credibility of the work he has published, 
 by bringing into question the authenticity of the very documents he has 
 used in compiling it! 
 
 There can be no doubt that a church existed here at an early period, 
 perhaps before the Norman Conquest, which being in a ruinous state, 
 had several gifts of land made by will towards its repair; some of these 
 are dated as early as the years 1207, 1229, and 1230. Indulgences 
 were also granted by various bishops,* on condition that the persons to 
 whom they were issued would “ devoutly visit the church of the Blessed 
 Mary of Redcliffe in Bristol, and there charitably contribute towards 
 the repair of the same, and pray for the souls of those there interred.” 
 These indulgences extend over a series of dates from 1232 to 1287. 
 “ All these documents are said to have been found in Canynges’ chests, 
 and notwithstanding they w T ere the gift of Chatterton to Barrett (the 
 historian of Bristol), their number, the difficulties that would have 
 prevented their execution by the want of specific evidence to their 
 fabrication, and their coincidence with other documents to w'hich it does 
 not appear that Chatterton had access, are in favour of their reception 
 as genuine authorities.” t We may, therefore, safely conclude that there 
 was a church here long before 1294, when it is said, “ This year the 
 mayor (Simon de Burton) founded the church of St. Mary Redcliffe ; ”$ 
 and this fact ascertained will be found of some importance as we 
 proceed to examine his claim to the honour of being exclusively the 
 founder of any part of the present edifice. 
 
 At the commencement of this investigation we note that in a 
 manuscript ascribed to Rowley, we are informed that Simon de Burton 
 was born in 1265, and that being fond of tourneying, he, in 1285, 
 engaged Sir Ferrars Nevylle in a fierce encounter on St. Mary’s Hill, in 
 the presence of King Edward I.—Sir Ferrars having already conquered 
 two knights on that occasion. Then did Simon de Burton vow that if 
 he overthrew Sir Ferrars, “he would there erect and build a church to 
 our Lady.” § Having borne both horse and man to the ground, and 
 being proclaimed victor, the document in question goes on to state 
 
 * Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 567. 
 
 t Britton's Historical and Architectural Essay on Redcliffe Church, p. 5. 
 + Barrett’s History of Bristol, p. 673. § Ibid, pp. 568, 569. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 313 
 
 that in 1291 Simon de Burton proceeded at once to fulfil his vow, by 
 “ building a goodly church,” on the spot where he had conquered Sir 
 Ferrars Nevylle; and that on “the day of our Lordes natyvyty 
 M.C.C.C.I., Gylbert de Sante Leonfardoe, Byshope of Chychestre, dyd 
 dedicate it to the Holie Vyrgynne Marye moder of Godde.” * 
 
 In examining this document and comparing dates, the first thing that 
 appears is the important fact that the terrific encounter therein recorded 
 took place between Sir Ferrars Nevylle, who we are told was a “strong 
 and doubty knight,” (and who had already overthrown two powerful 
 antagonists on that very occasion—“knights of renown,”) and Simon 
 de Burton, when the latter was but twenty years of age—a circumstance 
 at least open to grave suspicion, and not the less so when we find that 
 the manuscript was presented to Mr. Barrett by Chatterton! the 
 former frankly acknowledging that “other proofs cannot be produced 
 at present concerning these particular anecdotes of the life of Simon de 
 Burton.” f At page 506 this writer gives another date for commencing 
 the church, for he says, speaking of that of St. Leonard’s, once 
 standing in Corn Street, “ It is mentioned in a deed, 25 Edward I., 
 1297, wherein Simon de Burton about this time founding Redcliffe 
 Church, grants,” &c., &c. And at page 569, he quotes a manuscript 
 designated “ Hobson’s,” which relates that “ Simon de Burton, mayor 
 in 1294, had, two years before, begun to build Redcliffe Church.” On 
 this subject, Mr. Seyer also cites a manuscript, which records that “It 
 was about the year 1293, or 1294, that Simon de Burton built the church 
 of St. Mary Redcliffe,” J and Robert Ricaut, who was appointed town 
 clerk of Bristol in 1479, says in his calendar under date of 1293, “Thys 
 yere Simon de Burton, then Mayor, began to build Redclyf Churche.” 
 
 A close examination of the above quotations will show that between 
 the date of that which relates to the tourneying of Simon de Burton 
 and Sir Ferrars Nevylle, and the deed next cited by our historian, a 
 difference of six years occurs, which Mr. Barrett fails to discover! Of 
 Hobson’s manuscript, nothing is known but by name; and of that 
 
 * Appendix XLVIII. 
 
 t “ The introduction of an alderman of Bristol tilting with knights, must have 
 been not only ridiculous but offensive, in an age while the true ceremonial of 
 tilts and tournaments was observed.” Tyrwliitt’s Vindication, &c., p. 218. 
 
 X Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 77. 
 
314 
 
 HISTORY OP BRISTOL. 
 
 quoted by Mr. Scyer, the testimony he gives himself, as before noticed,* 
 as to the character of all such documents relating to the History of 
 Bristol, will suffice to show how little reliance can be placed on their 
 statements. He states, in fact, an absurdity, for he could have known 
 no more about the matter than ourselves, and had much better have 
 taken no notice of such manuscripts at all, than to have quoted them, 
 if he was driven, after having done so, to make the admission he has in 
 the preface to his work in which they appear. The value, too, of Robert 
 Ricaut’s testimony, is greatly diminished from the fact that his work 
 could have been compiled from tradition only, all the authentic records 
 of the Ivalendaries, to which fraternity he belonged, having been 
 destroyed by fire in 14G6; and a period of thirteen years elapsing 
 between that event and his election to the office of town clerk of Bristol 
 in 1479, at which time he commenced the Mayor’s Calendar. In this 
 book he recorded as well as he could remember, with the assistance of 
 his brethren, such incidents as, from memory, he believed were entered in 
 the original document so unfortunately destroyed. In doing this many 
 inaccuracies would inevitably occur, and this circumstance alone must 
 be regarded as fatal to the absolute correctness of all statements made 
 by Robert Ricaut before the year 1479. 
 
 Without further noticing these manuscripts at present, except to 
 observe, in passing, the marked disagreement that occurs in all of them 
 as to the year in which Redcliffe Church is said to have been founded, 
 we shall proceed to examine the structure itself, with a view to ascertain 
 how far its architecture bears out the statements made by the writers I 
 have quoted. 
 
 The first thing to be ascertained is the age in which the oldest part 
 of the fabric now standing was built, and here let it be observed that a 
 church was certainly erected on this site before the present edifice had 
 existence. The lower stage of the tower, the inner north porch, and 
 the lancet arch adjoining it at the west end of the north aisle of the 
 nave, are Early English architecture, and it may, with confidence, be 
 stated, they were the first portions erected. “ The Early English work 
 reaches as' high as the string of quatrefoils above the series of niches (in 
 the tower). The basement may be even earlier than this: at all events 
 
 Ante, p. 311. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 315 
 
 the masonry is of a ruder description.” * * * § If this be correct the tower 
 must have been commenced by Anglo-Norman architects, whose style 
 of building had been superseded by the Early English fashion, for more 
 than half-a-century before Simon de Burton, the reputed founder of the 
 church, was born. The last mentioned style (the Early English), in 
 which those portions of the building I have mentioned, were constructed, 
 commenced in England about the year 1200, as a general rule; and 
 therefore the lower stage of the tower, the inner north porch, and the 
 lancet arch adjoining, “ might be earlier than Simon de Burton; they 
 certainly are not later? t Now, as the style of architecture spoken of 
 ceased to be practised after 1272, at which time, according to Mr. 
 Barrett’s statement, Simon de Burton was but twelve years of age , it 
 may be safely affirmed that those parts of the church I have specified 
 could not have formed portions of a structure commenced by him. To 
 shew how inaccurate Mr. Britton also is upon the subject, we find him in 
 1813, and again in 1843,$ speaking of the inner north porch of the 
 church as “ corresponding with a specific date,” that is, the year 1292; 
 “ at which age it appears that Simon de Burton lived, and (he continues) 
 was engaged either in constructing a new church, or ‘re-edifying’ a 
 former building; and yet, in another work, § he states that the date of 
 the discontinuance of the style in which that part of the building is 
 constructed, was twenty years earlier! Again, in his account of the 
 church, appended to “An Appeal by the Vicar, Churchwardens, and 
 Vestry,” for funds to restore it, and written in 1842, Mr. Britton says, 
 at page 23, that “the vestibule (the inner north porch), is of a date 
 between A.D. 1200, and 1230;” or something like three quarters of a 
 century before the date he had just given as that in which “Simon de 
 Burton was engaged, either in constructing a new church, or re-edifying 
 a former building ! ” After making statements from 1813 to 1843, so 
 much at variance with each other, we can easily believe Mr. Britton 
 when he assures us, in 1853, that “Forty years have passed away 
 since he first examined it (Bedcliffe Church), investigated its condition, 
 
 * Proceedings of the Archfeological Institute, 1851, p. xlii. 
 
 t Ibid, p. xxxv. 
 
 J Historical and Architectural Essay on Redcliffe Church, p. 9. 
 
 § Sketch of a Nomenclature of Ancient Architecture. 
 
316 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 wrote an account of it, and made some animadversions on those who 
 had it in charge. I am now convinced (he says) that I know nothing 
 of the subject, and that I have now to learn what I ought to have learned 
 before I wrote.” * My own opinion is, that the beautiful sculpture of 
 the columns .and bosses of this inner north porch of the church, shew 
 that it was not commenced earlier than the last date named by 
 Mr. Britton; but that it was certainly finished, at the latest, in 1250; 
 that is to say, from forty to sixty years before it is said that Simon de 
 Burton “began to builde Redclyf Churche.” It may, too, be regarded 
 as probable that the entire fabric was finished, in the Early English 
 style; for, it is worthy of remark, that on removing part of the exterior 
 wall on the north side of the chancel, during the present restoration of 
 the church, there were discovered portions of columns in that mode of 
 building, which still lie exposed in the south aisle, the reverse side of 
 which is wrought into Perpendicular English panelling, an ornament 
 which adorns the whole of that portion of the structure. None of this, 
 however, belonged to the age in which Simon de Burton flourished, but 
 to the fifteenth century. 
 
 The mouldings of the Early English lancet arch mentioned as 
 terminating the west end of the north aisle of the nave, are continued 
 around an arch opening towards the south, into the nave itself, but 
 which is an early specimen of the Decorated English style of architecture, 
 erected about the year 1280; and in this instance, also, several years 
 before Simon de Burton is said to have founded the church. Over this 
 arch rises the tower, which is constructed in the same style, and so also 
 is the exterior north porch—the latter being the only part of the church 
 which coxdd have been founded by Simon de Burton; but even this 
 statement admits of very serious objections. The Decorated English 
 style of architecture began to prevail about the year 1270; and this 
 exterior north porch is built in rather an advanced stage of its practice, 
 consequently, it must have been erected when it was approaching the 
 height of its luxuriance, which was long after Simon de Burton’s death; 
 and although I think it very unlikely, yet he may have laid the 
 foundation stone of this porch when mayor of Bristol in 1294, which 
 
 * Speech at the Banquet of the Canynges’ Society, September, 1853 ; 
 reported in the Bristol Mercury. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 317 
 
 Mr. Barrett says was the year in which he “ founded the Church of 
 St. Mary Redcliffe,” * thus adding another date to those he had 
 previously given, as the year in which that event is said to have taken 
 place! At page 569 the very same circumstances are related as 
 occurring in 1292—so much for Mr. Barrett’s accuracy in the matter 
 of dates! As such erections in the middle ages, as well as restorations 
 in the present day, were a long time in progress, it is highly probable 
 that this exterior north porch was not finished until the middle of the 
 fourteenth century, to which era it undoubtedly belongs. This,— 
 accommodating circumstances and styles in architecture to Mr. Barrett’s 
 date,—is the only way in which it is possible to connect Simon de Burton 
 with the church at all, unless it is insisted on that the foundation stone of 
 this exterior north porch was laid by him when mayor of Bristol in 
 1305—the last time his name occurs in our local annals, and which I 
 regard as approximating much nearer to the correct date of that event, 
 although even then some forty years would probably elapse before it 
 was finished. 
 
 The value of Mr. Barrett’s “ History and Antiquities of the City of 
 Bristol,” at least as an authority on the subject before us, will be seen 
 by the following enumeration of the various dates given by him for the 
 founding of the Church of St. Mary Redcliffe, by Simon de Burton:— 
 
 At page 506, it was about the year 1297. 
 
 >» 
 
 567, it was 
 
 in 
 
 >> 
 
 1294. 
 
 
 568, „ 
 
 ditto 
 
 
 1291. 
 
 ,, 
 
 569, ,, 
 
 ditto 
 
 
 1292. 
 
 
 673, ,, 
 
 ditto 
 
 » » 
 
 1294. 
 
 It is clear, then, I conceive, from what has been advanced, that 
 Simon de Burton was not, as is commonly reported, the founder of 
 Redcliffe Church. Tradition alone has assigned this honour to him; 
 and by those who are too indolent to search out the matter, this is 
 regarded as sufficient to establish the fact. Air. Barrett evidently knew 
 nothing whatever of architecture himself, or he would have seen that 
 the church about which he has written so inaccurately, was a standing 
 contradiction of his statements. “ He was not only profoundly ignorant 
 of all architectural style and system, but he seems also to have had no 
 
 Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 673. 
 
318 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 natural capacity for imbibing any knowledge of the subject from obser¬ 
 vation.” He was most certainly unequal to the task he undertook ; 
 and relying, as he did, upon “ Old Morgan’s rotten papers,” and 
 Chatterton’s inventions, his work, as a History of Bristol, is utterly 
 undeserving the name. 
 
 Having shewn the incorrectness of Mr. Barrett’s statement, that 
 Simon de Burton was the founder of Redcliffe Church, I shall next 
 examine his testimony in favour of the senior William Canynges, of 
 whom he says, “ It can be proved that in the year 1376,‘William 
 Canynges built the body of Redcliffe Church from the cross aisle, down¬ 
 wards, and so the church was finished as it is now; ’ ” and also the 
 truth of a statement which he makes, when quoting a manuscript, that 
 “ William Canynges gave lands to repair it for ever.”* 
 
 The name of this first William Canynges, who, to distinguish him 
 from his more celebrated grandson of the same name, is styled senior, 
 first occurs in the annals of Bristol in 1361, when he served the office 
 of bailiff; this is more than half-a-century after the last time the name 
 of Simon de Burton appears in the same register, very shortly after 
 which it is believed that he died. It would, however, be a great error to 
 suppose that the building of the church did not proceed during all this 
 time; on the contrary, the exterior north porch dates, as already stated, 
 in the middle of the fourteenth century; and as the upper stages of the 
 tower are built in the same style, this part of the structure was also 
 progressing during the period referred to. The construction of the 
 tower, even as it now appears, was, from its magnitude, a vast under¬ 
 taking at that time for a mere parish, and must have occupied many 
 years in building. Added to this, the whole was done by the voluntary 
 contributions of the affluent, who had property there, and who were 
 contemporary with both Simon de Burton and William Canynges. 
 This we know, from the fact that the arms of many of these benefactors 
 once existed in the windows of the church, and that a few of them still 
 remain there; as also in the groining of the roof, on the bosses of which 
 they appear as evidence of the donations made by those who owned 
 them. Besides this, bequests by will are mentioned, and indulgences 
 were granted, at various times, to those who contributed towards the 
 
 Hist, of Bristol, p. 569. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 319 
 
 building, which certainly would not have been the case had the church 
 been constructed by any one individual.* In it were sepulchred many 
 of the most opulent merchants residing in the parish, as well as their 
 families; to it they bequeathed largely of their substance; and here, too, 
 they founded chantries in the time of this very William Canynges, who 
 as well as Simon de Burton, seems never to have resided here at all; 
 and whilst, also, the latter had not a particle of property in it, the 
 former possessed, in the parish, one solitary tenement only! t William 
 Canynges, moreover, was buried, with his wife and son John, in the 
 church of St. Thomas, in wdiich parish, also, he carried on an extensive 
 manufacture in cloths. With that of St. Mary Redcliffe he seems to 
 have had no connection whatever, except in the case of the one tenement 
 just mentioned; and even his second son, Simon, was not interred in 
 the church, as we should have supposed he would have been, if his 
 father was so intimately connected with its erection, as some writers 
 would have us believe that he was—but in that of St. Stephen. Many 
 wealthy Bristol men, contemporary with William Canynges, gave largely 
 by will to monks and monasteries, as well as to churches; but we search 
 in vain for any bequest, testamentary or otherwise, made by that so 
 much lauded individual, excepting of the most trifling character, to any 
 such persons, or to their establishments. His will, which is dated 
 October 2nd, 1396, is as follows—“I leave my soul to God, its 
 Omnipotent Creator, the Blessed Mary, and all saints—my body to the 
 Earth, to be buried in the chapel of the Blessed Mary, in the church of 
 St. Thomas the Martyr, in Bristol, near to the tomb of John Stokes. I 
 give to the fabric of the same church, twenty shillings. To the Vicar 
 of Redcliffe, for forgotten tithes and oblations, six shillings and eight 
 pence. To the chaplain of the Parish of St. Thomas, serving the cure 
 there, twenty-pence. To the Deacon of the same, eight-pence. To the 
 Sub-deacon of the same, six-pence. To the Suffragan of the same, four- 
 pence. To each of the Chaplains in the same church, to celebrate daily 
 for my soul, twelve-pence. To each boy in the same church, accustomed 
 to serve in the supplications, two-pence. To every other Chaplain 
 coming to the dirge and mass at my burial, four-pence. To every 
 
 * Hist, of Bristol, p. 569. 
 t Dallaway’s Antiquities of Bristow, p. 173. 
 
320 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Parish Clerk being then at the same, two-pence. To each of the orders 
 of Mendicant Brethren in Bristol, viz., the Friars’ Minors (Franciscans), 
 the Friars’ Preachers (Dominicans), the Carmelites, and Augustine’s, 
 six shillings and eight-pence, for the Priors of each to distribute between 
 his brethren.” Then follow certain small bequests of similar amounts 
 to the various hospitals in and about Bristol; and other matters are 
 mentioned which ai'e not at all connected with our subject, and therefore 
 not necessary to be quoted here; but nothing whatever is left to the 
 Church of St. Mary Bedcliffe, nor are lands bequeathed to repair it as 
 stated by the manuscript quoted by Mr. Barrett.* The amount left to 
 the vicar of the parish was nothing more than a customary donation ; 
 because, although all tithes, and other dues, might have been paid in 
 full, yet a gift to the priest, at death, was considered a necessary duty ; 
 lest any obligation should, by mischance, have been overlooked during 
 life; and this bequest, be it remembered, was made on account of the 
 one solitary tenement, which comprised the whole of the property he 
 possessed in the parish ! 
 
 No person acquainted with the subject, and who has carefully 
 examined the Church of St. Mary Bedcliffe, will fail to have remarked 
 that with small exceptions of an earlier date, the whole of the shell of 
 the edifice in its lower stage throughout, from end to end, is constructed 
 in the Decorated style of English architecture. From this fact it would 
 appear that with the finishing of the tower, and the erection of the 
 exterior north porch, the building of the entire church had been 
 commenced; and as these portions may be regarded as examples of 
 rather a middle stage in the style mentioned, so the whole of the 
 columns throughout the nave, chancel, and aisles, to the summit of 
 their capitals, with the exceptions* at the west end before noticed, may 
 be referred to as specimens of the same fashion, but erected at a later 
 period—the tower and exterior north porch progressing in the time of 
 Simon de Burton, and the body of the church, its columns and capitals, 
 from east to west, in that of the first William Canynges. In the 
 Mayor’s Calendar the latter is said, as already quoted, to have “ built 
 the body of Bedcliffe Church from the cross aisle downwards, and so 
 
 * For a copy of the will, in full, see my Memorials of the Canynges’ Family 
 and their Times, &c., pp. 57—59. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 321 
 
 the church was finished as it is now;”—that is, as I think we should 
 understand it—he commenced the entire fabric eastward, beyond the 
 tower and north porch, already progressing towards completion, by the 
 aid of contributions and bequests as before stated. In agreement with 
 this opinion Mr. Barrett himself, as if forgetting that he had already 
 recorded on the same page of his work, in echo to the manuscript he 
 quoted, that William Canynges finished the church, says, “he was for 
 the sixth time Mayor of Bristol in the year 1389, a merchant of great 
 fortune, weight, and respect among his fellow citizens: in a station of 
 life fitted to be a leading man, and to have the character of a founder 
 of such a work, promoted no doubt by donations by will , and voluntary 
 contributions of other devout and well-disposed people , as well as by grants 
 and indulgences from the Bishops of those days.”* 
 
 The erection of nearly all our large ecclesiastical structures was 
 almost uniformly commenced at the east end, and when sufficient was 
 completed for the purposes of Divine worship it was consecrated, and 
 the work proceeded as funds were raised for its continuance. But in 
 the case of the church of St. Mary Bedcliffe, it is clear, on inspection, 
 that this course was departed from—the south transept being certainly 
 older than the chancel and Lady Chapel at the east end of the fabric. 
 It is, in fact, the only part of the church in which any portion of the 
 superstructure of the body of the building is of pure Decorated English 
 architecture; a fact which shows that it must have been constructed in 
 the time of the first William Canynges, and it is not unlikely that this 
 south transept should be regarded as peculiarly that part of the structure 
 to which he more especially contributed, if, indeed, he did so at all; 
 and that to his fostering care it is indebted, in a great measure, for its 
 erection, with the assistance of those referred to above, who gave 
 largely of their wealth towards its completion. A few years before his 
 death, in 139G, the style in which the greater part of this south 
 transept is constructed had been gradually giving way to certain 
 features in English architecture which constitutes what has been very 
 properly designated a Transition style, that is, a fashion in building in 
 which the leading characteristics of the Decorated mode are blended 
 with certain indications of the approach of a new arrangement in 
 
 * Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 569. 
 
 Z 
 
322 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 construction, and -which ultimately produced what is known as the 
 Perpendicular English style of architecture; and as some of the 
 windows are neither wholly of the former, nor yet entirely of the latter 
 fashion, but partake, like the vaulting, of both, such portions of this 
 south transept give evidence of their having been constructed when this 
 transition from one style of building to another was in progress. From 
 this fact it is clear, that with this part of the church terminates its 
 erection during the lifetime of William Canynges, senior; and it is 
 equally certain that the remainder of the structure, which is built in the 
 succeeding style, must, of necessity, be ascribed to a future period. 
 
 It is manifest, then, that the first William Canynges was, at most, 
 no more than a contributor towards the erection of the church of 
 St. Mary Bedcliffe; and of this even we have no direct evidence. 
 Like Simon de Burton, he may have, when mayor of Bristol, laid the 
 foundation stone of some part of the church, but this is mere presumption 
 only; and by ascertaining that certain portions of it were built during 
 his lifetime, it is by no means to be inferred, as a consequence, that they 
 were erected by him, for we might, with as much propriety, say that 
 the late Sir John Iverle Haberfield restored the church, because he 
 laid the foundation stone for its renovation when chief magistrate of the 
 city, and gave a liberal donation towards effecting that object. 
 
 Another very serious objection to William Canynges, senior, having 
 “built the body of the church downwards,” or that it could have been 
 “finished (by him) as it is now,” is this—that whatever may have been 
 the character of the structure which preceded the present church, 
 which, however, from fragments discovered as before stated, appears to 
 have been erected in the Early English style of architecture, it must 
 have been entirely removed before the ground plan of the new edifice 
 was marked out in all its completeness, and the erection of the basement 
 story of the building proceeded with; because, in 1383, a contract 
 or agreement was entered into with the owners of the chapel of 
 St. Sprite, or the Holy Ghost, which stood at the west end of Bedcliffe 
 churchyard, to occupy this small building for a term of fifty years , 
 during which time it was natural to suppose that sufficient of the new 
 structure would be finished to allow of the performance of Divine 
 worship. This chapel became, therefore, in the sense in which, probably, 
 Leland intended his language to be understood, the parish church, when 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 323 
 
 he says, that this chapel being so engaged was “ons a paroche before 
 the buildynge of Redclifi'e great new ehyrche.” * This fact proves most 
 satisfactorily to my own mind, that the part which William Canynges 
 had in rearing the structure now standing, has been correctly stated in 
 the preceding remarks; and that the foundation, or basement story, 
 comprising a part of the lower stage of the building only, with the 
 columns of the entire edifice to the spring of the arches beneath the 
 clerestory, and the greater portion of the south transept, is all that 
 could have been done at the time of his death—the contract for the 
 occupation of the chapel of St. Sprite, for the use of the inhabitants of 
 Redclifi’e parish, having been entered into only thirteen years before 
 that event took place; it must, consequently, have been then in course 
 of erection; if not, why hire any building wherein to solemnize public 
 worship? the agreement for the occupation of which, as such, had yet, 
 when William Canynges died, thirty-five years to run. 
 
 Tf the opinions above expressed be correct, the manuscripts quoted 
 by Mr. Barrett are manifestly false, for we have seen that Simon de 
 Burton could not have “begun to build Redclifi'e Church;’’ nor could 
 the first William Canynges have finished it; and it is equally certain 
 from the will of the latter, that he did not leave “ lands to repair it for 
 ever.” In fact, no record whatever upon which the smallest reliance can 
 he placed, has yet been brought to light, to prove that either Simon de 
 Billion, or the first William Canynges, were in any way connected with 
 the erection of the Church of St. Mary lledcliffe, or that either of them 
 even contributed to the work ! 
 
 We see, then, that the senior William Canynges could not possibly 
 have been engaged on any other parts of this church than those already 
 specified, if indeed on them, viz., the upper stages of the tower, the 
 exterior north porch, and the south transept; and for this veiy obvious 
 reason, because the style cf architecture in which the remainder of the 
 fabric is constructed, was not fully established at the time of his death, 
 or, at most, its invention had not so far advanced towards its full 
 development, as we find it exhibited in the chancel and nave of the 
 structure. It is evident that the erection of the church proceeded very 
 tardily ; its gradual growth having already occupied at least a century 
 
 7. 2 
 
 Itinerary, vol. vii., p. 86. 
 
324 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 and a-half, from the date of the inner north porch to the death of the 
 first William Canynges; and now we shall see that the Y ork was carried 
 on between that event and the appearance of him in public life, who, 
 Mr. Barrett says,* “ has ever since passed for the founder thereof,”— 
 a period of more than forty years—by other hands. 
 
 I have already remarked that some of the windows in the south 
 transept are, in every particular, Decorated English, or constructed in 
 the style of architecture, the practice of which had been discontinued 
 but a few years before the first William Canynges’ decease ; so we find 
 that others are as positively Perpendicular English in every feature, 
 that is, they are as decidedly of the style of building which was in 
 course of introduction when that event took place, and which came into 
 general practice immediately afterwards. Again, I have said that not a 
 few partake of the characteristics of both styles, which clearly shews 
 that a gradual transition from one fashion to another was then in 
 progress. In the vaulting of the roof of this south transept we 
 recognize an early stage in Perpendicular English architecture; and by 
 comparing it with the roof of the north transept and the chancel, we 
 shall observe much in common, both in the general design and the detail, 
 which leads to the inference that these portions of the church were 
 reared very soon after those parts which I have regarded as belonging 
 to the time of the first William Canynges; and from plans furnished by 
 the same architect. This could not have been later than the year 1410; 
 because the arch, which divides the chancel from the transepts, and 
 which continues to be used throughout the entire nave, for the sake of 
 uniformity, as it would seem, so far declines from the perfection of that 
 architectural member, as to leave no doubt that it was erected soon after 
 the Perpendicular English style of architecture had been permanently 
 established as our national mode of building—that is, at the commence¬ 
 ment of the fifteenth century. As, therefore, the church was unfinished 
 at the time of the death of William Canynges, senior, it is clear that 
 those parts of the structure to which reference has been made, must 
 have been erected by succeeding benefactors. And who were they? 
 Why the Straffords, Berkeleys, Beauchamps, and Montacutes; amongst 
 nobles, whose arms are sculptured on the roof of the north aisle of the 
 
 Hist, of Bristol, p. 570. 
 
HISTORY Oi' BRISTOL. 
 
 325 
 
 nave, as on the portion erected by them; and by the Harringtons, 
 Hungerfords, Cradocks, Medes, Sturtons, Dyricks, Says, Gaunts, 
 Cheyneys, Fulks, Fitzwarrens, Inyns, Rivers, and others among 
 commoners, whose arms were formerly blazoned in the windows of 
 the church; and why, if they were not benefactors to the edifice ? If 
 these things be so—and the truth of these statements is worth 
 investigating—then let us hope no longer to hear the oft-repeated 
 fiction that the beautiful Church of St. Mary Redcliffe “ was founded 
 by one Bristol merchant,yfn ished by another, and re-edified by a third;” 
 as if to any one individual only was due the honour of commencing or 
 completing any portion of the noble structure in question. 
 
 The completion of so elaborate a superstructure as that of the nave, 
 must have occupied a longer period than the erection of any other part 
 of the church, excepting, perhaps, the tower. It is by far the most 
 costly portion of the entire fabric, and as it displays an example of 
 architectural excellence of almost unrivalled beauty, we may safely 
 conclude that the building of it occupied the remaining period of time 
 unaccounted for, which elapsed between the death of the first William 
 Canynges, and the commencement of the public career of the second of 
 that name, in 1140—a space extending over some forty years. In two 
 years more, we, for the first time, hear of the latter being engaged in 
 the work. His share in the undertaking evidently was to carry forward 
 the building to its completion, hence, we read under date of “ 1442, 
 William Canynges, wyth the helpe of others of the worshipfulle towne of 
 Bristol kepte masons and workemenne to edifie, repayre, cover, and 
 glaze the Church of Redcliffe.”* This information, it is granted, is 
 derived from a manuscript which may be equally as unreliable as those 
 before cited; but, if our argument be correct, it is sustained by the 
 quotation, against, apparently, the writer’s anxiety in noting it, to give 
 undeserved credit to his great hero, the second William Canynges, whom 
 he wishes to be regarded as “ the founder thereof,” that is, of the 
 church. “ William Canynges (he says) re-edified and enlarged the 
 Church of Redcliffe, in so exquisite a manner, that he has ever since 
 passed for the founder thereof.” t The truth is, that W illia m Canynges 
 
 Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 570. 
 t Ibid. 
 
326 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 received help from others towards finishing the structure, as this manu¬ 
 script correctly states. And who were they but the individuals whose 
 names have been already mentioned as benefactors ? By the aid thus 
 afforded, he “ kepte masons and workemenne to edifie,” or complete, as 
 far as possible, all imperfect detail and embellishment,—“ repayre ” the 
 unfinished building of his predecessors, wherever injured through the 
 length of time occupied in its erection,— “cover and glaze that is, 
 finish the vaulting already in progress, roof in the church, erect the 
 parapet, and glaze the windows. These, the only incomplete parts of 
 the work, in connection with the building of the church, to the date 
 last mentioned, are all that can, with certainty, be ascribed to the time 
 of the second William Canynges, previous to the fall of the spire, 
 which is said to have been thrown down in 1445, up to which time he 
 appears before the reader as, at most, a contributor to the building only, 
 like his grandfather, and Simon de Burton—the church having been 
 now in progress of erection for the long space of two centuries. 
 
 And what was he more than this subsequent to that event ? Let us 
 see. Mr. Barrett quotes what he designates two “ very ancient ” manu¬ 
 scripts ;* the first of which says that in “1445, at St. Paul’s tide was 
 very tempestuous weather, by which Redcliffe steeple was overthrown 
 in a thunder clap, doing great harm to the churche by the fall thereof, 
 but by the good devotion of Mr. William Canynges it was re-edified to 
 his everlasting prayse.” The second is that before quoted, which states 
 that “William Canynges re-edified and enlarged the Church of Redcliffe 
 almost destroyed by lightning in 1445, in so exquisite a manner, that 
 he has ever since passed for the founder thereof;” and it is added, 
 “ he aftenvards gave £500 to keep it in repair.” Mr. Britton also cites 
 a manuscript preserved in the Bodleian Library, which informs the 
 reader that “ the said church having suffered much in a tempest, the 
 above-mentioned William Canynges, a celebrated merchant and public 
 benefactor, in the year 1474, gave five hundred pounds to the parish¬ 
 ioners of Redcliffe towards repairing the church, and for the maintenance 
 of two chaplains and two clerks in St. Mary’s Chapel there, and of two 
 chantry priests.” t Now, it will be observed, that the second manuscript, 
 
 * Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 570. 
 t Historical and Architectural Essay on Bedcliffe Church, p. 7- 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 327 
 
 above quoted, records, iu other language, the contents of the first, with 
 the addition of a gift of £500, “ afterwards ” bestowed by William 
 Canynges towards keeping the church in repair; and the third, or 
 Bodleian writing, in addition to reciting the contents of the two preceding 
 papers, announces that besides repairing the church, the £500 was 
 given also for the maintenance of two chaplains and two clerks, and 
 it fixes the date of the execution of this deed so late as the year 1474. 
 This date evidently refers to the will of William Canynges, which was 
 executed November 12th, in that year; but in this document not a 
 word is mentioned of any such donation to the repair of the church, 
 as that above quoted, nor indeed of any other sum being left for that 
 purpose. But, admitting it to be correct, we are to believe that no 
 measures for restoring the church were adopted between the falling of 
 the spire (if ever it did fall) in 1445, and the gift of this money in 
 1474—a period of nearly thirty years. The thing is incredible ! This 
 manuscript is, in fact, nothing else than a transcript, in brief, of the 
 parish register (with another date) hereafter quoted. 
 
 In speaking of the restoration of the edifice after the spire is said to 
 have fallen, Mr. Barrett tells us that “ The same plan was observed by 
 him (William Canynges) in rebuilding and restoring to its original 
 beauty after being thrown down by the lightning. The south aisle, 
 where the mischief fell heaviest, seems to have been rebuilt with a 
 somewhat more elevated arch, and in a lighter style than the north ; a 
 difference, also, is between the windows of the north and south aisle. 
 The falling of such a large and very high steeple upon the chinch, must 
 have done great injury, and destroyed everything wherever it fell.”* 
 Immediately afterwards he observes, “ that the lofty spire or steeple, 
 falling upon the body of the church, injured it so much that it was 
 almost ruinous.” Now both these statements cannot be correct; for 
 in the first, mention is distinctly made of the damage having been 
 sustained by the south side; and in the second, by the body or nave of 
 the church. The former statement (if the spire fell at all) is doubtless 
 the true one; and to the south aisle, it may be confidently said, the 
 mischief was confined; for had the spire fallen on the body of the 
 edifice, some indications of repair or restoration would appear in that 
 
 Hist. of Bristol, p. 570. 
 
328 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 part of the building, as well as in tlie south aisle ; but as nothing of 
 the kind is observable, we may reasonably infer that it wholly escaped 
 the effects of the accident. Mr. Godwin, referring to this subject, says 
 “ The groined vaulting of the south aisle of the nave is inferior in 
 character, and more recent in date, than the vaulting of other parts of 
 the church. If we knew this to be part of the reinstatements made by 
 the second Canynges, after the fall of the spire, the inference would be 
 that he built less of the structure than has been supposed." * 
 
 Before proceeding further, let us inquire whether it is likely there 
 ever was a spire on the tower of this church at all! For many years I 
 believed, in common with others, that there was, but as every fresh 
 examination of the fabric reveals some new feature not before observed, 
 so a recent and more minute inspection has disclosed facts which have 
 induced me to alter my opinion, and for the reasons which follow. 
 
 An inspection of the buttresses all round the body of the structure 
 will show that, originally, there were no pinnacles on these supports to 
 the fabric, for the whole of them were left incomplete at the first or base 
 stone of the shaft over the drip stone, upon which the pinnacle should 
 have been erected; and it is certain, also, that no mortar had ever been 
 deposited on the base stones referred to, for the purpose of receiving a 
 superstructure. The same remark applies also to the small buttresses 
 on the body of the church, which were never carried above the parapet, 
 and consequently were not finished off with those graceful terminations, 
 as in the restoration. This fact shows that the church was never 
 completed; and this is apparent also wdthin the structure, where the 
 walls ivere never cleaned off, or scraped down, as buildings of this kind 
 always are when finished. Some of the capitals of the columns, also, 
 are left uncarved, whilst those next to them, and others opposite, are 
 enriched with sculpture, after the manner of the style to which they 
 belong. From all these circumstances I infer that the church was only 
 completed, as it appears at this day (modern additions of course 
 omitted); and that as the structure was never surmounted by pinnacles 
 of any kind, so the spire w T as only carried to the height which we now 
 see it. The fact that the church was never cleaned oft’ when left by its 
 builders, seems to show that from want of funds, or, w T hat is quite as 
 
 Proceedings of the Archaeological Institute, 1851, p. xxxv. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 329 
 
 likely, some commotion in the country, occasioned, probably, through 
 the contentions between the houses of York and Lancaster, its further 
 progress was stayed; and thus it has descended to us in the incomplete 
 manner in which it is now seen. Further reasons for this opinion will, 
 I have no doubt, appear, as the work of restoration proceeds. 
 
 It is extremely difficult to account for the difference observable in the 
 construction of the north and south aisles of the nave, if the latter did 
 not suffer from some such accident as that referred to, it having been 
 rebuilt, as it is said after its supposed demolition by the falling of the 
 spire, “with a somewhat more elevated arch, and in a lighter style” of 
 architecture than the opposite aisle. But presuming, as I do, that 
 there was no spire to fall on the church, then we have the fact, that as 
 most of the clustered pilaster columns attached to the wall of the south 
 aisle are Early English in character, although closely approximating to 
 the Decorated English style, and might, indeed, be almost classed with 
 it, that portion of the structure must have been erected before the wall 
 and corresponding columns of the north aisle, which are in a later 
 fashion; and consequently the spire could not have fallen on the south 
 side at all, or these columns, with the walls to which they are attached, 
 would most certainly have been demolished, instead of standing, as 
 they evidently do, in their original position. The lower part of the 
 south porch is also older than its roof; and, like that portion of the 
 south side of the nave of the church into which it conducts, has not 
 been disturbed by any such catastrophe as the falling of the spire; 
 otherwise it would not exhibit such an appearance of originality as it 
 docs at this distance of time; while the arches which span the south 
 aisle arc left in so clumsy and unfinished a state, as to shew that the 
 columns upon which they rest were not primarily raised to support 
 them; and the south porch is most certainly not finished according to 
 the design of the original architect of this part of the fabric. To prove 
 this latter fact it is only necessary to observe, that the canopies which 
 surmount the niches on its sides are reduced in height, as if sawn off; 
 as are also the mouldings and crockets over the arch of entrance into 
 the church from this porch; and upon the small pillars, which reach 
 nearly to the height of these reduced niches and mouldings, and which 
 are of an earlier date, the ceiling, or ribbed roof of this porch, which is 
 of the same design as that of the south aisle, appears pressed, or rather 
 
330 
 
 HISTOEY OF BSISTOL. 
 
 squatted, on to the walls of a structure which was evidently intended to 
 have been carried many feet higher. 
 
 In discussing the contents of the manuscripts noticed, it will be 
 observed that the third refers to a gift by William Canynges, junior, of 
 £500 “towards repairing the church, and for the maintenance of two 
 chaplains and two clerks in St. Mary’s Chapel there, and of two chantry 
 priests.” In Mr. Barrett’s first manuscript no mention whatever is 
 made of this gift, but in the second he quotes, we are to infer that 
 William Canynges, junior, having himself restored those parts of the 
 church said to have been injured by the falling of the spire, “ afterwards 
 gave £500 to keep it in repair the introduction of the adverb 
 “afterwards” seeming to imply that the donation was not made then, 
 but at a subsequent period. This gift is, I have no doubt, the same 
 sum of £500 as that mentioned by the same writer, where he records,* 
 
 under date of 
 
 £ s. d. 
 
 “ 1466, William Canynges gave by deed 1 
 for Divine Offices in Eedcliffe Church / 340 0 0 
 And in plate to the said church. 100 0 0 
 
 Vested in the Vicar and Proctors of 
 
 Redcliffe . £500 0 0” 
 
 According to this document £340 of the total sum was given “for 
 Divine Offices in Redclilfe Church,” the meaning of which is explained 
 by an extract from a volume of the parish register for the years between 
 1078 and 1694, inclusive. This entry expresses that William Canynges, 
 by deed dated October 20th, 1467, one year later than that stated by 
 Mr. Barrett, “gave unto the vicar and wardens, and also to the senior 
 and major part of the parishioners of the Church of the Blessed Mary 
 of Eedcliffe in Bristol, the sum of £340 of current money, upon 
 condition that the said vicar and churchwardens and their successors 
 for ever should for that gift and with the said money sufficiently repair 
 and re-edify the ruinous buildings,tenements, and houses whatsoever of the 
 said church, and with the rents and issues of the land and tenements of 
 the said church, should provide, find, and give unto two chaplains called 
 
 Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 612. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 331 
 
 St. Mary’s Priests, nine marks a piece per annum. To two clerks, 
 sufficiently instructed in reading and singing, at £2 13s. 4d. a piece, 
 and for executing the sexton’s office £1 6s. 8d., with divers other gifts” 
 of a similar character. 
 
 It will not fail to strike the reader as somewhat remarkable, that 
 whilst, according to this entry, the repair and re-edification of “ ruinous 
 buildings, tenements, and houses,” belonging to the church are specially 
 cared for b) r the donor, not one word is said about any repairs to, or 
 rebuilding of, any part of the sacred edifice itself; nor is the slightest 
 intimation given of there being any works whatever, exterior or interior, 
 in progress. The sum of £340 was, therefore, bestowed “ to provide, 
 find, (and pay) two chaplains, two clerks, (and) a sexton,” who would 
 properly discharge the duties of their respective offices in the church; 
 and it evidently had no connection whatever with repairing the fabric 
 in which these different parties officiated. Of the total sum of £500 
 there still remains £160 unappropriated; and as no mention is made in 
 any record as to the way in which this balance was disposed of, we are 
 left to conjecture that this amount only, was, in reality, all that the 
 second William Canynges gave as his personal donation towards the 
 re-edification of the church. I use the word conjecture because of the 
 silence observed with regard to this appropriation. How £340 came 
 to be the particular sum left “for Divine Offices” in the church, is 
 accounted for by the fact that William Canynges (says the deed recorded 
 in the parish register before quoted) had advanced £160 to Sir 
 Theobald Gorges, upon some jewels or plate which the latter had placed 
 in his hands as security for that amount lent to him by Canynges, but 
 which appears never to have been redeemed. These valuables, 
 therefore, with £340, were presumed to make up the total sum of 
 £500, said to have been given by the latter in relation to the matter 
 before us. It is worthy of remark here, that in a deed dated 1467, 
 quoted by Mr. Dallaway,* the sum of £340 only is mentioned; and 
 this was given to repair the dilapidated tenements belonging to two 
 chantries in Eedcliffe Church, founded by Everard le Franceys; and to 
 found another to be called “W. Canynges priest.” If this deed could 
 be depended on as the most truth-telling of the whole of the documents 
 
 * Antiquities of Bristow, p. 19G. 
 
332 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 brought forward in this discussion, it clearly shuts out William 
 Canynges, junior, from all participation, by gift or donation, in the 
 re-edification of the church, and leaves us to the alternative that he did 
 not even contribute at all towards the undertaking! 
 
 If the above remarks be correct, and the inferences deduced be based 
 upon fact, William Canynges, junior, who has “passed for the founder ” 
 of the Church of St. Mary Redcliffe, is reduced from the edifier and 
 liberal contributor, to the mere treasurer or superintendent in the 
 application of the funds raised for advancing the completion of the 
 building. That he gave of his substance, however, to carry on the 
 work, we may presume, although it does not appear; yet if he had been 
 more than a contributor, surely some mention of a circumstance so 
 remarkable would have been recorded, either on the monuments erected 
 to his memory, and still standing in the church, or in his will. Yet 
 nothing of the kind was ever placed on record. A still more singular 
 fact is, that whilst, amongst his last testamentary bequests, he 
 particularly specifies a gift of “twenty pence to the mother church of 
 Wells,”—directs that the “lights and torches” used at his funeral 
 should “be given and distributed” by his executors “to twenty-four of 
 the neighbouring parish churches without Bristol,”—gives “to the 
 fabric of the church of Westbury, forty shillings,” and a like sum to 
 the church and tower of Compton Braynesold—no mention whatever is 
 made of any gift, in money or lands, to the Church of St. Mary 
 Redcliffe! Nor do we meet with the slightest notice of any donation 
 or bequest being made by this second William Canynges towards the 
 erection, in any memorial to which the smallest importance can be 
 attached. The manuscripts cited in these remarks are of so contradictory 
 a character as to be unworthy of credit; and they bear so strong a 
 general resemblance to each other, and yet admit of such vSried 
 interpretations, as to have the appearance, at least, of having been 
 concocted for purposes of fraud and deception. 
 
 From what has been advanced it will be seen that my opinions differ 
 widely from those of all previous writers upon the Church of St. Mary 
 Redcliffe; yet, although they should affect the long established fame of 
 those to whom, by common consent, the erection of this matchless 
 structure has been ascribed, it were better—far better—to endeavour to 
 divest the subject of a mysticism which has darkened its history, than 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 333 
 
 to echo, as most writers have done, an undisturbed tradition which does 
 not even approach to fact. “ If to investigate truth be in some instances 
 to lessen traditional fame which has descended to our times without 
 examination, the present age is become more interested in discovering 
 realities, and in detaching such errors from seeming authorities, which 
 have never been submitted to the test of historic proof. * 
 
 The sum of the foregoing argument is, as I think, clearly to establish 
 three important facts:—First, that tradition alone, unsupported by any 
 documentary evidence of undoubted authority, has ascribed the founding 
 of the Church of St. Mary Redcliffe to Simon de Burton; and that the 
 oldest parts of the structure were erected at least forty years before that 
 event is said to have taken place, another style of architecture being at 
 the time in practice. Secondly, that in constructing those parts of the 
 building usually assigned, through the same suspicious and unconfirmed 
 medium only, to William Canynges, he was aided by the contributions 
 of other wealthy individuals, and only as a contributor stands 
 connected with the erection of any part of the structure. Thirdly, 
 that in the examination of such documents as refer to William Canynges, 
 junior, nothing has been discovered to justify the long-received opinion 
 that he executed the work of re-construction at his own sole cost, all 
 the evidence adduced tending to prove that, like his great predecessors, 
 Simon de Burton and William Canynges, senior, he was, at most, but a 
 contributor; and as such only, “ wyth the helpe of others of the 
 worsliipfulle towne of Bristow,” he finished the labours ascribed to 
 those worthy men by employing “ masons and workemenne to edifie, 
 repayre, cover, and glaze the church of Redcliffe,” which had been 
 commenced upwards of a century before the time when his grandfather 
 flourished. 
 
 In thus endeavouring to “ unravel the entangled thread spun by 
 other authors,” f and bring to light, if possible, the secret hidden 
 history of a church about which so much has been -written to little 
 purpose, I have had no desire to disparage the labour of others, or to 
 speak of what they have recorded in any way than as every other lover 
 of truth would feel himself at liberty to do. Much less would I detract 
 
 * Dallaway’s Antiquities of Bristol, p. 197. 
 t Britton's Appeal for tho Restoration, &c., p. 32. 
 
334 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 from tlie fair fame of those to whom it has long been usual to award 
 the praise of the erection of so noble a structure as the Church of St. 
 Mary, but that a desire to ascertain truth for myself and then to inform 
 others, prompts me to give expression to opinions which, however 
 adverse to popular notions, are nevertheless those of sincere conviction, 
 resulting from a long and deep-seated persuasion of more than thirty 
 years standing, that the building of this magnificent church has 
 hitherto been ascribed to parties who were, at most, mere helpers in the 
 work, like many others contemporary with them. Men, professionally 
 qualified to undertake the task before me, have contented themselves 
 with a mere echo of the opinions, or rather the thoughtless expressions 
 of other writers, as if afraid of disturbing the traditionary narrative of 
 their predecessors in the same vocation; although apparently conscious 
 that there was concealed beneath its surface a real history of the fabric, 
 yet to be revealed. So conscious was Mr. Britton of this fact, that we 
 find him remarking “ The Church of Bedcliffe is not only popularly 
 called Canynges’ work, but the topographers of the city also ascribe it 
 to a person of this name. Hence much error, and much confusion have 
 prevailed. There were several persons named Canynges, two of whom 
 appear to have been rich merchants, mayors, and liberal benefactors to 
 the poor and to the religious fraternities of Bristol. Barrett, Seyer, 
 Evans, Dallaway, and other antiquaries, have failed to identify the works 
 and deeds of the senior and junior members of that family, although 
 the last reverend gentleman has endeavoured to do so, and has certainly 
 given a better and more discriminating account of the varieties of 
 architecture in this church than any other writer; but he is occasionally 
 very obscure and confused. Seyer and Evans have not made out the 
 true history of the edifice, nor was my former essay at all successful.” * 
 How far I have succeeded in the attempt, I leave to the judgment of 
 others, but if this effort tends to the removal of the mystery which has 
 hitherto surrounded this fabric, my labour will not have been in vain; 
 and my reward will be ample in the pleasure of knowing that I have, in 
 any humble way, explained the history of a church which has hitherto 
 been veiled in no inconsiderable amount of obscurity, t 
 
 Britton’s Appeal for the Restoration, &c., p. 23. 
 f Appendix XLIX. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 335 
 
 I shall now pass on to a more particular description of this noble 
 pile, which, from its magnitude, and the amount of valuable composition 
 it contains, ranks quite as a cathedral or collegiate church. Every part, 
 both externally and internally, displays a combination of architectural 
 embellishment scarcely surpassed by any other ecclesiastical building in 
 the kingdom; whilst the graceful lightness of its lofty and almost 
 unique interior, affords unmingled delight and astonishment to the 
 visitor. On the exterior an open-worked parapet extends along the 
 summit of the aisles, and another, at the top of the entire church, with 
 purfled pinnacles rising above flying buttresses, which extend from the 
 upper story of the fabric to the attached buttresses of the aisles. 
 
 The ground plan of the church is, as usual, cruciform, having a massy 
 tower at the north-west end of the structure; nave and aisles with north 
 and south porches; transepts with aisles—which occurs only in the 
 present instance, and in the cathedrals of York and Ely, and the Abbey 
 Church of Westminster; chancel with aisles, and a Lady Chapel at 
 the eastern extremity; the total length from which, to the end of the 
 nave, is 239 feet; of the transept, 117; breadth of ditto and aisles, 44 
 feet; breadth of nave and aisles, 59 feet; height of aisles, 25 feet; and 
 ditto of nave, transept, and chancel, 54 feet. 
 
 The unrivalled tower of this church is, perhaps, as fine as anything 
 in architecture, and requires extended study before its beauties can be 
 estimated. Its commanding situation gives to it an appearance of 
 altitude which its massiveness, under less favourable circumstances, 
 would scarcely convey. It is rich in decoration, some of its statues 
 still remaining, and all its parts and ornamental details are proportion- 
 ably large and majestic. Its height is 120 feet to the open worked 
 parapet which surmounts it; and that of the portion of an intended 
 spire is 36 feet more. 
 
 The exterior north porch, with its unique entrance doorway, the 
 boldness and variety of the mouldings throughout, the beauty and 
 skilful arrangement of the groining within,—are some of the many 
 points which arrest the attention of the examiner, and compel him to 
 admit what a fine appreciation of the beautiful the architects of the 
 middle ages had. This singularly elegant porch has no parallel in 
 England; in its form, which is exangular, and its adornments, and 
 appropriation, it is an exceedingly curious and interesting object. A 
 
33 G 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 large and very remarkable doorway faces the north, the mouldings of 
 which are filled with richly matted foliage, consisting of leaves, flowers, 
 and figures. Over the cornice is a series of beautiful windows of three 
 lights each; and at the external angles of the porch are triangular 
 buttresses. The whole is adorned with niches, canopies, crockets, 
 pediments, and other embellishments of rich and elaborate workmanship 
 peculiar to the style of art in which it is built. 
 
 If William Wyrcestre be correct, the niches on the exterior of this 
 porch were once filled with statues wrought in freestone. The corbels 
 supporting them are deserving special notice, from the variety of 
 curiously combined figures of men and animals, and wreaths of foliage 
 of the most costly workmanship, with which the whole are elaborately 
 adorned. The bosses of the vaulted roof within are peculiarly 
 striking, and so also are some singularly carved corbels in the interior, 
 w here once was a confessional, the remains of which are still apparent 
 in the walls of the structure. 
 
 The small openings near the summit of this porch afford light to an 
 apartment known as the muniment room; it is hexagonal, and was 
 formerly called the treasury house, in which w r ere kept all the archives 
 belonging to the church. In it are several chests more or less decayed, 
 or stolen piecemeal by the curious; one of which is denominated 
 “William Canynges’ chest.” As these coffers were supposed to contain 
 title deeds and other documents of value, an examination of them took 
 place about the year 1729, when such as were thought worth preserving 
 were removed to the vestry-room as to a place of greater security; but 
 numerous manuscripts, which appeared to have no relation to the 
 church, were left in the open chests, to the mercy of any one visiting the 
 place. Chatterton, whose uncle was the sexton of the parish, obtained 
 easy access to the room, from whence he is believed to have conveyed 
 the parchments wdiich have so greatly contributed to his fame. 
 
 Beneath this room is an apartment which, from its having a fire-place 
 in it, is supposed, by some persons, to have been a lodging room 
 assigned to the keeper of the porch, and w r e are told that these officials 
 had similar rooms with fire-places in them, in other parts of the church, 
 but this opinion is a very erroneous one. That over the south porch is 
 now used by the churchw T ardens and vestrymen, where to meet and 
 transact their business. At the east end of the north aisle are tw r o 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 337 
 
 apartments, the first of which has a lodging-room over it, and there is a 
 chimney in each of them. All these apartments I have no doubt were 
 occupied by chantry priests, and not by mere keepers of the porches, 
 they being situated in the immediate vicinity of several chantries, as 
 also of the high altar. From the north aisle a doorway (now walled up) 
 and a stone staircase, conducted to an apartment beneath the north end 
 of the transept, at the eastern extremity of which is a fire-place. Mr. 
 Barrett thinks this room might probably be the common dining-room 
 for the officers which belonged to the church; but this opinion, like his 
 notion of the keepers of the porches, is ideal.* It is now used as a 
 place of interment, and seems to have been rather a small crypt, of 
 which another example, on a veiy limited scale, exists at the east end 
 of the church, beneath the Lady Chapel, and is now used as a 
 thoroughfare from one part of the churchyard to another, which lies 
 above and below it. 
 
 Immediately under the apartment assigned to the officials above 
 named, is the interior north porch—the oldest part of the present 
 fabric, and which, in former times, seems to have been the principal 
 entrance to the church. It presents to notice an example of Early 
 English architecture of great beauty and excellence; displaying richly 
 foliated capitals supported on Purbeck marble shafts, representing 
 flowers, leaves, &c., in considerable variety, well worthy the attention 
 of the student. Indeed, all the members which compose this part of 
 the church, whether foliage, capitals, mouldings, or canopies, are found 
 to be eminently chaste and elegant, exhibiting in all their parts the merits 
 of this first style in English architecture—lovely in simplicity, and 
 permanently attractive without the labour of a redundancy in 
 embellishment. Over the doorway conducting into the church, and 
 on each side of it, are mutilated niches, which, as well as the doorway, 
 are in the Perpendicular style of English architecture. The former 
 once contained an image of the Virgin Mary, attired in a fringe 
 garment, and to which one Maude Easterfield gave, in 1401, a very 
 splendid ring. William Wyrcestre calls this porch the Chapel of the 
 Blessed Mary. 
 
 The general interior of this costly church, viewed from the west 
 entrance, has few parallels. Its elegantly clustered pillars, the profusion 
 
 * Hist, of Bi-istol, pp. 576, 577. 
 
 A A 
 
338 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 of slender mouldings rising from near tlie floor to the vaulting in 
 unbroken lines, the chaste simplicity of its panelling, the grateful 
 adornings of its mullioned windows, and the elaborate enrichments of 
 its finely sculptured roof—the bosses of which were once embellished 
 with leaf gold and heraldic colourings—exhibit such a grandeur of 
 conception, a tasteful variety in decorative excellence, and a combination 
 of the beautiful and impressive in architecture, as never fails to strike 
 the spectator with a reverential awe which can be produced by no 
 other mode of building. No less than twelve distinct varieties of 
 groining exist in this church, but that in the vaulting of the transepts 
 is the most remarkable for its lightness, richness, and beauty of 
 construction. The bosses, too, throughout the entire structure, display 
 an extraordinary fertility of imagination, and an amazing effort of the 
 power of inventive genius; there being no less than 1,117 of these 
 beautiful creations in the building, and yet no two are alike! Every 
 portion of the fabric is vaulted with stone; embellished with tracery of 
 the most elaborate character; and it possesses a grace and elegance 
 which must be seen to be appreciated. 
 
 The east end of this church, which, until about three years ago, was en¬ 
 cumbered with paintings by Hogarth and others, is now exposed to view 
 by their removal, and the original altar screen is seen to great advantage, 
 as well as the Lady Chapel. Opposite to this, in the centre of the 
 church, and at the commencement of the chancel, is an eagle or lettern 
 of brass, from which the lessons for the day are read by the officiating 
 minister; and a modern oak pulpit and reading-desk, elaborately 
 carved, has been long since substituted in the place of the old one. An 
 inscription round the ball or globe on which the bird is perched, reads, 
 
 “The free gift of James Wathen, senior, pin-maker, of this parish, A.D. 1G38.” 
 
 The original font of the church stands close to the south-west pier, 
 near the w T est entrance. It is of good design, but not particularly rich 
 in embellishments; and of Perpendicular English architecture, but 
 rather plain for the age in which it was constructed. It was, some 
 years ago, superseded by an erection in white marble, which stood in 
 the north transept, but which has, in its turn, given place to a very 
 beautiful little structure of the kind, which stands at the west end of the 
 church, and is adorned with alabaster figures and inscriptions. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 339 
 
 The west window of the structure is concealed by an organ in quite 
 an incongruous style of workmanship to the architecture of the church; 
 it stands upon a screen of moderate pretensions to beauty, which was 
 erected by subscriptions obtained for the purpose by a late church¬ 
 warden, at a cost of £200. 
 
 The Church of St. Mary Redcliffe has been long undergoing a 
 complete restoration, it having become apparent nearly twenty years 
 ago, that unless immediate steps were taken to accomplish that object, 
 it might soon be too late to effect it; and also that the original design of 
 some of the detail would certainly be lost for ever. Long and loud 
 complaints have been made of the tardy manner in which the restoration 
 is proceeded with, which seem to be needless, if (as I have shewn), 
 two hundred years, at least, were occupied in erecting it. Too much 
 praise cannot be awarded to the Restoration Committee for their 
 untiring efforts in the cause they so ably and energetically superintend. 
 In the midst of obstacles apparently insurmountable, and discourage¬ 
 ments almost overwhelming, they have persevered with a fortitude that 
 does them honour, and when their labours shall have an end, Bristol 
 will again possess a church, which, instead of being parochial merely, 
 is worthy to be classed among our national monuments. 
 
 In this restoration there was found, beneath the steps of the north 
 porch, in January, 1853, an ancient stone coffin, in which were the 
 remains of a human body of the male sex. On the lid of this coffin 
 was sculptured a cross, surrounded by foliage, within a quatrefoil 
 peculiar to the style which prevailed in the thirteenth century, at which 
 time the inner north porch of this church was constructed. Its 
 discovery, in such a situation, would imply that the founder of this part 
 of the building was sepulchred at the entrance to the beautiful portal 
 which he had erected, and that the stone coffin contained his ashes. 
 His interment here may be regarded as an act of humility; for the 
 burial of ecclesiastics, as well as pious laymen, in the middle ages, at 
 the entrance to the church porch, was not uncommon, and shows that 
 some of them, at least, regarded the interior of the sacred structure as 
 too holy a place for their dust to rest in after death. 
 
 At the south-west end of the church are to be seen several relics, 
 which, in the process of restoration have been brought to light, and are 
 there preserved. One of these is a stone coffin lid, on which is 
 
340 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 sculptured a cross, and two imperfect human heads above it. On 
 another is an incised cross, with a mutilated inscription round the edge 
 of the stone—the former being of the thirteenth century, and the latter 
 of an earlier date, probably by a century. Here is also preserved a 
 stone coffin lid, which was found in the wall beneath the west window 
 of the chapel of St. Sprite, or the Holy Ghost, pulled down in 1766, 
 because it obstructed the view of the west front of the church. On it 
 is sculptured a human figure of a man with hands joined in the act of 
 prayer, and beneath it in old English characters, is inscribed, “ loljanneS 
 ^tamjmgton,” abridged. On opening the coffin which this lid covered, 
 the shape of the entire human body, or rather of its solid parts, was to be 
 seen preserved in the natural position,butonbeingtouched it fell into dust. 
 John Lamyngton is mentioned among the chaplains of Redcliffe Church 
 for the year 1393, so that “ Lamynton’s Lady’s Chamber” might be the 
 name of the building spoken of before the fraternity of the Holy 
 Ghost gave it the name of St. Sprite’s Chapel.* This chapel once 
 belonged to the master and friars of the Hospital of St. John the 
 Baptist, without Redcliffe Gate. At the surrender of the hospital, on 
 the dissolution of religious houses, it w r as taken into the king’s hands. 
 In 1571 Queen Elizabeth gave it to the parishioners of St. Mary 
 Redcliffe, for a free grammar and writing school, for which it continued 
 to be used until it was demolished as above stated. 
 
 The parts of this church restored up to the present time are the 
 north porch, the first stone of which was laid November 24th, 1848, 
 and its completion was effected in June, 1854. The contributor to 
 this restoration was an unknown benefactor, signing himself “Nil 
 Desperandum,” and the total cost of the work was .£2,534 8s. 8d. 
 Mr. Richard Rowe, a liberal Dissenter, to show his appreciation of the 
 zeal of the Redcliffe committee, and of the voluntary principle adopted 
 in the restoration, offered to bring, in a vessel belonging to him, one 
 hundred tons of stone from Caen, freight free, which he did.t The 
 south transept also, the south porch, the altar screen at the east end of 
 the church, some of the columns and part of the roof inside the structure, 
 and a few of the clerestory and other windows, have been restored. “ The 
 
 * Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 596. 
 t Report of the architect, George Godwin, Esq., to the Committee. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 341 
 
 ground has been lowered all round the Church, so as to expose the whole 
 extent of the faced walls; a complete system of drainage has been formed, 
 and the surface next the south side of the church, where much water falls 
 from the higher land adjoining, has been paved. The eastern angle of the 
 South Aisle of the Chancel, which had failed, has been rebuilt ; the oak 
 roofs of the Chancel and Aisles, as far as the Transept, have been 
 renewed and fresh leaded, on a layer of asphalted felt and oak boarding; 
 the east end of the Church and one severy on each side, with the 
 parapets, flying buttresses, and enriched pinnacles, have been wholly 
 restored stone by stone. Casts have been made of various ornamental 
 portions of the building, which are fast hastening to decay,” * and the 
 Lady Chapel is being proceeded with. 
 
 There is but little ancient coloured glass in the windows of this 
 church ; with the exception of a few armorial devices already alluded 
 to, the principal remains are in the centre window of the north transept, 
 where the figure of the Virgin and Child are prominent. Besides this 
 there are two modern stained glass windows, each of three lights, in 
 this part of the structure. At the end of the west aisle is one inscribed :— 
 
 “The above memorial window was erected November Anno Dni. 1859. 
 
 By the surviving children of the deceased.” 
 
 And on a brass plate, beneath, is— 
 
 “In Memory of W m - Hopton Wyld, Esqre, 
 
 Alderman of this City, Died Aug 1 . 2S t j 1 1853, 
 at the time of his decease senior vestryman 
 of this Parish of S. Mary Redcliff, 
 also of Mary his Wife, died Mar. 29 111 1858, 
 and of four of their infant children.” 
 
 Beneath the other modern window, at the extremity of the east aisle 
 of this transept, is another brass plate, inscribed :— 
 
 “ This 
 
 Window was erected in Memory 
 of Samuel Lucas, of this Parish, 
 for many years Senior Vestryman. 
 
 Obit 13 January 1853, 
 
 Aged 83 years.” 
 
 The centre window in the south transept was filled with modern 
 stained glass by the exertions of some ladies of the parish, who raised 
 
 Report of George Godwin, F.R.S., architect. 
 
342 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 the funds necessary for the purpose, and it was completed in December, 
 1854. The south-west window of this transept was filled with stained 
 glass by the family of the gentleman whose name it perpetuates, and 
 whose daughters had been chiefly instrumental in the erection of the 
 central window. It is inscribed 
 
 “ In Memory of William Powell. Ob 1 - 23rd Feby- 1854. iEtat. 64.” 
 
 The south-east window which, as well as that last mentioned, is of 
 three lights, is also filled with stained glass. At the foot of it is 
 written:— 
 
 “This Window was erected, in Memory of Benjamin Spry, A.M., formerly 
 Vicar of this parish, by his surviving Children and Grandchildren, A.D. 1835.” 
 
 Mr. Spry was a prebendary of Salisbury Cathedral, vicar of Bed- 
 minster, with the Chapelries of St. Mary Redcliffe, St. Thomas, Abbots’ 
 Leigh, 31 years, and died in October, 1806. 
 
 The east window of the church was erected as the result of the 
 subscriptions contributed to fill it with stained glass by the late Sir 
 John Kerle Haberfield, Robert Phippen, and Richard Poole King, 
 Esquires; and recently the committee for the restoration have added a 
 stained glass window to the Lady Chapel, in which the Sunday school 
 was held for many years; beneath it is written, 
 
 “ To the Glory of God, and in Memory of William Hall, Died Nov 22, 1857, 
 Aged 64. Erected by Subscription.” 
 
 This unostentatious, but most valuable man, was, for the long space 
 of forty-five years, the devoted teacher and superintendent of the 
 Sunday schools belonging to the parishes of St. Mary Redcliffe and 
 St. Thomas. His exertions for the education of the children of the 
 poor were continuous and unremitting, and the respect paid to his 
 obsequies were but a faint tribute to his worth, and to the excellence of 
 his character as a Christian; his eminent services gratuitously rendered 
 to the two parishes, calling for the co-operation of the authorities, to 
 mark, by them attention and presence, the solemnity of the occasion. 
 When it was not fashionable to watch over the interests of the poor, 
 and at a time when it was considered they ought not to be educated, 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 343 
 
 he struck out his path of rectitude, from which he never deviated; and 
 for years he not only superintended the duties in which he engaged 
 with much cheerfulness, but he discharged, also, what some are pleased 
 to call the drudgery of the work. Steadily pursuing his labour of love, 
 the varied changes that occurred produced but little change in him; he 
 was ever, at the appointed hour, found among his little charge, 
 endeavouring to guide their wandering feet into the way of peace. 
 
 Mr. Hall was an industrious tradesman in the parish of St. Mary 
 Redcliffe, whose memory will long be blessed by thousands whom he 
 has taught in the above-named schools; and the committee could not 
 have erected a more suitable memorial to record their appreciation of 
 the worth of such a man, than the stained glass window referred to. 
 
 The SEPULCHRAL MONUMENTS in the Church of St. Mary 
 Redcliffe are of great interest. Upon an altar-tomb in the north 
 transept repose the recumbent effigies of a warrior, cross-legged, and 
 habited as a Knight Templar, in the act of drawing his sword. “The 
 name of the person to whom this monument properly belongs (says 
 Mr. Britton) is unknown, there being no inscription, or any distinct 
 mark upon it, by which it can be decidedly ascertained. Tradition 
 assigns it to William Burton.” * 
 
 In this paragraph the writer has introduced the name of a person 
 who is, as far as I am aware, totally unknown in Bristol history, and of 
 whom it is believed no one but himself ever heard. It is difficult to 
 regard even the great Simon de Burton in any other light than as a 
 mere myth, the creation of Chatterton’s imagination; and it is still 
 more difficult to look upon a Burton bearing the prenomen of William, 
 as a reality. In the absence of positive testimony I rather give the 
 preference to Mr. Barrett’s opinion here, although, perhaps, the armour 
 in which the figure is habited agrees better with that worn at a 
 somewhat earlier period. That writer thinks this mailed effigy was 
 “probably designed for Robert de Berkeley, Lord of Bedminster and 
 Redcliffe, a benefactor to this church.” t He was born in the year 
 1165, but the place of his birth is not mentioned, nor is the day named 
 
 Essay on Redcliffe Church, p. 26. 
 t Hist, of Bristol, p. 583. 
 
344 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 when that event occurred; it is likely, however, that the former was at 
 Berkeley, where his father, Maurice, who adopted the name of his 
 estate, then lived. 
 
 Of his early life little is recorded, yet that little is a sufficient index 
 to his character. We are informed that he grew up to be a pious and 
 good man; an expression which shews that his early training, under the 
 abbot of the Monastery of St. Augustine, was as much of a religious 
 as of a military complexion; for his sire, as well as his grandsire, seem 
 to have been thoroughly imbued with the monastic spirit of the times 
 in which they lived, and to have regarded the favour of the church as 
 paramount. Piety in those days consisted, according to priestly 
 interpretation, in the bestowment of liberal benefactions to the religious 
 houses and churches, and the giving of estates for supporting the 
 institutions of the Papacy. 
 
 Having passed the season of pupilage, he proceeded, whilst yet a 
 youth, to the court of Henry II., where he was instructed in all the 
 martial exercises and military accomplishments of the age.* Here, in 
 all probability, the monarch’s son, the indomitable Coeur de Lion, his 
 senior by a few years, was his example of unsurpassed daring and 
 unconquerable prowess. From the court he seems to have retired to 
 his father’s manor of Portbury, in the church of which village he (the 
 father) had founded a chantry; and on his death, which took place in 
 1189, Robert, the son, succeeded to the title and estates. Henceforward 
 therefore, he is known to us .as Lord Robert de Berkeley. 
 
 In 1191, and when twenty-six years of age, Lord Robert gave one 
 thousand pounds for livery, of his inheritance of Berkeley Castle, 
 which, with the lands belonging thereto, was confirmed to him in 1199, 
 on payment of an additional exaction of sixty marks. In 1214 he 
 joined the barons in the struggle against the tyranny of King John, 
 whose misgovernment had excited the indignation of his nobles, when 
 they, in retaliation for the monarch’s having solicited aid from the Pope, 
 adopted the dangerous course of inviting the son of the King of France 
 to land in England, and to whom they promised obedience as their 
 sovereign. For this act of indiscretion Lord Robert de Berkeley 
 suffered the loss of his large estates, which were seized by the Crown, 
 
 Seyer’a Memoirs of Bristol, vol. i., p. 481. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 345 
 
 but they were soon restored to him again. Notwithstanding this, 
 however, two years afterwards he, a second time, forfeited the confidence 
 of the king, by again falling from his allegiance, when his estates were 
 once more siezed, and the revenue arising from them was ordered to be 
 applied to the maintenance of Bristol Castle, of which he had been the 
 constable or governor. And, as if this punishment for his offence was 
 not sufficiently heavy, Lord Robert was excommunicated by Innocent 
 III.,—one of the haughtiest and most unbending of all the Popes of 
 Rome. He must, however, with all his delinquencies, have been 
 esteemed by the Sovereign, for in the last year of his reign, the king 
 being at Berkeley Castle, Lord Robert received letters of safe conduct 
 to visit the monarch there, when, upon making his submission, he 
 obtained a grant of his forfeited manor of Came, in Dorsetshire, for the 
 support of Julian, his wife ; and, on the accession of Henry III. to the 
 throne, he made his peace with the new king on payment of a fine of 
 £9 66 13s. 4d., when he was restored to all his lands, excepting the 
 castle and town of Berkeley, which, however, were granted to his brother 
 Thomas in 1223, two years after he had succeeded to the titles and 
 estates on the death of Lord Robert, May 13th, 1221, at the age of 
 55 years. 
 
 It has been already remarked that this noble founded the hospital of 
 St. Catherine, Briglitbow.* In it, too, his obiit was yearly celebrated 
 with great solemnity. At the dissolution of religious houses, this 
 hospital, with its chapel, was soon deprived of its sacred character, 
 which naturally led to the destruction or removal of everything likely 
 to interfere with its application to secular purposes. Accordingly when 
 its demolition appeared inevitable, the effigy of the warrior in Redcliffe 
 Church, was, I doubt not, taken from this chapel, and deposited in the 
 more honoured building in which it is now seen, as in a place of 
 security—a shrine more befitting a church-going Berkeley. 
 
 My reasons for regarding the effigy spoken of as that of Lord Robert 
 de Berkeley, may be expressed in few words. As the figure is 
 completely habited in chain mail, without poleyns or knee-caps of plate, 
 it must belong to a period before these introductions to plate armour 
 were used, and for this reason it probably is the oldest effigy in Bristol. 
 
 Ante, p. 61. 
 
34G 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 It dates very early in the thirteenth century, at which time the Hospital 
 of St. Catherine was erected ; and as it was customary for the founder 
 of a religious house to be represented therein, the effigy in question, I have 
 no doubt, was intended for Lord Robert de Berkeley. Mr. Barrett says* 
 he “ was buried in the north aisle of St. Augustine's Monastery, over 
 against the high altar j” but this is no objection to his effigy being 
 erected in the chapel of his own hospital—a circumstance of frequent 
 occurrence in the middle ages. Nor is there any just ground for 
 objecting that, as Lord Robert was not a Crusader (the attitude in which 
 the figure reposes), it could not, therefore, be intended to commemorate 
 him ; because it is well known that many warriors of the era of the 
 Crusades, who had merely made a vow to repair to the Holy Land, 
 were so represented. Moreover, as the figure before us is certainly 
 older than any part of the present church of St. Mary Redcliffe, 
 excepting, perhaps, the base of the tower, it clearly could not have been 
 originally deposited in that structure. 
 
 Lord Robert de Berkeley was twice married. His first wife was 
 Julian, daughter of William de Pontdelarche ; and his second was a 
 lady named Lucia, whose family patronymic, however, is not recorded. 
 He had no issue by either, and was consequently succeeded in his title 
 and estates by liis brother Thomas, as already stated. This second lady 
 survived him, and was afterwards married to Hugh de Gourney. 
 
 Beneath the central window of the south transept, on the opposite 
 side of the church, is a tomb, on the altar part of which, beneath a 
 testoon, repose the effigies of William Canynges, junior, and his wife 
 Joanna ; the former habited in the robes of a magistrate; the female in 
 a plain flowing body-dress, according to the fashion of the time, and a 
 large kind of cap covering the head. The tomb itself is a comparatively 
 plain structure for the time in which it is said to have been erected, 
 hairing none of that elaborate detail so often found on contemporary 
 monuments of the same kind. Above the arched testoon or canopy is 
 a horizontal cornice, and at the top a row of trefoil-leaved flowers, 
 peculiar to the style of architecture in which it is constructed. The 
 front beneath the altar slab is divided into three square compartments, 
 which are each adorned with trefoil panelled arches, or rather niches, 
 
 Hist, of Bristol, p. 252. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 347 
 
 in the centre of which is a shield bearing the Canynges’ arms painted 
 on it, argent three moor’s heads erased proper boudest azure and argent. 
 
 On a board, at the back of this tomb, is an inscription, the former 
 part of which “ has most likely been translated from William Wycestre’s 
 Itinerary (p. 81, 99), and is presumed to be of much later date than the 
 death of Canynges. It is singular that his buildings at Eedcliffe Church 
 are not mentioned in his epitaph, though, it is supposed, the ‘ 800 
 handy crafts men’ (mentioned) were employed on that edifice.” * The 
 inscription is as follows :— 
 
 “ Mr. William Cannings ye Richest 
 Marcliant of ye town of Bristow ; 
 Afterwards chosen 5 times Mayor of 
 ye said town: for ye good of ye Comon 
 Wealth of ye same : He was in order 
 Of Priesthood 7 years, & afterwards 
 Dean of Westbury, & died ye 7th of 
 Novem. 1474, which said William 
 did build within ye said towne of 
 Westbury, a Colledge (with his 
 Cannons), & the said William did main¬ 
 tain by space of 8 years, 800 
 handy crafts men, besides carpen¬ 
 ters and Masons, every day 100 Men 
 Besides King Edward the 4th had of ye 
 said William 3000 Marks for his peace, 
 
 To be had in 2470 tons of Shiping ; 
 
 these are ye names of his Shiping with their burdens 
 
 — 
 
 ye Mary Canynges. 
 
 tonnes. 
 
 ... . 400 
 
 ye Mary Batt. 
 
 tonnes. 
 . 220 
 
 ye Mary Redclitf.. 
 
 . 500 
 
 ye Little Nicholas. 
 
 . 140 
 
 ye Mary and John. 
 
 . .900 
 
 ye Margaret. 
 
 
 ye Galliot. 
 
 . 150 
 
 ye Catharine Boston. 
 
 . 22 
 
 ye Katharine. 
 
 . 140 
 
 a Ship in I reland. 
 
 
 No age nor time can wear out well-woon fame, 
 the Stones themselves a stately work doth shew, 
 from senceless graue we ground may men’s good name, 
 And noble minds by ventrous deeds we know. 
 
 A Lanterne cleer setts forth a candel light, 
 
 A worthy act declares a worthy wight; 
 the buildings rare that here you may behold, 
 to shrine his Bones deserves a tombe of gold, 
 
 The famous Fabricke that he here hath donne, 
 
 Shines in its sphere as glorious as the Sonne. 
 
 What needs more words, ye future World he soughte 
 And set ye pompe and pride of this at uoughte : 
 heaven was his airne, let heaven be still his station, 
 that leaves such work for others imitation.” 
 
 Britton's Essay on Redeliffe Church, p. 30. 
 
348 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 There is a tradition current, that on the death of his wife, about 
 14G0, William Canynges placed this tomb in the church “as a 
 memorial of her, and of himself; ” * but where it originally stood is 
 uncertain. Here was situated the altar of St. Catharine, the iron work 
 which secured it to the walls still remaining, as well as other evidences of 
 its previous occupation of the same spot, being still traceable at the back 
 of the monument. There is much doubt, also, as to the period when this 
 tomb was constructed; in the absence of any date by which to fix this 
 point, it might well be regarded as the production of a later age than 
 that of William Canynges ; for although bearing the broad lineaments 
 of the Perpendicular English style of architecture, which obtained when 
 he flourished, there is a degree of clumsiness about its general appearance, 
 and a want of delicacy in the finishing of the detail, which is anything 
 but prepossessing. Still, with every deficiency, it would be hazarding 
 too much to say it is not a work of the middle ages; at the same time, 
 the fact of the arms of Canynges appearing on a shield in the centre of 
 it, painted, is no proof that the tomb was constructed to commemorate 
 the individual for whom it is supposed to have been erected, as there 
 is no evidence that he ever used any arms whatever; and it is something 
 remarkable that they do not appear as attached to the architecture of 
 any part of the Church of St. Mary Kedcliffe. 
 
 A close inspection of the effigies on this tomb will satisfy the 
 inquirer that they do not occupy their original positions—each resting 
 on a separate slab; and that the right side of the female figure has been 
 cut away so as to allow her to lie as close as possible to the wall; and 
 in like manner, the right arm of the man has been chipped away to 
 admit the folds of the garment on the left arm of the woman; or, in 
 other words, to make room for both effigies to lie abreast upon the 
 altar portion of the tomb. The slab, too, on which the male figure 
 reposes, is finished off in such a way as to leave no doubt that it was 
 placed there at a subsequent period to the erection of the tomb itself, 
 the edge of it being quite flush with the table stone of the monument. 
 These facts show that William Canynges could not have constructed 
 this tomb “as a memorial of her (his wife) and himself.” 
 
 The place from whence these figures had been removed was a matter 
 of doubt until the year 1852, when a discovery was made which settled 
 
 Dallaway's Antiquities of Bristow, p. 194. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 349 
 
 that difficulty beyond further question. In 1709 a brief was obtained 
 for repairing the church, to the amount of £5000, when it was repewed; 
 on removing some of the wooden panelling belonging to which, from 
 the wall, beneath the second and third windows eastward of the south 
 porch, two recessed tombs were found, which were originally ornamented 
 with very beautiful enrichments; but these had been wantonly destroyed, 
 and the wall rendered quite flat, to make way for the unsightly wooden 
 partitions referred to, by order of some Vandal churchwarden. From 
 these tombs the effigies in question had been removed when this 
 repewing took place; and it was found, on measuring the length and 
 breadth of the slabs on which they rest, that both fit exactly into the 
 tombs opened in the south aisle, from whence they were undoubtedly 
 removed, and most probably, as just stated, when the church was 
 repewed, and therefore upwards of a century and a-half ago. 
 
 At the south-east end of this south transept is represented, on a low 
 altar tomb, the recumbent figure of a man in priest’s robes, carved in 
 Derbyshire marble, very beautifully set forth, and habited according to 
 the position occupied by William Canynges as Dean of the Benedictine 
 College established at Westbury-on-Trym, little more than three miles 
 distant from Bristol. The head of the effigy rests on a cushion 
 supported by a book, and at its feet is a singular representation of an old 
 man, apparently suffering great anguish of body and mind. This figure 
 is also popularly believed to be intended for William Canynges, junior, 
 as above intimated, a subject upon which a considerable difference of 
 opinion is entertained amongst antiquaries, some thinking there does not 
 appear to be such a resemblance in the features of this figure and that 
 of the male effigy on the tomb last noticed, as to warrant a belief that 
 they were intended for the same person. 
 
 There is an inscription in Latin, painted on a loose board attached to 
 this monument, but which can be of no authority, as it dates, like the 
 latter part of the last-mentioned, no further back than the age of Queen 
 Elizabeth, and was, doubtless, the production of Thomas Churchyard, 
 ajnoted writer of such inscriptions at that time. It reads, in English, 
 as follows:— 
 
 “ Beneath this stone lies entombed the body of William Canynges, formerly 
 a famous, upright, and industrious merchant, and five times mayor of this town; 
 afterwards he was in holy orders for the space of seven years and Dean of 
 Westbury. In this church he founded two perpetual chantries in the two 
 
350 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 chapels, one in honour of St. George, the other in honour of St. Catherine. He 
 also appointed one priest and consecrated him to the service of the Virgin Mary 
 and his own Johanna. On whose souls may God have mercy. Amen.” 
 
 Very little is known of this figure, and even that little is veiled in 
 mystery, like everything else that relates to the individual, I believe, 
 with others, it is intended to represent. Mr. Dallaway says that 
 William Canynges had procured, during his lifetime, “ according to a 
 practice then not unusual, his effigy as a priest, to be carved and placed 
 as a monument in the chapel there (Westbury College). This was 
 intended as a daily incitement of his piety. When Westbury College 
 was burnt down by Prince Rupert’s army in 1G43, to prevent the 
 Parliament’s army taking possession of it, upon their surrender of 
 Bristol, this monument was saved, and is now in Redcliffe Church.” * 
 Mr. Dallaway does not inform his readers from whence he obtained the 
 above information, nor does he tell us how he came to know more about 
 the history of this effigy than other writers; yet the boldness with 
 which he asserts its removal from Westbury College, is sufficient to 
 excite our curiosity to know if his statement be true or not. In the 
 Latin edition of Camden’s Britannia, page 173, is a passage, which, 
 translated into English, reads thus:—“In it (Redcliffe Church) the 
 founder William Canynges has two honorary monuments; one in the 
 habit of a magistrate, for he was five times mayor of this city; the 
 other in the habit of a clergyman, for in his latter days he took orders 
 and was dean of the college which himself founded at Westbury.” 
 After this quotation from a work first published in 1586, that is, fifty- 
 seven years before Mr. Dallaway says that the monument we are 
 considering was removed from Westbury College to Redcliffe Church, 
 comment is unnecessary. Lest, however, any doubt should still exist 
 upon the subject as to the correctness of Camden, the following is 
 adduced from a manuscript, “ Relation of a Short Survey,” &c., made 
 by three officers “of the military Company in Norwich,” in 1634— 
 nine years before the event recorded by Mr. Dallaway is said to have 
 taken place,—in corroboration of the inaccuracy of that gentleman’s 
 statement:—“Hee (William Canynges) maintayn’d many Ships at Sea, 
 and was an exceeding rich Merchant, as the Story engraven on his 
 
 Antiquities of Bristow, p. 208. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 351 
 
 Monument, w Ul liis Aldermans and Sacerdotall Habits, in that high, 
 fayre Structure sets forth at large.” * In Camden’s account above 
 quoted, William Canynges is said to be the founder of Westbury 
 College, which is not true, for, at most, he merely assisted Bishop 
 Carpenter to rebuild it;h and in his statement of the effigy, he says also 
 that he was the founder of Bedcliffe Church, which shews that the 
 tradition of his having been so, was as current in the seventeenth century 
 as at the present time. It is much to be regretted that such unfounded 
 representations are made without so much as the most trifling endeavour 
 to ascertain their correctness. Whilst Camden proves that the effigy 
 of William Canynges as a priest was located in Bedcliffe Church, fifty- 
 seven years before Prince Bupert assailed Westbury College, it will be an 
 act of gross negligence, if not of criminality, for any future writer to 
 reiterate the incorrect statement of Mr. Dallaway. 
 
 William Canynges, the second of that name, was born in Bristol, in 
 or about the year 1400. He was the second surviving son of John 
 Canynges, whose will is dated May 13th, 1405. His eldest brother 
 then living was Thomas Canynges, who was sheriff of London in 1450, 
 and lord mayor in 145G ; William himself serving the office of bailiff 
 of his native town in 1432, sheriff in 1438, and mayor in 1441, 1449, 
 145G, 14G0, and 14GG ; thus occupying that elevated position five 
 times. In 1451, and again in 1455, his fellow townsmen returned him 
 as their representative to Parliament. As he contemplated retiring 
 from public life, having lost his wife and children, we find him, as a 
 prelude, making some provision for the neighbouring religious houses 
 to remember him after death; the Franciscans, to wit, promise and 
 grant that his name, and that of his wife, should “be inscribed in the 
 gift-book of their convent among the chief benefactors, (and) that their 
 obiit the second festival next after St. Peter, every year should be 
 solemnly celebrated for their souls and for the souls of all the faithful 
 departed.” } To these Franciscans he seems to have given ten pounds, 
 as he did also to the Dominicans, Augustinians, and Carmelites. He 
 gave, also, sixty pounds to all the poor blind and lame residing in the 
 
 * Lansdowne MSS. No. 213, British Museum, 
 t See my Memorials of the Canynges’ Family, 
 t Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 572. 
 
352 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 town of his nativity, every fraternity in Bristol shared in his bounty, 
 besides those before mentioned; and having completed what he 
 had designed with regard to worldly matters, he withdrew to Westbury 
 College; was ordained accolyte, September 19th, 1467; deacon and 
 priest, April 16th, 1468; and appointed the first dean of the house of 
 his adoption. In this retreat he passed the last six years of his life, 
 dying early in 1475, having attained, it is believed, the age of seventy- 
 four years. 
 
 In the west aisle of the south transept is another altar tomb, upon 
 which recline the effigies of a man, who, tradition states, was the purse- 
 bearer of the second William Canynges, and by this name it is still known, 
 because the figure happens to have something like a gypciere, purse, or 
 pouch, attached to its left side, between the folds of its ample garments, 
 which are clearly those of a civilian. There is no inscription upon this 
 tomb, nor anything else besides the figure itself to guide us in de¬ 
 termining as to whose memory it was erected. I am quite certain it 
 does not represent an ecclesiastic ; and equally sure that the person 
 whose memory it was intended to perpetuate, lived in the time of the 
 second William Canynges; and although it may not represent his 
 purse-bearer, merely as such,—an office I think too menial to secure for 
 its occupant so honourable a position after death, as to be sculptured in 
 stone, like his master ; yet it was doubtless intended for some person 
 intimately connected with him. 
 
 The head of this effigy rests upon a cushion, the right side of which 
 only is supported by an angel, which I think may be regarded as a 
 mark of inferiority ; the head of William Canynges, on both his monu¬ 
 ments, being honoured with the representation of two of those celestial 
 beings. In this particular the effigy before us is, as far as I am aware, 
 singular ; and appears to have been intended as a mark of distinction, 
 by which to indicate that the original of the figure was a dependant of 
 Canynges’, rather than his equal. The loose robe which envelopes this 
 effigy within its ample folds, was commonly worn by civilians in 
 Canynges’ time, and the remarkable manner in which the covering for the 
 head is placed on this figure, decides, at once, the age to which it 
 belongs. It will be observed that this singular kind of cap appears 
 both on the effigy of Canynges, and also on that in question, and is 
 placed on the left shoulder of each figure. This head-gear was very 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 353 
 
 fashionable during the reign of Henry VI., and much worn till nearly 
 the close of the fifteenth century. In shape it somewhat resembled a 
 turban, and was composed either of a roll of cloth or other rich 
 material, which, on one side, hung down in a broad band or scarf, 
 sometimes to the ground. At the feet of this effigy is a dog with a 
 large bone between his paws, which may have been intended to typify 
 the almsgiving practised by William Canynges, through his represen¬ 
 tative. 
 
 Several other members of William Canynges’ household lie near 
 then - master, and in the immediate vicinity of his so-called purse-bearer. 
 Among them is William Coke, whose remains are covered by a flat 
 stone, upon which is represented a large knife and a skimmer, 
 emblematical of his calling, that of a cook; together with a Latin 
 inscription informing the reader that— 
 
 “ Here lies William Coke 
 sometime servant to William 
 Canynges Merchant of the 
 town of Bristol to whose soul 
 
 • may God be propitious. Amen. ” 
 
 On another stone close by, ornamented with a cross in the centre, 
 and formerly with a rim of brass round its edge, is an inscription in 
 Latin, stating that beneath lie the remains of “John Blecker, Brewer, 
 to whose soul may God be propitious. Amen;” and adjacent is a 
 similar record to Richard Coke, who was no doubt another of the 
 wealthy merchant’s servitors. In an old bede roll, among other persons 
 to be remembered, is “Willielmus Colas, the servant of Mystre 
 Canynges, 7 Edward 4th. (He) was buried next St. George’s chapel, 
 (and) hath yeven and delyvered to All Sowles autour (altar), wythynne 
 the chyrche of owre Ladye of Redclyve yn Bristow, by the hands of 
 Maystre William Canynges, a chalys wyth a paten of sylvre, wayinge 
 xiii ounces and halfe, sylvre parcel guylte, and the name of the said 
 William Colas is wrote upon yt, and hys fygure is portryed upon the 
 foot, besydes the crucyfyxe of the sayde chalyce, and so his sowle to be 
 praid forre’.” * 
 
 In the chancel of this church are two sepulchral brasses in excellent 
 preservation; that on the north side is to the memory of John Brook 
 
 Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 582. 
 
354 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 and liis lady, the former of whom was, in the reign of Henry VIII., one of 
 the judges of assize, and is represented in his official robes, consisting of a 
 long gown, with a furred cape and hood about the shoulders, and a cap 
 upon his head, somewhat looser in its fit than the coif or scull cap of 
 the time. The dress of his lady is in the style which prevailed at the 
 period of her death. The head is surmounted with the then fashionable 
 pediment and veil, which falls down on either side. The gown sits 
 close up in the neck, with a turn-over collar. The wrists are encircled 
 with cuffs of rich lace, and round the middle is an ornamented girdle, 
 which hangs down in front, and terminates in a costly tassel. Beneath 
 these figures is a Latin inscription, which, in English, is, 
 
 “ Here lies the body of the venerable man John Brook, once servant-at-law 
 to the illustrious prince of happy memory, King Henry the Eighth, Judge of 
 
 [Assize 
 
 to the said king in the eastern parts of England, and chief steward of 
 that honourable house and monastery of the blessed Virgin of Glastonbury, 
 in the county of Somerset; which said John died on the 25th day of 
 December, Anno Domini, 1522. And near him rests Johanna his wife, 
 daughter and heir of Richard Americke, whose souls God propitiate. Amen.” 
 
 Sir David Brook, Knt., son of the above, was lord chief baron of the 
 Exchequer, in the reign of Queen Mary, and married Margaret, daughter 
 of Bichard Butler, of London. She survived him (he being her third 
 husband), and was subsequently married to Sir Edward North, who 
 w\as (as her epitaph on her tomb in St. Lawrence Jewry Church, 
 London, expresses it)— 
 
 —‘ ‘ He that passeth all, 
 
 And was in number fourth, 
 
 And for his virtue made a Lord, (and) 
 
 Was call’d, Sir Edward North.” 
 
 On the second brass in the chancel of Redcliffe Church, w T hich is 
 much more costly than the above, is inscribed, in Latin, 
 
 “ Here lies John Jay and Johanna his Wife. John 
 died A° Dud MCCCCLXXX, whose souls may 
 God propitiate. Amen. ” 
 
 John Jay was an eminent merchant of this city, and served the 
 office of sheriff in 1456 and 1472. He is dressed as a burgess of his 
 time, and from a girdle round his w r aist hangs a purse and a rosary. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 355 
 
 The head-dress of the female, who was sister to William Wyrcestre, is 
 very similar to that on the wife of Thomas Rowley, in St. John’s 
 Church, which is remarkably simple, and bears some resemblance to 
 the mitred head-dress of the fifteenth century. The body costume 
 consists of a long gown fitting close at the waist, which is compassed 
 by an ornamental girdle, receiving the ends of a deep collar, falling 
 over each shoulder, leaving the neck and bosom bare, with the exception 
 of an under portion of her attire, which is apparently of very thin 
 texture. The sleeves have large cuffs, but in other respects fit rather 
 close to the arm. This brass is surmounted by arched canopies, ogee¬ 
 shaped, and crocketted, the whole being elaborately engraved. Beneath 
 the principal figures are representations of their children—six sons and 
 eight daughters—in the attitude of prayer; the last-mentioned wearing 
 the butterfly head-dress, a strangely fantastic fashion prevailing in the 
 latter half of the fifteenth century. 
 
 In the Lady Chapel, at the extremity of the chancel, is another 
 brass, inserted in a large stone, to the memory of Sir John Inyn, Knight, 
 a judge of the common pleas, and recorder of Bristol, who is represented 
 in his robes of office, and his head covered with a close scull cap. A 
 Latin inscription, somewhat imperfect, runs round the margin of the 
 stone, on a strip of brass, which, translated, is as follows: — 
 
 “ Here lies John Inyn, Knight, Chief Justice to our Lord the King. 
 
 who died the 24th of March, Anno Domini, 1439, whose soul may God 
 propitiate. Amen.” 
 
 Beneath the effigy is the following, also in Latin: — 
 
 “ O, just God, patient Judge, have mercy upon John 
 Inyn, who was in his time a soldier, hut practising 
 the law he became Recorder of this city, and Chief Baron 
 of the Exchequer, and also a Judge in the King’s Bench ; 
 he tempered justice with clemency; maintained 
 himself, being a soldier, in honour. Just John! 
 brave soldier ! now be thou propitiated shut 
 the doors of death upon him ; pardon his sins.” 
 
 “Underneath are his arms, or afess azure inter three unicorns’ heads 
 couped, argent within a bordure of the same, quartered with a lion 
 rampant; also two other shields. His country seat was at Bishopsworth 
 
 B B 
 
 o 
 
356 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 near Filwood, now a farm-house, in which are still to be seen the arms, 
 in coloured glass, in the windows.” * 
 
 At the east end of the north aisle of the chancel are two very richly 
 adorned monuments of stone, of the latter part of the fifteenth century, 
 erected to the memory of two Bristol merchants—Sir Thomas Mede 
 and his brother Philip. Both tombs are of the same style and 
 character, without any space being left between them, so that they have 
 the appearance of being but one structure, and iu reality they are so; 
 there being merely a slender partition dividing them; they may, 
 therefore, be spoken of as one tomb, and I shall so describe them, at 
 least, architecturally. 
 
 These tombs are flanked by slender buttresses, finishing in pinnacles 
 beneath the cornice moulding. Foliated arches, with rich ogee 
 canopies, springing from angels supporting shields, appear suspended in 
 front, over the table portion of the monument; and above these, and in 
 the intervening spaces, are narrow trefoil-headed panels. The horizontal 
 testoon is surmounted with a richly sculptured frieze of vine leaves and 
 fruit, and a crowning of trefoil flowers, as in Canynges’ monument, but 
 much more beautiful. Beneath the canopy of the first division of this 
 tomb repose the effigies of Sir Thomas Mede and his lady, both much 
 mutilated. The male figure is habited as a burgess or merchant; his 
 head, which has flowing hair, rests on pillows supported by angels. 
 The dress of the lady is remarkably plain, and very similar to that of 
 the female on the Berkeley monument in the Mayor’s Chapel. A strip 
 of brass formerly extended the whole length of this tomb, along the 
 front edge of the table stone, but part of it only remains, on which is 
 inscribed the date of the death of Sir Thomas Mede, December 
 20th, 1475. 
 
 The second division of this tomb has no effigies lying upon the table 
 stone, but affixed to the back, beneath the canopy, is an engraved brass, 
 on which are the figures of Philip Mede, who fought at the battle of 
 Nibley Green, March 20th, 1470, his wife and daughter, kneeling, with 
 their hands raised in the attitude of supplication. Upon the mantles 
 of the two former are depicted the arms of their respective families. 
 The man, who is bare-headed, has long flowing hair, and is equipped in 
 
 Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 587. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 357 
 
 a complete suit of armour, his helmet resting on the ground between 
 himself and wife. From the mouth of each issues a label; on that of 
 the man is inscribed, in Latin, “Holy Trinity, One God, have mercy 
 upon us;” and on that of the woman, “0 God the Father of Heaven 
 have mercy upon us.” Above them, in clouds, appears the bust of an 
 aged male figure, encircled about the head with the usual nimbus of a 
 saint, and surrounded with rays of light. This figure is probably 
 intended to represent the Great Creator himself, to whom they are 
 addressing their invocations. 
 
 Sir Thomas Mede was bailiff of Bristol in 1438, and sheriff in 1452, 
 at which time also he had a country residence called Mede’s Place, in 
 the parish of Wraxall, Somersetshire. Mr. Britton says he was thrice 
 mayor of the town, but this is a mistake, for he never once attained to 
 that dignity. The will of Philip Mede is dated January 11th, 1471, 
 in which he directs his body to be interred at the altar of St. Stephen 
 (where his tomb stands), in the Church of St. Mary Redcliffe, to which 
 he was a benefactor. He was bailiff in 1444, sheriff in 1454, and 
 mayor of Bristol in 1458, 1461, and 1468; and was returned member 
 of Parliament for the town in 1460. 
 
 The arms of Mede, which appear on a shield carved in stone on his tomb, 
 are—sable a chevron ermine, between three trefoils slipt argent. 
 
 Of the more modern monuments, that to the memory of Admiral 
 Penn is conspicuous for its military accompaniments. On the summit 
 are the arms of the deceased painted on a shield, and on each side is a 
 piece of mounted ordnance. Beneath is the following inscription:— 
 
 “ To the just Memory of Sr Will 111 Penn, Kt., and sometimes 
 Generali: Borne at Bristoll An. 1021: Son of Captain Giles 
 Penn, severall yeares Consul for ® English in ® Mediterranean ; 
 of the Penns of Penns-Lodge in ® County of 
 Wilts, and those Penns of Penn in ® C. of Bucks; and by 
 his Mother from the Gilberts in ® County of Somerset, 
 
 Originally from Yorkshire : Addicted from his 
 Youth to Maritime Affaires ; he was made Captain at 
 the yeares of 21; Rear-Admiral of Ireland at 23 ; Vice- 
 Admiral of Ireland at 25 ; Admiral to the Streights 
 at 29 ; Vice-Admiral of England at 31, and General 
 in the first Dutch Warres, at 32. Whence retiring, 
 
358 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 in A° 1655 he was chosen a Parliament man for the 
 Town of Weymouth, 1660 ; made Commissioner of 
 the Admiralty and Navy ; Governor of the Town and Fort 
 of King-sail; Vice-Admiral of Munster, and a Member of 
 that Provincial Oounseill; and in Anno 1664, was 
 chosen Great Captain Commander under his 
 Royall Highnesse in * signall and most 
 evidently successful fight against the Dutch fleet. 
 
 Thus, He took leave of the Sea, his old Element; But 
 continued still his other employs till 1669 ; at what 
 time, through Bodely Infirmities (contracted by * 
 
 Care and fatigue of Publique Affairs), 
 
 He withdrew, 
 
 Prepared and made for his End ; and with a gentle and 
 Even Gale, in much peace, arrived and anchored in his 
 Last and Best Port, at Wanstead in ® County of Essex, 
 
 *16 Sept. 1670, Being then but 49 and 4 Months old. 
 
 To whose Name and merit, his surviving Lady 
 hath erected this remembrance.” 
 
 Against a pillar above this memorial, hang the armour worn by the 
 deceased, and some flags and pennons once belonging to him, but which 
 time has reduced to mere shreds by its inroads upon their fragile 
 texture. The flags and streamers, as well as the armour, were borne at 
 his funeral. 
 
 Arms.—Argent, on a bar vert three balls or bezants of the first. 
 
 “Sir William Penn, born at Bristol, and baptised in the Church of 
 St. Thomas the Apostle in that city, on the 23rd day of April, 1621, 
 was the second and youngest son of Giles Penn, a captain in the navy, 
 and for many years a consul for the English trade in the Mediterranean.”* 
 He was educated with great care by his father for the sea-service, with 
 whom he performed several voyages; until he entered the royal navy as 
 a lieutenant, from which time his whole life was devoted to the 
 profession. From the commencement of the year in which he died, his 
 health had been declining, and so continued until he sank under his 
 infirmities at the date stated on his monument; upon which, also, the 
 chief incidents of his life are recorded, rendering mention of them here 
 unnecessary. In his will, dated January 20th, 1669, he says, “My 
 
 Memorials of Sir William Penn, Knt., by Granville Penn, vol. i., p. 1. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 359 
 
 body, I commit to the grave, to be buried in the parish church of 
 Redcliffe, within the city of Bristol, as near unto the body of my dear 
 mother deceased (whose body lies there interred) as the same conveniently 
 may be.” This was accordingly done. His remains were conveyed to 
 Bristol, and “ put in the Guildhall; wherein he lay in state untill the 3d 
 of October, and being guarded on each side of the way with the trained 
 bands, was buried at Redcliffe-church.”* The order of the procession 
 was as follows :—“ After three or four companies of foot were passed, 
 there were carried three large streamers, with his arms quartered therein; 
 next to that, the crest of his coat, and his helmet; next to that his 
 shield and gauntlets; and then came the corpse, drawn with six horses: 
 and at his head a red flag (to which he was entitled) and a blue flag of 
 the one side, and a white flag of the other, according to the ships and 
 squadrons he had served in, for the parliament, or for his majesty since 
 his restoration.” 
 
 “ He was a man, in many respects, of a noble heart; and, for a sailor, 
 uncommonly devout, as would appear, among many other still better 
 proofs, from the following epitaph, written by himself, on one of his 
 unfortunate sailors, who, drowned with many others on the coast of 
 Deal, was picked up, and buried iu the churchyard near that place. 
 
 ‘ ‘ The boisterous winds and raging seas 
 Have tost me to and fro ; 
 
 But spite of these, by God’s decrees, 
 
 I harbour here below. 
 
 Where, safe at anchor, I do ride 
 With many of our fleet; 
 
 In hope, one day, again to weigh, 
 
 Great Admiral Christ to meet. ” + 
 
 Sir William Penn married Margaret, daughter of John Jasper, of 
 Rotterdam. His eldest son William was a member of the Society of 
 Friends, and a considerable writer among them. He was also 
 proprietor of Pennsylvania, and founder of Philadelphia. 
 
 At the north-east angle of the transept is a small marble tablet, 
 inscribed with the following lines, written by Mrs. Hannah More:— 
 
 * Bristol Memorialist, p. 200. 
 t Memorials of Sir William Penn, vol. ii., p. 569. 
 
360 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 “ Near this pillar are deposited the remains of Mrs. 
 
 Fortune Little, ■widow of Mr. John Little, late of this 
 parish. She died June 28th, 1777, aged 57. 
 
 “ Oh I could this verse her bright example spread. 
 
 And teach the living while it prais’d the dead : 
 
 Then, reader, should it speak her hope divine, 
 
 Not to record her faith, but to strengthen thine ; 
 
 Then should her ev’ry virtue stand confess’d, 
 
 ’Till every virtue kindled in thy breast: 
 
 But if thou slight the monitory strain 
 And she has liv’d to thee at least in vain, 
 
 Yet let her death an awful lesson give, 
 
 The dying Christian speaks to all that live ; 
 
 Enough for her, that here her ashes rest 
 ’Till God’s own plaudit shall her worth attest. 
 
 Hannah More.” 
 
 Tu the north aisle of the chancel is a tablet with the following 
 inscription:— 
 
 ‘ ‘ Sacred to the Memory of 
 The Revd Thomas Broughton, M.A. 
 eldest son of the Revd Thomas Broughton, D. D. 
 
 Rector of St. Andrew’s Holbom, 
 
 & Grandson of Henry Broughton, Esq. 
 of Willisham in the County of Suffolk ; 
 a Prebendary of the Cathedral Church of Salisbury, 
 
 Rector of Stipington in the County of Herts, 
 
 & Vicar of Bedminster, with the Chapelries of St. Mary Redcliffe, 
 
 St. Thomas, & Abbots Leigh Annexed. 
 
 He was bom in the Parish of St. Andrew’s Holborn in the year 1703, 
 
 & married Anne, the Daughter of the Revd Tho 3 Harris, 
 of this City, by whom he had six children. 
 
 He was a profound and elegant scholar; 
 
 & successfully applied his talents to the support of the 
 Protestant Establishment, 
 of which he was an able & a faithful Minister. 
 
 He died 21st Deer in the year 1774, Aged 71.” 
 
 Mr. Broughton was the author of “Bibliotheca Historico-Sacra; or, 
 an Historical Library of the Principal Matters relating to Religion, 
 Ancient and Modern;” in two volumes folio, which he published in 
 1737. He wrote also for the “Biographia Britannica;” compiled 
 a “Dictionary of all Religions;” and was the author of a musical 
 drama entitled “Hercules.” He received the preferments he held in 
 Bristol from Bishop Sherlock. 
 
 Close by, in the same part of the church, is another tablet, inscribed 
 as follows : — 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 361 
 
 “ Sacred to the memory of 
 the Revd Martin Richard Whish, M.A., 
 Prebendary of Sarum, 
 
 46 Years Vicar of Bedminster, 
 
 With its Chapelries of St. Mary Redcliife, 
 St. Thomas, and Abbot’s Leigh, 
 Who died on the 7th day of April, 1852, 
 Aged 70 years. 
 
 His remains are deposited 
 In the same vault with those of 
 His wife and three of their children ” 
 “Underneath the altar.” 
 
 Mr. Whish was of Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge, B.A. 
 1804; M.A. 1807. His proceedings were sometimes eccentric, but be 
 was regarded as a pious and conscientious pastor, and one in whom the 
 poor found a warm-hearted friend, and the distressed a cheerful and 
 ready adviser. He was strongly attached to the Evangelical doctrines 
 of the Church of England, to the interests of which he was warmly 
 devoted. 
 
 Against the wall iu the east aisle of the north transept is a neat 
 monument in the Perpendicular English style of architecture, with this 
 inscription:— 
 
 “ Sacred 
 
 to the Memory of 
 Nathaniel Bridges, D.D. 
 
 Vicar of Willoughby and Hatton, 
 and for 28 years 
 Lecturer of this Parish. 
 
 He died the 17th of July, 1834, 
 
 Aged 86 years. 
 
 In him were combined 
 Those estimable qualities 
 which 
 
 Render social intercourse delightful, 
 
 And make public ministrations a blessing. 
 
 Gospel simplicity, deep uniform piety, 
 
 Unremitting zeal 
 
 For the spiritual interests of the people, 
 and unbounded benevolence, 
 
 Were his distinguishing characteristics. 
 
 Firmly attached 
 
 To the Established Church of England 
 He yet rose superior to party prejudice 
 
 And loved all, who loved his Master. 
 
 In him the Church of Christ 
 Has lost a faithful, laborious, 
 
 And successful minister. 
 
362 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Marble will moulder, monuments decay, 
 
 Time sweep memorials from the earth away ; 
 
 But lasting records are of Bridges given, 
 
 The date Eternity, the archives Heaven. 
 
 There living tablets, with his worth engraved 
 Stand forth for ever, in the souls he saved. 
 
 Erected 
 by subscription 
 A.D. 1835.” * 
 
 Separated but a few feet from the above is another very neat 
 monument erected in the Perpendicular style of English architecture, 
 to the memory of several members of the family of Wyld, who were 
 eminent rectifiers in this parish. 
 
 Against a column in the south transept is a marble tablet recording 
 the death of Maria, wife of William Barrett, author of “The History 
 and Antiquities of the City of Bristol,” which appeared in 1789. She 
 was a daughter of a Air. Tandy, a sugar-baker of some eminence, 
 residing in Thomas Street in this city. The historian himself was a 
 native of Chippenham, in Wiltshire, or the adjoining village of Notton, 
 where he was born, about the year 1735. His parents dying when he 
 was very young, he was placed, by his guardians, at a school in the 
 • place of his nativity, from whence he was removed to Winchester, 
 where he formed a lasting friendship with the son of the above-named 
 gentleman, at whose house, in Bristol, he frequently passed his holidays, 
 and whose daughter he subsequently married, and settled in Broad 
 Street. This occurred soon after he was admitted a surgeon, and being 
 in possession of a comfortable maintenance, which he inherited from his 
 parents, and a goodly portion with his wife, and himself skilful in his 
 profession, he soon obtained a first-rate practice; when he removed 
 from Broad Street to the house now occupied by Messrs. Chilcott, 
 opposite Colston’s School, on St. Augustine’s Back, then a more 
 aristocratic neighbourhood, as may be seen by the houses in Host 
 Street, the gardens belonging to which extended in front to the river. 
 Here he remained until about 1784, when the loss of his wife many 
 years before, and frequent attacks of gout, to which he was subject, 
 induced him to resolve on retiring from business, and devote the rest of 
 
 See Ante, p. 276. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 363 
 
 his days to study and to preparing his “History of Bristol” for the 
 press. He accordingly purchased a house at Wraxall, Somersetshire, 
 inhabited by the late Mr. Homer, where he occupied himself in close 
 study, or attending the poor of the village, to whom he gave his 
 gratuitous services, until his death, which occurred about the year 1790, 
 rather unexpectedly, from a carbuncle on one of his eyebrows, which 
 proved fatal in forty-eight hours. His age, at the time of his death, is 
 unknown, but it is believed to have been under sixty years. He was 
 buried at Higham, in the same county, of the advowson of which living 
 he was the owner, and his only son, the Rev. William Tandy Barrett, 
 was the rector of the parish. 
 
 At the west end of the nave of St. Mary Redcliffe is a mural tablet 
 inscribed 
 
 “ To the Memory of 
 Sir Francis Freeling, Baronet, 
 who was born in this parish the 25th of August, 1764, 
 and who died in Bryanston-square, in the comity of 
 Middlesex the 10th of July 1836. 
 
 For more than half a century 
 his life was devoted to the public service, 
 in the 
 
 General Post Office, 
 
 in which for 38 years he discharged the arduous duties 
 Of Secretary. 
 
 By unwearied industry, 
 in the employment of great talents, 
 and by unblemished integrity, grounded upon 
 Christian principles; 
 
 He acquired and retained the favour of 
 three successive sovereigns, 
 and the approbation of the public— 
 
 He has left a name, 
 
 which will be remembered with honour 
 in his birth place, 
 
 and which is cherished with affection and veneration 
 by his children, 
 
 who have raised this Monument. ” 
 
 Sir Francis Freeling was possessed of a clear and vigorous under¬ 
 standing, with a singular aptitude to seize upon whatever might be the 
 point in question—great patience in investigation—correctness of 
 judgment, and a power of expressing his thoughts and opinions, both 
 verbally and in writing, with force and precision. In his address and 
 manners he was courteous and affable, always ready to favour modest 
 
364 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 merit, and -willing to promote it in -whomsoever found. No private 
 cares or pleasurable engagements of -whatever nature, could draw his 
 attention from those public duties and engagements in which he was 
 involved, though fond of society and imparting much of its charm to 
 those with whom he occasionally mixed. Of him the Duhe of Richmond 
 once said, “ Sir Francis Freeling raised himself to an important station 
 by his zeal and assiduity in this branch of the service of his country— 
 by a private character unimpeached and unimpeachable, and with the 
 esteem of every individual. He was fortunate in obtaining that which 
 to a faithful public servant must ever be his highest reward—the just 
 appreciation of his services by those whose good opinion was to be 
 coveted. He possessed the unbounded confidence, and the warm 
 personal friendship of every one of the noble individuals, without 
 distinction of party, who presided over the Post Office throughout 
 his career.” 
 
 The preceding are the principal monuments now remaining in the 
 church before us, but Mr. Barrett mentions several others which have 
 totally disappeared. Those to the memory of Thomas Young and 
 Everard le Frances are gone, and nothing remains to remind the visitor 
 to St. Mary’s Church of these once eminent merchant princes. The 
 chantries, too, which the latter founded, are gone; and those erected by 
 other devotees have vanished. Robert Cheepe and John Burton 
 founded chantries here, but their situation is not mentioned; and St. 
 Blaize, St. Nicholas, St. George, St. Catharine, and others, some of 
 whom have been named before, had altars or chantries here, but the 
 Reformation swept them all away. 
 
 The floor of the chancel of St. Mary Redclifie is paved with black 
 and white marble. There are in the pillars of the north and south 
 aisles of this part of the church, two squints, through which a sight of 
 the high altar was obtained by those ecclesiastically forbidden to 
 approach nearer. Against a pillar in the former aisle there was, not 
 many years since, a copy of the Holy Scriptures in black letter, resting 
 on a kind of desk, and chained to the pillar referred to; King Henry 
 VIII. having ordered, during his reign, that only one copy of the Bible, 
 then newly translated, should be allowed to each parish throughout the 
 kingdom, and this was to be fixed as described. Injunctions were 
 subsequently issued by Oliver Cromwell, instructing the incumbent of 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 365 
 
 each parish to provide a copy of the Bible, and place it in some part of 
 the church where the parishioners could peruse it at their pleasure. 
 
 It is customary every Whit Sunday to strew the floor of this church 
 with rushes, and to decorate the structure profusely with flowers and 
 the green leaves of spring, when the mayor and corporation attend 
 Divine service in procession, according to ancient usage. The origin of 
 this custom is probably to be found in the fact that William C'anynges, 
 junior, bequeathed one messuage of the yearly rent of four pounds, to 
 provide “ three priests sufficiently instructed in sacred divinity to 
 preach the word of God in the parish church of St. Mary Redcliffe, or 
 the yard of the said church, before the mayor and commons of the said 
 town, and other devout people thither resorting in the Feast of 
 Pentecost, and to pay every of the priests there so preaching 6s. 8d., to 
 the Mayor for the preacher’s dinner at his table, 3s. 4d. each day. To 
 the clerk and sexton for ringing the bell, and placing the forms for the 
 Mayor and common council, twelve pence per diem.” 
 
 At the north-east end of the churchyard is a monument of stone, 
 consisting of three stages, standing on the same number of steps, and 
 surmounted by a figure of the deceased, dressed as a Colston school-boy, 
 to the memory of the unfortunate Thomas Chatterton. It is in the 
 style of Perpendicular English architecture; is thirty-one feet high; and 
 cost about £100, obtained by subscription. Mr. S. C. Fripp was the 
 architect, wdio erected it in 1840, near the north porch of the church, 
 but as this site was objected to on account of it being consecrated 
 ground, the monument was removed and laid in the crypt until the 
 present situation for it was decided on, when it was re-erected, the spot 
 on which it now stands not having been consecrated, but occupied, a 
 few years since, by some old houses forming part of Pyle Street. 
 
 THOMAS CHATTERTON was born in this parish November 20th, 
 1752, his ancestors, for several generations, having been connected there¬ 
 with. He was the posthumous son of Thomas and Sarah Chatterton— 
 his father having been a sub-chanter at the cathedral, and, at the same 
 time, master of Pyle Street School, both of which offices he seems to 
 have held till his death. At five years of ago the son was sent to the 
 school over which his father had presided, from whence he was soon 
 dismissed, as being so unusually dull as not to be capable of compre¬ 
 hending the first rudiments of learning; yet, before he was eight years 
 
36G 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 old, he was admitted into the hospital founded by Edward Colston. 
 Here he remained until the 1st of July, 17G7, when he was apprenticed 
 to Mr. John Lambert, an attorney, whose offices were on St. John’s 
 Steps, in this city, and it was whilst in the service of this gentleman 
 that he discovered, in “Mr. Canynges cofre,” what he said were the 
 far-famed manuscripts of Thomas Kowley, a priest of Bristol, who 
 enjoyed Canynges’ patronage in the reigns of Henry VI. and Edward IV. 
 Chatterton professed to become enamoured of these old writings, and at 
 once commenced his forgeries, succeeding in which, he became disgusted 
 with his profession, which increased with his taste for literary com¬ 
 position, until, at length, he resolved to repair to London as to the only 
 place worthy his aspirations after fame and independence, which he 
 conceived would be sought for in vain in his native Bristol. He had 
 for some time written for the periodical press, and he flattered himself 
 that he should, by his removal to the metropolis, soon obtain sufficient 
 employment to make his position, at least, an easy one; but “he soon 
 found his splendid day-dreams of greatness vanish under the chilling, 
 apathetic neglect of those who, from their station in life, his imagination 
 had exalted into patrons; and to the countenance of whom he had 
 fondly turned with all the fervour of youthful enthusiasm. After 
 passing a few short months in the presence of the wealthy great; 
 in spite of his matchless, his unwearied industry; spite of the 
 multitudinous productions of his pen; his frugality, and his ab¬ 
 stemiousness,—he was reduced to a state of actual starvation. Two 
 miserable, melancholy days were passed by him without food, and 
 without prospect of being able to procure it; when maddened by his 
 distresses, and the bitter reflections which his proud and haughty 
 spirit could not brook,—in an evil hour, separated from his friends, 
 without one kind being to console his sufferings,—at the early age of 
 seventeen years and nine months, he rushed into the presence of his 
 Maker by taking a dose of poison.” * His remains were consigned to 
 the cold grave by the hands of strangers, but “whether his body 
 remained in the Shoe Lane burying-ground, to be torn up, with the 
 bodies of other paupers, fifty years afterwards, when Farringdon Market 
 usurped the site, is a point on which a question has been raised.” f 
 
 * Memorials of the Canynges’ Family, p. 288. 
 t Masson’s Essays on the English Poets, p. 325. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 3G7 
 
 Some have asserted that they were removed clandestinely to the place 
 of his birth, and re-interred in or near the tomb which contained the 
 ashes of his relatives, in the churchyard of St. Mary Redcliffe. Since 
 the appearance of Professor Masson’s work I have obtained the testimony 
 of a gentleman upon the point, who was intimately acquainted with the 
 Chatterton family, from whose evidence it appears there is no truth 
 whatever in the story. * 
 
 To rescue the memory of Chatterton’s relations from oblivion, in the 
 month of March, 1853, a new grave-stone was laid in place of one 
 decayed and illegible, over the remains of his father, mother, sister, and 
 others of kin to the unfortunate youth, whose remains were interred in 
 this churchyard, with the following inscription :— 
 
 “ In memory of 
 Thomas Chatterton, 
 
 Schoolmaster, who died 
 7th. August, 1752, Aged 39 years. 
 
 Also, Thomas Newton, son-in-law 
 of the above, who died 29th Sept 1 
 1785, aged 40 years. 
 
 Also, 2 of his Sons, and 1 Daughter. 
 
 Also, Sarah Chatterton, widow 
 of the above Tlio? Chatterton, 
 who died 25th Deer 1791, 
 
 Aged 60 years. 
 
 Also, Mary Newton,f Widow of the 
 above Tho*? Newton, who died 
 23rd February, 1804, Aged 53 years. 
 
 Also, Mary Ann Newton, Spinster, 
 
 Daughter of the above Thomas 
 and Mary Newton, who died 7th 
 September, 1807, Aged 24 years. 
 
 The old Tombstone having 
 fallen into decay was thus replaced. 
 
 Anno Domini, MDCCCLIII. 
 
 SholtoVere Hare, 
 
 William Henry Edwards, 
 
 Churchwardens. ” 
 
 There was once also “ An Epitaph on a Sexton lately interred in 
 Redcliffe Church-yard, Bristol,” of which the following is a copy:— 
 
 * Fact versus Fiction, p. 97. t Appendix L. 
 
3G8 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 “ Near this place 
 
 In a cold hed of another’s making, 
 
 Lies John Chatterton, 
 
 Who was Death’s Chamberlain Here 
 if or Twenty Years. 
 
 And after having provided lodgings 
 tfor Various Passing Travellers, 
 
 Lay down himself 
 A.D. 1752, of his Sojourning 48. 
 
 When living, John, Pursuant to His trade, 
 
 Many Good Beds for weary Pilgrims made; 
 
 May the same kindness now their Host receive, 
 
 Dead John will be Among them—by their Leave.” 
 
 In this churchyard, too, lie the remains of John Simmons, the Bristol 
 painter, but in what particular spot is now unknown. He was born at 
 Nailsea, in Somersetshire, either in the year 1714 or 1715. His 
 parents died in his infancy. He manifested a fondness for drawing 
 when a boy, and expressed his wishes to be a painter. His friends 
 doubtless thought that they had gratified his inclination by placing him 
 an apprentice to a house and ship painter in this city. His master died 
 before the expiration of his apprenticeship, but he continued to serve 
 the widow; whose circumstances requiring assistance, he would 
 frequently give her the money which he earned by working after the 
 usual hours. She ever afterward expressed the strongest regard for 
 him, in consequence of the kindness of his conduct towards her. Though 
 his employment during this period did not afford him the means of 
 indulging his inclination for drawing, his attachment to it continued to 
 increase; he frequently passed the greatest part of the night in 
 cultivating this talent. On the expiration of his apprenticeship he 
 commenced business as a house and sign painter, in Small Street, from 
 whence he removed to Broad Street; .afterward to the house since 
 occupied by Mr. Skiercliffe, opposite the Drawbridge, and lastly in 
 Bridge Street. During a great part of this time he held the office of 
 city painter, and carried on his business with very considerable success, 
 especially as a sign painter. It is well known that the use of sign-boards 
 was not, at that time, confined to public houses, but was very generally 
 adopted by tradesmen, and that they usually hung before the house in 
 as projecting a manner as possible, and with the most showy embellish¬ 
 ments. The pictorial talent of the country met with little employment 
 except in this way, and so much interest did these productions excite, 
 that in 1762, an exhibition of signs was opened in Bow Street, Covent 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 369 
 
 Garden, and a catalogue was published, containing the names of the 
 painters. The public, however, experienced so much inconvenience from 
 the manner in which signs extended over the pavement, and into the 
 street, that an act was passed for their removal. This regulation was 
 enforced in Bristol in 1765, and was the cause of such a disuse of them, 
 that Simmons declared it occasioned him a loss of £500 a-year. 
 
 When Hogarth’s paintings were fixed in Redcliffe Church, Simmons 
 executed the four niches under them, containing the Scriptural narration 
 of the subjects. There is a traditionary story, that as soon as Hogarth 
 arrived at Bristol, in passing through Redcliffe Street, the sign of the 
 Angel attracted his attention, and on being informed that it was painted 
 by Simmons, of Bristol, he said, “ then they need not have sent for 
 me.” The following anecdote is related by a relative of Mr. Simmons, 
 and authenticates the opinion which Hogarth is said to have entertained 
 of Simmons’ talents. They had been walking together about the city, 
 when Hogarth stood for some time contemplating a sign-board, and on 
 Simmons asking him why he noticed it, Hogarth replied, “ I am sure 
 you painted it, for there is no one else here that could.” 
 
 Simmons afterwards painted the Annunciation, as the altar-piece of 
 All Saints’ Church. He painted also the altar-piece of St. John’s 
 Church, at Devizes, the subject of which is the Resurrection; and an 
 altar-piece was likewise painted by him for one of the West India 
 Islands. 
 
 During this period Simmons painted several portraits, and among 
 them an excellent one of Ferguson, the astronomer. This extraordinary 
 man frequently delivered lectures in this city; on which occasions he 
 was the constant tea-table visitor of his friend Simmons, by whom, and 
 other friends, the painter was strongly advised to remove to the 
 metropolis, as presenting a fair prospect of benefitting himself. But 
 his old habits and connexions were not easily to be given up, and he had 
 not courage enough to make the sacrifice. 
 
 There are many portraits by him in this city, of some of its then 
 public characters, and a large piece consisting of the Daubeny family. 
 In 1777 he experienced a paralytic seizure, which rendered him wholly 
 incapable of pursuing his business; and for some time previous to his 
 
3/0 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 decease, he was so debilitated in body and mind as not to know his own 
 family. He died January 18th, 1780, aged 65 years.* 
 
 In the churchyard, at the south-west quarter of it, was, until recently, 
 a flat stone inscribed as follows:— 
 
 “ Sacred 
 to the Memory 
 of John Sharp, 
 
 Publisher of the 
 Observer Newspaper, 
 
 Who died the 29th of August 1819, 
 
 Aged 42 years. 
 
 He was a truly good Man 
 and universally respected.” 
 
 Mr. Sharp died after a short, but severe illness, amidst the regrets of 
 all who knew him, as he seems to have been, in every relation of life, 
 most exemplary; amiable in his family relations, and worthy of imitation 
 in his social endearments. 
 
 Before taking leave of the Church of St. Mary Redcliffe and its 
 precincts, it ought to be observed that no stranger visits it, but he hears 
 of that wonderful quadruped, the Dun Cow of Guy, Earl of Warwick, 
 which has been associated with the legendary lore of his boyhood. It 
 has, too, prevailed in Bristol from time immemorial, in connection with 
 this church, and appears to have originated in that love of the 
 marvellous which so preponderates amongst, at least, the juvenile 
 portion of our population. On a bracket inserted on the angle of the 
 arch of the north aisle, rests, as we are told, a rib of this far-famed 
 animal, which often attracts more attention than the beautiful vaulting 
 of the church in which it is deposited. Scientific men pronounce this 
 relic to be the rib of a whale, and not of any quadruped whatever, and 
 there is a tradition that it was brought to this country by Sebastian 
 Cabot, who is famed for the voyages he made from Bristol, where it is 
 said he was born,f to the north seas, in search of a north-west passage; 
 and, as in his account of these trips, “ bigge fishes ” were mentioned by 
 him, as so numerous “ that they sometimes staid his shippes,” it is not 
 at all improbable that, in order to give his credulous countrymen an 
 idea of the enormous bulk of the creatures he spoke of, he might have 
 
 * Bristol Memorialist, p. 33. 
 t See Appendix III. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 371 
 
 brought home the rib now in Redcliffe Church, to convince them of the 
 truth of his apparently exaggerated tale. Be this as it may, it were 
 much more rational to believe that it belonged to a whale, than that it 
 was extracted from the side of the imaginary Dun Cow of Guy, Earl 
 of Warwick.'*' 
 
 WYCLIFFE CHAPEL, in Guinea Street, was used by the Wesleyan 
 Methodists, and seems to have been built by that bedy of Christians, 
 about a century ago; and it continued to be used by them until the 
 opening of their more commodious chapel, in Langton Street, in 1828. 
 It was subsequently occupied by other denominations, until it was taken 
 possession of by the Independent Nonconformists, in 1848; who have 
 continued the use of it ever since. 
 
 On Redcliffe Parade is a substantial building, erected in 1856, and 
 used as the public schools of this parish, in which a large number of 
 boys and girls are educated. There is also a school for girls, on 
 Redcliffe Hill, built in 1787; both institutions are supported by 
 voluntary contributions. On Redcliffe Hill, too, is the residence of the 
 vicar of the parish. Pyle Street School, for the education of poor 
 boys, has been already referred to ; it is situated at the north-east end 
 of the church, opposite to Chatterton’s monument. 
 
 “There is an almshouse on the south side of Redcliffe Hill (which is 
 said to have been), founded by Mr. Canynges, for fourteen persons to 
 inhabit;” f of this, however, a considerable amount of doubt exists, and 
 the Charity Commissioners tell us they have not “ been able to gain any 
 other information whatever relative to this supposed foundation,” than 
 that which an entry in one of the corporation books supplies, to the 
 effect that he is the reputed founder only, They say that “From the 
 earliest period to which the parish books yet extant enable us to trace 
 (viz: the year 1580), this house appears to have been under the 
 management of the vestry, and to have been kept in repair by the 
 general parish funds. There are also occasional charges in the earlier 
 accounts, for shrouds and funeral expenses for persons dying in this 
 almshouse; but there is no trace of any periodical or other contribution 
 
 * Appendix LI. 
 
 t Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 599. 
 
 cc 2 
 
372 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 from the parish funds to the support of the almspeople, although it is 
 possible that they may have always participated (as they are found to 
 do at this day) in the general charities to the poor of the parish. 
 
 “For more than half a century past, this almshouse has been appro¬ 
 priated to the reception of parish paupers, in consequence of arrangements 
 made with the corporation of the poor of Bristol;” and it has been 
 “kept in repair by the vestry.”* From this account we see that 
 William Canynges’ name has been associated with this almshouse, as it 
 has with almost everything else connected with St. Mary Redcliffe—by 
 the authority of tradition only; which, in fact, has given him nearly all 
 the prominence he has so long held as a munificent benefactor to this 
 particular parish. This “ Spital House,” or almshouse in question, 
 becoming ruinous, was rebuilt about the year 1700, near Bedminster 
 Bridge. 
 
 There was another parochial almshouse or hospital attached to St. 
 Mary Redcliffe, situated at Temple Gate, which no longer exists, having 
 been sold a few years ago, and the site of the present Infant School, in 
 Pyle Street, purchased with the proceeds. 
 
 On Colston’s Parade is another almshouse, called “ Fry’s House of 
 Mercy,” founded by William Fry, a distiller, who lived in Redcliffe 
 Street, and designed to accommodate eight women, who are to attend 
 public worship at the parish church as often as it is held there, and in 
 default of attendance to be fined sixpence, unless they are ill, or some 
 valid excuse be offered for absence. 
 
 In Guinea Street is the entrance to the Bristol General Hospital, 
 which was erected by public subscription. The building itself stands 
 at the back of the old hospital, one wing facing the New Cut, the other 
 wing being in front of Bathurst Basin; in the centre is a lofty tower. 
 It is provided with every convenience, and is altogether a noble 
 institution. It owes its origin principally to the exertions of George 
 Thomas, an influential member of the Society of Friends, through whom 
 it was founded, in 1832. The old building becoming dilapidated, it was, 
 in 1851, resolved to erect another, Joseph Eaton,+ also a member of the 
 same society, offering a premium for success, promising to give JI5000 
 
 Report of the Charity Commissioners. 
 + Appendix Lll. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 373 
 
 himself, provided his fellow-citizens would subscribe =£10,000 more. 
 The offer was gratefully accepted and cheerfully responded to; 
 subscriptions flowed in with unexampled rapidity; the money was 
 readily obtained, George Thomas giving £'1000 towards it, besides 
 paying the legal expenses, which amounted to some three thousand 
 more, and, at a cost of about £15,000, the present structure was 
 completed, several thousand more being expended upon necessary 
 furniture, &c., to render the institution available for tbe purposes 
 intended, which was also raised by subscription; the total cost being 
 about £25,000. 
 
 In Redclifle Street is situated a very interesting remnant of the 
 domestic architecture of the middle ages—the “Great House,” in 
 which the second William Canynges once resided. The principal 
 apartment of this relic is now used as a shop, but was formerly “the 
 Hall and Oratory (of the mansion), the roof of ornamented timber 
 frame (being) still perfect, though its interior has been materially 
 changed by subsequent alterations.” * In the centre of the roof is a 
 louvre, or lantern, which formerly, with the aid of windows inserted in 
 the walls of the structure, conveyed light to the interior. The 
 vaulting is spanned by Perpendicular English arches, somewhat 
 obtusely pointed, which clearly indicate the age of the building, and 
 carry us back to the close of the fourteenth century, or thereabouts, for 
 the date of its erection, at which time the second William Canynges 
 was but an infant, at most. It appears, therefore, to have been built 
 either by the first William Canynges, near the close of his life, or by 
 his son John, the father of the second William, immediately after that 
 event took place. Thomas Canynges, lord mayor of London, sold it in 
 1484, but to whom does not appear. In 1500 it was the residence of 
 Thomas Brooke, the father of John Brooke, whose tomb, inlaid with 
 brass figures, is in Itedcliffe Church. It was then called Canynges’ 
 Place. From this time nothing of importance is recorded of it until 
 the commencement of the present century, when the entire west front 
 seems to have been destroyed, including its “handsome tower, and its 
 bay windows with the ornamented arched roofs.” Its present western 
 extremity appears to have formed part of a court-yard, from which, 
 
 * Dallaway’s Antiquities of Bristow, pp. 145, 191. 
 
374 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 through an arched passage, having at each end a Perpendicular 
 English doorway, a second square, or court-yard, is entered, evidently 
 of smaller dimensions than it was originally. Nearly in a line with the 
 passage just named, and on the opposite side of this second court, 
 another passage is entered beneath a similar doorway; this conducts, in 
 a straight line, into Redcliffe Street. On the right hand is an 
 apartment, on the ground floor, designated “the monk’s cellar,” which, 
 however, contains not a vestige of antiquity visible; the same may be 
 said of several other rooms leading out of the two passages, in other 
 directions. Over “the monk’s cellar” is a large chamber, now used as 
 a printing office, but which tradition assigns as the banquetting room 
 of the mansion in which Canynges feasted King Edward IY. Some 
 of the gilding and rich colouring with which it was once adorned, after 
 the fashion of the time when it was erected, is still perceptible, and 
 other evidences of its former splendour may also be traced in the 
 windows, <fcc. Behind “the hall with its finely carved roof,” is a large 
 room, with a low ceiling, now fitted up in the style of architecture 
 prevailing in the time of James I.; the original floor of encaustic tiles 
 remains in good preservation, and the chamber itself is, by tradition, 
 designated “ Canynges’ parlour.” The entire premises are now occupied 
 by Mr. C. T. Jefferies, bookseller and printer, who has laudably 
 endeavoured to preserve whatever of the original structure has come 
 down to modern times. * 
 
 Of ancient inns in this parish, the Red Lion, Redcliffe Street, was 
 established in 1G06, and preserves remains of the old-fashioned galleries 
 which once surrounded the yard or court below, and in which doorways 
 led into the sleeping apartments for visitors. These galleries were of 
 frequent occurrence in the inns of that period, and are probably of 
 Roman origin. The Saracen’s Head, without Temple Gate, is an 
 hostelry of the same date, and not improbably was so ages before. 
 Whilst its sign was intended to refer to the hated Moslem who trampled 
 on the Land of the Cross, the George Inn, opposite (in the parish of 
 Temple), was established in rivalry, to remind the passenger of the 
 invader of the Saracen, personified by St. George, the champion of 
 England. 
 
 * Memorials of the Canynges’ Family, p. 122, &c. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 375 
 
 There is a house still standing in Pyle Street, which, from its having 
 accommodated Charles I. for a single night, when on a visit to the city, 
 in 1643, is still called “ the palace.” Near the end of this street, east¬ 
 ward, stood Temple Gate, and at the west-end, that of Redcliffe. 
 Bathurst Basin was formed from a pool or pond belonging to Treen 
 Mills, exchanged by the Abbot of St. Augustine, with the corporation, 
 with reservation of the privilege of duck-hunting for the pleasure or 
 sport of the magistrates.'* 
 
 “ The ecclesiastical histoiy of lledcliffe may be considered peculiar, if 
 not truly singular. It constitutes a part, or member of the parish of 
 Bedminster; is in the diocese of Bristol; and is a prebend to the 
 Cathedral of Salisbury. This prebend comprehends Redcliffe, with the 
 parishes of Bedminster, Abbots-Leigh, and St. Thomas, adjoining 
 Redcliffe; yet the parochial regulations and ordinances are held distinct 
 and separate from each other, and each is governed by its own church¬ 
 wardens, &c. The living of Bedminster is both a rectory and a vicarage, 
 and, as prebend, the incumbent is patron of all the other livings. He 
 is nominated by the Bishop of Salisbury. The ecclesiastical edifice of 
 Redcliffe is also of a peculiar nature and description: it is easier to name 
 it negatively than positively, for it is not strictly either a parish church, 
 conventual church, collegiate church, cathedral church, or chapel.” f 
 On the 2nd of August, 1852, a notice was placed upon the doors of 
 these churches, announcing that the Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol 
 was about to separate them, and form as many distinct livings out of 
 these parishes as there are sacred structures mentioned above; which 
 was done accordingly. 
 
 At this point terminates an account of the parishes which comprised 
 ancient Bristol. An additional parish was formed in 1787, when 
 an act was obtained for separating that of St. James’ into two 
 parts, and constituting the more distant portion into the parish of St. 
 
 * In the Corporation Accounts, under date of May 30th, 1686, is the 
 following entry:—“Paid Mr. John Olliffe for a dinner for the Aldermen and 
 several others that rode the Shire Stones (Boundaries) the last Duck Hunting 
 Day £3. 18. 0.” Also “ 1700 Sept. 30. Paid for Ringing at Redcliffe, Duck 
 Hunting Day, by Custom 5. 0.” 
 
 t Britton’s Essay on Redcliffe Church, p. 4. 
 
376 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Paul; the inhabitants having very greatly increased, and elegant squares 
 and streets being built in every direction in the locality. Hence a new 
 ecclesiastical division of this extensive parish became desirable, and was 
 at once effected. 
 
 THE PARISH OF ST. PAUL includes the area between Montpeli er 
 on the north, St. James’ parish on the west, and the River Froom on 
 the south and east sides. 
 
 THE CHURCH OF ST. PAUL, as a whole, is a perfect archi¬ 
 tectural absurdity; it belongs to no known order in art, nor is it allied to 
 any style of building. Its Chinese looking tower rises from Portland 
 Square, tapering from base to summit in mean and pitiful gradations— 
 an incongruous monstrosity! The b ody of the church, too, which is 
 divided into nave, aisles, and chancel, is perfectly indescribable; the 
 windows are intended to be in the Pointed style: but what cobbled 
 imitations! The roof, ornamented like a ball-room, is coved, and 
 supported by three columns on each side, which, if not so tall, might be 
 supposed, in their capitals, at least, to have some resemblance to those 
 of ancient Egypt. The chancel is divided from the nave by a Pointed 
 arch, the soffit of which is panelled to resemble quatrefoils. The altar 
 end is an alcove, and this, too, is in the Pointed style, with Roman 
 embellishments! 
 
 The subject of the painting over the communion table is Paul 
 preaching at Athens, and is an interesting memorial of a talented local 
 artist. On a tablet, in an adjoining vestry, is inscribed, 
 
 ‘ ‘ The painting 
 placed over 
 
 The Communion Table, 
 
 A. Masterly Performance 
 Of Mr. Edward Bird, 
 
 Is the gift of 
 
 The Rev. Joseph Atwell Small, D. D. 
 
 Abraham Ludlow, M.D., 
 
 John Cave, | 
 
 Stephen Cave, 
 
 Benjamin Baugh, 
 
 William Weare, 
 
 William Battersby, 
 
 Robert Bush, 
 
 Esqr 
 
 29th Sept. 1798.” 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 377 
 
 This church was opened June 29th, 1794, the foundation stone 
 having been laid April 23rd, 1789. “The architect and builder was 
 Daniel Hague, under the direction of the Rev. Dr. Small; who, though 
 a Freemason, in his abandonment of all established orders of 
 architecture, proved his practice of the mystic craft to be not quite 
 orthodox.”*—“The exceptions which we made to the interior of 
 St. Michael’s Church t are in a great measure applicable to St. Paul’s. 
 To repeat these exceptions might be considered invidious, but not to 
 make them would appear to us a dereliction of duty, because it would 
 be a departure from that strict line of impartiality which we have 
 endeavoured to make the rule of our conduct.” “The new Church of 
 St. Paul, at Bristol, has such a mixture of incoherent, capricious forms, 
 as renders it the most absurd piece of architecture which ancient or 
 modern times ever produced.” $ 
 
 On the north side of the chancel is a monument with a figure of 
 Fame, in a sitting posture, weeping over an oval inscribed “Monte 
 Video,” executed in marble, by Rossi, from a design by Flaxman. At 
 the top of the tomb are the arms of the deceased, and under them is his 
 name and age, “Vassall JE XL,” within a wreath. Beneath the whole 
 is the following inscription:— 
 
 “Sacred to the Memory of 
 
 Spencer Thomas Vassall, Esq. Lieut Colonel of the 3Sth Regiment, 
 who, after 28 years of active and unremitting Service, 
 during which he had justly acquired a high mil itary reputation, 
 was mortally wounded 
 
 at the storming of Monte Video, in South America, 
 on the 3d of February, 1807, at the moment 
 he had conducted his intrepid followers within the walls of that fortress, 
 and expired on the 7th of the same month. 
 
 His beloved remains, 
 
 brought to England by the companions of his victory, 
 are deposited near this spot— 
 
 Where to record her own, her children’s, and her country’s loss— 
 
 She, who was the wedded and happy witness of his private worth, 
 has caused this monument to be erected. 
 
 Stranger, if e’er you honoured Sidney’s fame, 
 
 If e’er you lov’d Bayard’s spotless name, 
 
 * Evans’s Chronological Outline. 1794. 
 t Evans’s Hist, of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 253; and Appendix XXI. 
 + Jackson’s Essay on Architecture. 
 
378 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Then on this Marble gaze with tearful eyes, 
 
 For kindred merit here with VassaU lies. 
 
 But far more blest than France’ or England’s pride, 
 
 In the great Hour of Conquest Vassall died, 
 
 While still undaunted in the glorious strife, 
 
 Content he purchased Victory with life, 
 
 And nobly, careless of his own distress, 
 
 He bade his noble comrades onward press ; 
 
 Bade them (the Hero, Victor o’er the man,) 
 
 Complete the Conquest which his Sword began ; 
 
 Then proudly smiled amidst the pangs of death, 
 
 While thanks for Victory fill’d his parting breath. ” 
 
 Near to the monument last mentioned is a tablet thus inscribed, in 
 Latin and English:— 
 
 ‘ ‘ To Anna 
 
 alike as wife and mother, 0 ! how regretted !— 
 her sorrowing husband and daughters 
 have raised this memorial.” 
 
 “ Where, now the tie that linked me to tins earth, 
 
 A willing, gladsome tenant of its soil ? 
 
 ‘ Ah ! where indeed ? my widowed heart replies, 
 
 (Tho’ not in phrenzied bitterness of grief) 
 
 ‘ Riven by a shock,—it moulders in the grave,’ 
 
 Still lives the thought of her unchanging truth ;— 
 
 Still dwells upon the tender traits that marked 
 Her cheek of beauty,—nor had left untouched 
 That gentle brow,—fair transcript of a mind, 
 
 With modesty and native candour graced. 
 
 Nor cold the eye,—nor transient in its gaze, 
 
 That saw her move in home’s retiring sphere; 
 
 Saw, and confessed, how richly she deserved 
 A husband’s care,—her children’s fond regard— 
 
 She died,—and, yet, the lineaments of death 
 On her mild visage was so softly traced; 
 
 It seemed to tell of one, whose ‘end was peace;'' 
 
 Of one, w'hose tranquil ‘ sjnrit had returned 
 To God who gave it,’ —and—in him—was blest.— 
 
 Sept 24. 1832. Chas. Penry Bullock.” 
 
 In the churchyard of St. Paul’s were recently interred the remains of 
 John Holmes, Esq., who died at Cotham, May 23rd, 18G0, in the 82nd 
 year of his age. He was well-known for his many and large donations 
 to local charities, and for his gifts to various religious objects both in 
 and out of the Establishment, amounting, it is computed, to the 
 munificent sum of about £85,000. He possessed large-hearted 
 benevolence of character, and although himself an Independent 
 Nonconformist, liberally aided in the erection of churches as well as 
 chapels. Besides many similar donations, he gave £5000 to Mr. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 379 
 
 Spurgeon’s new Tabernacle, in London; about £3000 to Gideon 
 Chapel, Newfoundland Street, in this city; more than £2000 to Arley 
 Chapel, Cheltenham Road; nearly £7000 to Castle Green Chapel; and 
 £3000 to the new Church of St. Luke, Bedminster. The Bristol 
 Royal Infirmary, and General Hospital, together with the Orphan 
 House, Ashley Hill, also partook largely of his liberality. 
 
 ST. BARNABAS’ CHURCH, also in this modern parish, is situated 
 in Ashley Road. It was erected by the Diocesan Church Building 
 Association, assisted by voluntary contributors, and was opened for 
 public worship, September 12th, 1843. Its cost was £2200. 
 
 This church is as poor a specimen of architecture as can be conceived; 
 its finials and bald unmeaning gables, without corresponding roof, can 
 be referred to no style of building whatever in use in England at any 
 period when the art was understood. Its Early English windows, with 
 Anglo-Norman pilaster columns placed against the jambs with nothing 
 to support—and its wooden ribs within, sustaining the vaulting of the 
 church, are innovations in architecture which no master of his profession 
 would care to imitate. 
 
 ST. ANDREW’S CHURCH, the site of which is in the newly 
 constituted district taken out of the parishes of St. Paid and Horfield, 
 was opened for public worship, January 31st, 1845. Very unlike 
 the last mentioned structure, this church is a very fair specimen 
 of modern art, being Early English in style, and consistent in all its 
 parts. It has a good roof of open wood work, which is supported 
 either on richly wrought corbels, or upon capitals and columns in 
 harmony with the building. The altar screen is of Painswick stone, 
 composed of seven arches, occupying the entire width of the east end 
 of the church, and having detached shafts and richly carved spandrils. 
 The entire structure is in good keeping with the style to which it 
 professedly belongs, and is in striking contrast with that of St. Barnabas; 
 its cost of erection, too, including a tower corresponding in style, with 
 boundary walls, Ac., being only £2428. The parochial schools 
 adjoining were built at an expense of £570, raised by voluntary 
 contributions. 
 
 ST. CLEMENT’S, Newfoundland Street, is another district church, 
 which was also erected by the same means, aided by a grant from 
 
380 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 the Government; as also was that of St. Matthias, on the Weir, with 
 its large and commodious schools. The former church cost £2000.* 
 
 THE TABERNACLE, in Penn Street, in the parish of St. Paul, 
 belongs to the Independent Nonconformists, and is the result of the 
 labours in this city of the Rev. George Whitfield, who, with his own 
 hand, laid its foundation in 1753; the accomplished Lord Chesterfield, 
 the Earl of Bath, and other noble persons, aiding in the work. On 
 November 25th in that year, it was opened for Divine worship. Since 
 that time “ The titled Baronet, the commissioned officer, the pious 
 soldier, the gifted tradesman, as well as the educated clergyman and 
 the regularly trained Dissenter, have been engaged at different times in 
 ministering within its walls ; ” f and among the number was the Rev. 
 Joseph Easterbrook, vicar of Temple, in this city. The first Sabbath 
 school in Bristol was opened here in 1800; and it is affirmed that in 
 the Tabernacle House, the residence of Whitfield, “ the London 
 Missionary Society was first conceived and cherished, if not born.” f 
 
 GIDEON CHAPEL, Newfoundland Street, also belongs to the same 
 body of Nonconformists, and is an offshoot from the Tabernacle. It 
 was erected in 1809, and nearly rebuilt, and a new school-room added 
 in 1849. 
 
 BRUNSWICK CHAPEL is another building belonging to the same 
 people, a few of whom, some years since, separated from Castle Green, 
 and erected the present commodious structure; the foundation stone 
 being laid June 25th, 1834. “It stands an ornament to the Square 
 (Brunswick), nearly one side of which it occupies, and is a neat and 
 appropriate model of chapel-building. There is nothing superfluous, 
 nothing wanting. Its elevation, its exterior, its accommodations, its 
 vestry, school-room, and adjacent burial-ground, all constitute it one of 
 the most convenient sanctuaries of our land, capable of seating about 
 eleven hundred persons; and at a cost of nearly £5,000, contributed by 
 the free-will offerings of the people. Long will it stand a monument of 
 
 * The number of churches built uithin the borough of Bristol during the 
 present century amounts to 22, and two are in the course of erection. 
 
 t Caston’s Independency in Bristol, p. 120. + Ibid, p. 125. 
 
 / 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 381 
 
 the voluntary principle.”* It was opened for public worship, May 6th, 
 1835. Its gratuitous architect was Mr. William Armstrong, who, for 
 the long period of forty-five years, was superintendent of the Sunday 
 School, first at Castle Green, and afterwards at Brunswick Chapel, and 
 to the last was a pattern of punctuality and regularity in his attendance. 
 He also filled more public situations for upwards of forty years, and was, 
 until his death, one of the city surveyors, in which office, as well as 
 every other, his public character and private worth endeared him to a 
 wide circle of friends, who mourn his loss with sincere regret. He died 
 October 28th, 1859, and was buried at Brunswick Chapel, where 
 persons of nearly every grade in society seemed anxious to pay the last 
 token of respect to one who had been a friend to all, and who, through¬ 
 out his long life, was deservedly beloved by men of all parties. Mr. 
 Armstrong was in the 78th year of his age. 
 
 ARLEY CHAPEL, also belonging to the Independent Non¬ 
 conformists, is situated within the limits assigned to the parish of 
 St. Paul, and stands at the junction of the Cheltenham and Redland 
 Roads. It is cruciform in plan, but is of no order or style in 
 architecture; it, however, rather inclines to the Italian mode of building 
 than to any other, and is exceedingly neat in appearance, and well 
 adapted to the purposes of the worship of Dissenters. It has a 
 commodious school-room, vestry, and every accommodation that can be 
 desired, and will seat about six hundred persons. The foundation 
 stone was laid May 22nd, 1854, and on the 20th of June, 1855, the 
 structure was opened for public worship. It cost upwards of four 
 thousand pounds, and is a fine monument of Christian liberality; the 
 site, too, being given for the erection of the chapel. 
 
 OLD KING STREET CHAPEL, already referred to,t is a large 
 and handsome building belonging to a congregation of Baptist Non¬ 
 conformists. It was erected in 1815, and to it the church heretofore 
 worshipping at the Pithay then removed, the congregation, under the 
 pastorate of the Rev. Thomas Roberts, A.M., becoming too numerous to 
 be accommodated in that building. At the side of the entrance to 
 King Street Chapel is a tablet to his memory, inscribed:— 
 
 * Ante, p. 237. 
 
 t Gaston’s Independency in Bristol, p. 191. 
 
382 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 “ Beneath the portico 
 are deposited the remains of 
 The Rev. Thomas Roberts, A. M. 
 who, after a Pastorate of 34 years, 
 
 Departed this Life December 21, 1841, 
 
 Aged 61. 
 
 The Church assembling here met at its formation 
 in the Friars ; 
 
 It afterwards worshipped at the Pithay, when 
 the increase of its Members, 
 under Mr. Roberts’s Ministry, 
 rendered a more commodious Building requisite. 
 
 By his exertions this Edifice was erected and dedicated to the 
 Triune Jehovah, 
 
 1815. 
 
 ‘ He rests from his labours, and his works do follow him. ’ ” 
 
 There was formerly a small congregation of General Baptists, meeting 
 at Providence Chapel, Callowhill Street, which was so named after 
 Thomas Callowhill, a Bristol Merchant, whose daughter, Hannah, was 
 married in 1695, to William Penn, the Quaker, from whom, in like 
 manner, Penn Street was called. * The church in Callowhill Street was 
 presided over by the Bev. William Foot, who was at his death interred 
 in the Baptist burial-ground, Bedcross Street, with the folio whig 
 inscription in remembrance of him:— 
 
 “ To the Memory of 
 The Rev. and learned W m Foot 
 for many years Minister of ® Gospel in this City 
 He died May 13th, 1782, in the 75th year of his age. 
 
 Undissembled piety, integrity, candour, and liberality, 
 eminently distinguished his character. 
 
 Go, Reader, 
 
 study like him to approve thyself unto God, 
 and thy latter end, like his, 
 will be peace. ” 
 
 Mr. Foot was bom at Plymouth, in 1707, and commenced his 
 education there, which he appears to have completed at Stratford- 
 upon-Avon, under the Bev. John Alexander, a distinguished Oriental 
 scholar. In 1728 he settled at Tiverton, Devon, as pastor of the 
 
 Appendix LIII, 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 383 
 
 Baptist church at that place, from whence, in 1731, he removed to 
 Moreton Hampstead, and ultimately to Callowhill Street. For many 
 years he conducted a classical school on St. Michael’s Hill, in this city, 
 with great success, the duties of which, on his death, were undertaken 
 by the Bev. Dr. Estlin, by whom its reputation was greatly extended. 
 Mr. Foot was the author of a small work entitled “ A plain Account of 
 the Ordinance of Baptism ; in which all the Texts of the New Testament 
 relating to it are produced, and the whole doctrine concerning it drawn 
 from them alone: in a course of Letters to the Right Rev. Dr. Benjamin 
 Hoadly, late Lord Bishop of Winchester.” This work passed through 
 three editions, and was extensively circidated in America, where it was 
 several times reprinted. 
 
 “As a man, Mr. Foot was distinguished by ardent piety, genuine 
 benevolence, and an innocent simplicity of character, which even a long 
 experience in ‘the ways of men’ could not corrupt or diminish. He 
 possessed, in an eminent degree, the affectionate respect of his pupils; 
 and they who were most capable of appreciating his virtues have 
 consecrated the noblest monument to his name, by cherishing the love 
 of his memory.” * 
 
 The seceders from the Wesleyan Society, calling themselves the 
 Wesleyan Free Church, have a commodious place of worship in Milk 
 Street, in this parish. 
 
 That very influential and respectable body of Christians, the Society 
 of Friends, have a Meeting House in this parish, situated in a quiet and 
 somewhat secluded locality, between Rosemary Street and the Broad 
 Weir, t It is a remarkably neat and commodious building, and has, 
 within the premises enclosed around it, a burial-ground, formerly 
 belonging to the Dominican monastery. Many eminent members of 
 this society have been here interred, but having no visible memorial 
 attached to their last resting place, the names of some who are worthy 
 of record, may, through the want of such a means of remembrance, be 
 omitted from these pages. Another part of the old Dominican house 
 is converted into a school for boys, as before stated. 
 
 * Evans’s Hist, of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 328. 
 t Ante, p. 51. The total number of Chapels built by Dissenters of all 
 denominations, within the borough of Bristol, during the present century, at a 
 cost of about one hundred thousand pounds, is fifty. 
 
384 
 
 H1ST0EY or BEISTOL. 
 
 THE BRISTOL BAPTIST COLLEGE. OR EDUCATION 
 SOCIETY, is situated in Stokes' Croft, and was established in 1770. 
 In it young men are educated for the ministry, and it is a most valuable 
 institution, deserving our highest commendation. It contains an almost 
 priceless library, for besides its collection of old Bibles and other books, 
 here is deposited the only complete octavo copy extant of Tyndale’s New 
 Testament, published in 1526.* To its extensive, and almost unique 
 theological store of learning, have been added at various times, several 
 legacies which have greatly enriched it, particularly that of the library 
 of Dr. Llewellyn, and that of Dr. Andrew Gifford, a learned Baptist 
 minister, and an intelligent antiquary. The museum belonging to this 
 institution contains some excellent natural and artificial curiosities, 
 Hindoo idols, Ac., and an original miniature likeness of Oliver 
 Cromwell, painted by Cooper, for which five hundred guineas have 
 been offered. 
 
 THE ORPHAN ASYLUM FOR GIRLS, at Hooks’ Mills, in the 
 out pa rish of St. Paul, or district of St Andrew, is an interesting 
 establishment, founded in 1795, and supported by voluntary con¬ 
 tributions. Here fifty fatherless and motherless children are clothed, 
 boarded, and educated: and adjoining the premises is a chapel, to which 
 thev are conducted every Sabbath, to attend the service of the Church 
 of England. 
 
 The Wesleyans have recently built large and convenient schools in 
 the Back Fields; and adjoining the Tabernacle, in Penn Street, the 
 congregation attending that place of worship have also erected a 
 commodious structure for the accommodation of the children of the 
 neighbourhood. The Unitarians have, too, a school in Stokes’ Croft, in 
 which forty boys axe educated. It was founded, in 1722, by Abraham 
 Hook, a Bristol merchant, and others belonging to the Lewin’s Mead 
 congregation, who also founded, at the same time, an almshouse for 
 twelve poor women: which, with the school, forms a respectable 
 building, and occupies three sides of a court In Milk Street is an 
 almshouse with the following inscription on the front: — 
 
 Appendix LIV. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 3'^-3 
 
 “ In 
 
 Memory 
 
 of 
 
 Mr. Thomas Ridley 
 and 
 
 Mrs. Sarah Ridley, 
 Being Brother and Sister, 
 Never Married; 
 Erected 
 Anno Dom, 
 
 1739.” 
 
 This almshouse owes its erection to Mrs. Sarah Ridley, who, by her 
 last will, dated November 10th, 1716, desired her executors to 
 construct “ a convenient almshouse for ten persons,” with the inscription 
 mentioned to be placed over the doors. In this almshouse were to be 
 “ maintained from time to time five old poor decayed bachelors, and 
 five old poor decayed maids, (who) have not received any alms, and 
 shall have been of a sober life and conversation.” Sarah Ridley died 
 in the year 1726. 
 
 There is another almshouse in Milk Street, founded also by a maiden 
 lady named Elizabeth Blanchard, who bequeathed her house in which 
 she resided until her death, in trust, that her executors “ should for 
 ever permit and suffer the same to be held and enjoyed by three poor 
 old maids, whose labour was done, of the congregation of Mr. Gifford's 
 meeting (then the Baptist meeting in the Pithay); or for waut of such 
 poor old maids, then by widows of the said congregation.” The number 
 of persons now in this almshouse is increased to five. Elizabeth 
 Blanchard died about the year 1722. 
 
 In Brunswick Square is the Unitarian burial-ground. Among the 
 memorials is one inscribed. 
 
 “ In 
 
 remembrance of 
 John Wright, M.D. 
 
 who from an incapacity, thro’ a failure of voice, 
 to discharge the duties of the Christian Ministry 
 in which he delighted, engaged in the 
 medical profession, and actuated by the same 
 principles of piety and benevolence, closed a life of 
 varied usefulness in the pleasing hope of immortality, 
 
 ‘23rd Deer 1794, a?t. 62. 
 
 Mark the perfect man, and behold the upright, for the end 
 
 of that man is peace. Psalm xxxvii. 37.” 
 
 D D 
 
386 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Another tablet is inscribed, to the brother of the above, as follows,— 
 
 “ Near 
 this stone 
 
 are deposited the remains 
 of the Reverend Thomas Wright 
 who sustained with Dignity the Character 
 of Minister of the Society of Protestant Dissenters 
 in Lewin’s Mead 
 
 during the space of forty eight Years. 
 
 He departed this Life the fourteenth of May, 1797, 
 in the seventy first Year of his Age. 
 
 By a manly avowal of the genuine principles 
 of Religious and Civil Liberty; 
 
 By an ardent and well directed Zeal to promote 
 the knowledge and the practice of pure Christianity ; 
 and particularly by a Life of strict Integrity, 
 
 He acquired general respect, 
 
 And secured to himself the testimony of a 
 good conscience, 
 
 And the well grounded hope of a happy Immortality. 
 
 His public services, in which Piety, 
 
 Affection and Judgment were united, 
 were happily continued to the period of his Dissolution, 
 
 ‘ Blessed is that Servant, whom his Lord, 
 when he cometh shall find so doing.’ ” 
 
 A third tablet is inscribed, 
 
 “ Sacred to the memory of 
 The Rev<l John Prior Estlin, L.L.D. 
 the faithful and Affectionate 
 Minister of Lewin’s Mead Chapel 
 for 46 years; 
 
 who, beloved and regretted, died 
 August 10th, 1817, aged 70 years. 
 
 His writings are characterized by an 
 enlightened zeal for the faith of 
 the Gospel, as his life was by benevolence, 
 integrity, simplicity, and cheerful piety ; 
 and his departure was illumined by 
 the joyful expectation of a resurrection 
 to eternal life through Jesus Christ. 
 
 * Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God. ’ ” 
 
 “John Prior Estlin was born at Hinckley, in Leicestershire, April 
 9th, 1747. He received his school education under the auspices of his 
 maternal uncle, the Rev. John Prior, vicar of Ashby-de-la-Zouch, and 
 his earliest views in life seemed to be directed to the Church of 
 England, towards which, and its religious services, notwithstanding the 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 387 
 
 wide difference with regard to doctrinal points in the sentiments he 
 afterwards entertained, he always felt a certain degree of respect and 
 affection. From school, where he imbibed a taste for classical literature, 
 he was however sent by his father to the Dissenting Academy of 
 Warrington, where he was entered in the year 17G4; and the course of 
 studies he there went through determined his choice towards a different 
 persuasion. Having finished his academical course, with credit to 
 himself and satisfaction to his tutors, he was invited to the congregation 
 of Lewin’s Mead, as colleague to the Rev. Thomas Wright, and he 
 entered on his ministerial services in January, 1771. Soon after his 
 settling in Bristol, Dr. Estlin opened a school, which became a very 
 flourishing one, and many of his pupils did credit to themselves and to 
 their tutor, by the proficiency in classical learning which they exhibited 
 when entered in the universities; to wluch many of them were removed. 
 His degree of Doctor of Laws was procured for him without his 
 knowledge, from the University of Glasgow, and presented to him by 
 his pupils, whom he always treated with great liberality. His school 
 and congregation did not, however, so engage the active mind of 
 Dr. Estlin as to prevent his giving to the world several publications, all 
 of them relative to those topics of religion and morals which were the 
 favourite subjects of his investigation. His style was elegant, clear, 
 and flowing, rather turned to pathos, than to dry argumentation; his 
 delivery in the pulpit was animated, solemn, and affectionate. For 
 some years, Dr. Estlin had experienced a decay of sight, and resigned 
 his situation in Lewin’s Mead in consequence, where he preached his 
 farewell sermon, the 22nd of June, 1817; his congregation presenting 
 him with a handsome sum of money on his retiring from his ministerial 
 duties. On Sunday, the 10th of August, following, he was seized with 
 a violent effusion of blood from his lungs. The affectionate partner of 
 his life ran to him, he grew faint, leaned his head upon her bosom, and, 
 without a sigh, expired. His remains were brought from Glamorgan¬ 
 shire, where he died, and interred in the burial-ground belonging to 
 Lewin’s Mead Chapel, on the 23rd; the burial service was performed 
 by the Rev. Dr. Carpenter, his successor in the pastoral office.” * 
 
 A fourth tablet is inscribed to the memory of 
 
 * Abridged from A. L. Barbauld. 
 
 D D 2 
 
388 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 “John Bishop Estlin, F.L S. F.R.G.S. 
 
 (son of the Revd John Prior Estlin,) 
 
 Bom Deer 26th, 1785, died June 10th, 1855, 
 
 JET. 69. 
 
 ‘ He was eyes to the blind ; 
 and the cause which he knew not 
 he searched out.’” 
 
 John Bishop Estlin was born in a large house which formerly stood 
 at the top of St. Michael’s Hill, where his father conducted an academy, 
 as above stated. Having finished his preliminary studies, and acquired 
 a literary taste, and the power of elegant composition, which he 
 retained in a remarkable degree to the last, he was apprenticed to a 
 medical practitioner, in connection with the Bristol Infirmary, where he 
 attended, until he repaired to London, where, at Guy’s Hospital, Sir 
 Astley Cooper w T as then a teacher of anatomy and surgery. In 1806 
 he became a member of the Royal College of Surgeons, of London; and 
 finishing his professional studies at Edinburgh, he became also a member 
 of the Royal Medical Society, &c., of that city; after which he 
 commenced practice in Bristol, and at once took rank amongst the most 
 eminent practitioners in the city, particularly in ophthalmic cases, to 
 which he ultimately devoted Ms entire attention ; and for the cure and 
 treatment of diseases of the eye he established a dispensary in Frogmore 
 Street, where upwards of 60,000 persons were relieved, or cured of 
 defects in their vision. Mr. Estlin was seized with au attack of 
 paralysis in London, which compelled Mm to relinquish Ms professional 
 practice, and retire into private life. The last attack of tMs disease 
 was about thirty-six hours before Ms death, and was fatal. In a 
 memorandum appended to his will, he says, “Anxious to mark my 
 disapproval of the absurd waste of money that usually takes place on 
 the occasion of a funeral, (money which in many cases can be ill-afforded 
 to be thus squandered,) I especially direct that my funeral expenses 
 (exclusive of any sum necessarily employed about the family vault, for 
 a leaden coffin, or for travelling, should I die from home), shall not 
 exceed twenty pounds. If respect for the dead can only be shown by 
 black feathers and black coaches, I am willing to pass to my resting 
 place unrespected. As however, my object is not to save money for my 
 estate, and as without these directions an additional sum of forty 
 pounds would probably be expended in heartless show, I direct that this 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 389 
 
 latter amount of forty pounds be distributed in charity as follows, viz., 
 Ten pounds to the Minister of St. George’s Chapel (Church), near Park 
 Street; ten pounds to the Minister of St. Augustine’s Church; ten 
 pounds to the Minister of the parish where I was born (St. Michael’s) ; 
 and ten pounds to the Minister of St. Paul’s Church (all in Bristol); 
 to be distributed by them in small sums according to their discretion 
 to the deserving poor of tlieir respective parishes”—a mark of great 
 liberality, the donor being a Unitarian ! 
 
 Mr. Estlin was a firm advocate of liberal principles, and w'ith great 
 sweetness of temper, and kindness of disposition, he showed an in¬ 
 flexibility in his advocacy of them, which was the theme of admiration. 
 He was above contending for them in a mere party sense, but always 
 accompanied his firmness with great liberality of mind. He supported 
 for many years, with liis voice, his pen, and his purse, the cause of the 
 captive slave, in which cause lie was probably better known, even in 
 America, than in his native country. Among his medical brethren his 
 name was held in the highest estimation, with wiiom, as with all others; 
 his strictness of principle, true honesty, and uniformly amiable manners, 
 made him an especial favourite. 
 
 On a tomb in this burial-ground is inscribed the following:— 
 
 “ Sacred to the Memory of 
 Edward Kentish, M.D. 
 who departed this life 
 December 5th, 1832,^ 
 Aged G9 Years.” 
 
 Dr. Kentish was one of the senior physicians of St. Peter’s Hospital, 
 where his loss was not more felt, than it was generally, wdierever he was 
 known. He was a man of most gentlemanly bearing, and his useful¬ 
 ness was not confined to his professional avocation, but extended to 
 every liberal institution requiring the aid of his highly cultivated mind; 
 and he was to be found at all times foremost in those plans of improve¬ 
 ment where a pure and refined taste might lend its assistance to 
 advantage. The extent of his benevolence is not generally known, but 
 to the afflicted poor it was not only gratuitous, but without limit. 
 
 On another tomb is this inscription:— 
 
390 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 “Sacred 
 
 To the Memory of 
 J. Edmonds Stock, Esquire, M.D., 
 who departed this life 
 on the 4th day of October, 1835, 
 
 Aged 61 Years.” 
 
 John Edmonds Stock, M.D., died at Tewkesbury. He was a 
 Gentleman-Commoner of Exeter College, Oxford, but left tbe University 
 without a degree. He was tbe intimate friend of Dr. Beddoes, whose 
 life he published hi 1811, with an analytical account of his writings. 
 In 1816 Dr. Stock seceded from the body of Unitarians with whom he 
 had long been connected, which occasioned a great sensation in Bristol 
 and its neighbourhood, producing a correspondence of considerable 
 interest at the time. 
 
 On a marble monument in this burial-ground is inscribed as follows:— 
 
 ‘ ‘ To the Memory of 
 Michael Castle, Esq., 
 of Stapleton Grove,* 
 near this city, 
 who died May 22, 1821, 
 
 Aged 59 years. 
 
 He was attached 
 to the principles and worship 
 of the congregation 
 to which 
 
 this burying ground belongs; 
 and was a liberal supporter 
 of the charities connected with it 
 as well as of various other 
 Benevolent institutions. 
 
 He served the office of 
 Chief Magistrate of this City 
 in the year 1812.” 
 
 One of the most important events of which we read in the “History 
 of Bristol,” took place in the year 1373, when King Edward III. 
 constituted it a county within itself; at which time, as the Charter 
 expresses it, “We, for the improvement of the town of Bristol, and 
 also in consideration of the good behaviour of the burgesses towards us 
 and of their good service bestowed on us in times past by their 
 shipping and other things (<tc.), have granted and by this our charter 
 
 Appendix LV. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 391 
 
 have confirmed for us and our heirs to the said burgesses and their 
 heirs and successors for ever, that the said town of Bristol with its 
 suburbs and precincts of the same, according to its metes and bounds 
 as they are limited, to be for ever in future alike separated and in all 
 respects exempted from the counties of Gloucester and Somerset both 
 by land and by water, and that it be a county by itself, and called the 
 county of Bristol * To commemorate the giving- of this charter, the 
 grateful people erected the civic High Cross, since which time the 
 name of King Edward III. has, in consequence of this gift, been held 
 in high esteem by them. In the same charter he also granted them the 
 privilege of sending two members to represent them in Parliament. 
 
 “ The county of Bristol now includes (besides the parishes already 
 described) the course of the river Avon, from Hanham Mills, about 
 four miles above Bristol, to its mouth, and takes in so much of the 
 Bristol Channel as is included within a line skirting the Somersetshire 
 coast, as far westward as the How Rocks, just below Clevedon, 12 
 miles from Bristol; thence in a straight line to the islands called the 
 Steep Holmes and Flat Holmes, more than 20 miles below the mouth 
 of the Avon; thence in a straight line nearly up the mid channel to an 
 island called the Denny, nearly opposite the Avon; and thence to 
 Avon road, on the north side of that river.” f 
 
 For the purposes of parliamentary representation, the district of the 
 united out parishes of St. James and St. Paul, the whole of the parish 
 of Clifton, that part of the parishes of St. Philip and Jacob heretofore 
 without the bounds of the ancient city, and parts of the parishes of 
 Westbury and Bedminster, have been added thereto by the Reform Act 
 passed in 1832, and constitutes the Borough of Bristol. The population, 
 including these additions, was, in 1851, 137,328; of these, 61,621 were 
 males, and 75,707 females. 
 
 Bristol was made a city by King Henry VIII., who conferred upon 
 it the honour of constituting it the see of a bishop, by letters patent, 
 in 1542; and the town was accordingly proclaimed to be a city and a 
 
 * Seyer’s Charters and Letters Patent, of Bristol, No. xii., p. 39. Mr. 
 Barrett says this charter was granted in 1347, which is an error; its correct 
 date is “8 Aug. 47 Edw’ 3, i’ e’ 1373.” For the charter of Henry III., see 
 ante, p. 24. 
 
 t Report of the Municipal Corporation Commissioners. 
 
392 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 bishopric; a similar honour being paid to the towns of Westminster, 
 Oxford, Peterborough, Chester, and Gloucester. 
 
 Queen Elizabeth, iu the twenty-fourth year of her reign, granted a 
 charter empowering the election of twelve aldermen, and for dividing 
 the city into as many wards; and Charles I. did the same in 1631; and 
 for the sum of nine hundred and fifty-nine pounds, as before remarked, 
 the castle and its precincts were separated from the county of 
 Gloucester, and made part of the city and independent jurisdiction of 
 Bristol; * which Charles II. confirmed to the mayor and corporation, 
 April 22nd, 1661. 
 
 In the Civil Wars which distracted the reign of Charles I., Bristol 
 stood prominently forward in the contest. The castle, and the walls of 
 the city, were repaired and fortified on behalf of the king, and forts were 
 built on Brandon and St. Michael’s Hills—the latter being afterwards 
 known as the Royal Fort. “ The gates and portcullises were repaired 
 and made strong with great chains hanged up within them, and great 
 strong rails full of long iron spikes without every gate, so that no horses 
 could pass by or over them.”f These inlets to the city were closed 
 against the partisans of both King and Parliament—each being alike 
 refused admission within its walls, until the arrival of Colonel Thomas 
 Essex, with two regiments of infantry, before the city, December 2nd, 
 1642; when, after a show of resistance, the influence of the mayor’s 
 wife, and some other women, who had joined her in petitioning for their 
 entry, procured them that introduction into the city, which had been 
 denied them by their more martial husbands,—then, and not till then, 
 the gates were opened to the Parliamentarians, and Essex undertook 
 the governorship of the city; a regiment of Colonel Popham’s also 
 marching into it on the same day. 
 
 Although, at this time, the majority of the city authorities, including 
 the mayor and sheriffs, were on the side of the Parliament, they were 
 evidently desirous of maintaining peace with the king, for on the 7th 
 of January, 1643, was presented “The humble petition of the citie of 
 Bristoll to his Majesty for an accommodation of peace betweene himselfe 
 and Parliament,” in which the petitioners “ invoke the royal assistance 
 
 * Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 224. 
 t Ibid, p. 226. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 393 
 
 and suffrage for tire establishing an unanimous tranquillity throughout 
 this realme,” &c. This petition, Mr. Seyer endeavours to shew, could 
 not have emanated from any 'party of importance , because, “We are not 
 'positively informed whether it proceeded from the Common-council as 
 an act of the whole Corporation, or whether it was the private petition 
 of individuals.” “ It was (however) presented to the king’s most 
 excellent Majestie at the court at Oxford, by foure of the Aldermen of 
 the said citie on Saturday the seventh of Januarie,” and it matters little 
 whether it issued from the Corporation as a body, or that “ it was the 
 private petitions of individuals;” whether it was sent from the loyalists, 
 whom Mr. Seyer tells us were “ Among persons of honour, education, 
 and wealth in Bristol, as in other places, (and) far more numerous than 
 their adversaries; ” or whether it was presented by petitioners, who, as 
 the same writer says, “were not of the king’s friends.”* The fact of 
 its being presented, and that, too, “ by foure of the aldermen,” cannot 
 be denied, and the language in which it is couched is of the most 
 respectful character, and deserved the attention it was hoped it would 
 procure. Mr. Seyer’s arguments are weak and one-sided, and will not 
 stand the test of fair criticism. In this, as in many other things of 
 which he has written, there is an evident leaning to party, which adds 
 nothing to the credit of his “ Memoirs of Bristol,” but leads thinking, 
 unprejudiced men, to weigh evidence, and draw conclusions, not always 
 favourable to him as a writer. 
 
 In the petition above referred to, “his most gracious Majesty is 
 implored to desert and give off the councells of such notorious 
 malignants, t as for their owne sinister and unworthy ends aime at the 
 ruine of the commonwealth and destruction of the essences of 
 Parliament; to which are conterminated and confined the liberty and 
 right of the English subject.” The petitioners also implore his majesty 
 to take into consideration the “strange and uncouth distractions that 
 have lately broken forth into the church of England, sometimes the 
 glory of all the Keformed churches, the too much power of the Prelacie 
 in forcing new canons and unheard of doctrines upon us, such as have 
 
 * Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., pp. 314, 315. 
 
 t “ The royalists called their opponents Rebels and Rogues, and were in 
 return styled Malignants.” Keightley’s History of England, vol, ii., p. 123. 
 
394 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 corrosives to the hearts and goads in the sides of most of the religious 
 and well-affected persons to church and commonwealth in these your 
 Majesties dominions, which have been the immediate and efficient 
 causes of the many dissensions and troubles now raigning in this 
 realme; no oppression being so forcible or oppressive to men’s 
 consciences, as that which is intruded on them concerning their belief, 
 and the worship of God.” To this petition the king replied in a vague 
 and unsatisfactory manner, thanking the petitioners for their advice, 
 “not doubting, but that ere many days passe, to reduce his affaires to 
 that conformable condition, as to finish all jars and contentions between 
 himselfe and Parliament by an happie union: that all his good subjects 
 may have their desires by the establishment of a constant peace in 
 these his dominions.” 
 
 By his inattention to the grievances complained of, added to the fact 
 of his “ endeavouring to govern his kingdom without a Parliament (in 
 which), he resorted to many strange and oppressive expedients to raise 
 money,” the king committed a serious unconstitutional error. “ The 
 immediate reason for levying this tax (ship-money), was to equip a fleet 
 for the protection of the kingdom, which was threatened by the alliance 
 of France and Holland : but the real cause was to raise a revenue for 
 the king, without the authority of a Parliament. The nation was 
 divided in its opinion concerning this affair, and probably in nearly 
 equal numbers. Some maintained that the king had no legal right to 
 raise money on the subject, by his own authority : others supposed that 
 such a right was constitutionally inherent in the crown.” * With this 
 act commenced the king’s misfortunes. “ Bristol was particularly 
 annoyed by these extortions, and the people detected the duplicity with 
 which he sought to cloke his real designs, and they judged of him 
 accordingly. They became alarmed. “The government of England 
 was now, in all points but one, as despotic as that of France ;”+ and 
 that one was the peculiar right of Englishmen to tax themselves, which 
 right the king was now about to invade and set aside. “ Former 
 princes had raised ship-money only in time of war ; it was now exacted 
 in a time of profound peace. Former princes, even in the most perilous 
 
 * Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., pp. 289, 290, 317, 319. 
 f Macaulay’s History of England, vol. i., p. 89. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 395 
 
 wars, had raised ship-money only along the coasts ; it was now exacted 
 from the inland shires. Former princes had raised ship-money only for 
 the maritime defence of the country ; it was now exacted, by the ad¬ 
 mission of the Royalists themselves, with the object, not of maintaining 
 a navy, but of furnishing the king with supplies which might be in¬ 
 creased at his discretion to any amount, and expended at his discretion 
 for any purpose.”* “The question (now) was, should the country in 
 future be governed by an absolute or a limited monarchy—should there 
 be a constitution including its representative and legislative assemblies, 
 the ancient safeguards of freedom and property—or should it be thrust 
 aside and trodden down by a mere band of courtiers, responsible to 
 none save the master appointing them, and observant of no law save 
 of his pleasure ? Charles did not mean to become a Nero, but the 
 principles of government to which he would thus have given the per¬ 
 manence of custom and the force of law, are precisely those which 
 have never failed to prepare the way for such specimens of parental 
 sovereignty. Men who saw this course of things, and had protested 
 against it, now protested more loudly, and many who had wavered were 
 in doubt no longer. Laud saw the injury done to the king’s policy by 
 the memorable debate (at Hampden’s trial), and bitterly deplored it.” f 
 “Such oppressions (as those mentioned above) were a prelude to the 
 Civil war which broke out three or four years afterward, and were in 
 fact one great cause of it.” This remark refers to a belief then gaining 
 ground among the people, that by a special commission, recently 
 appointed, inquiry was to be made into certain “frauds and extortions 
 and unjust levies of money, which had been practised for many years 
 by the magistrates and other persons of Bristol, that justice might be 
 done to those who had been oppressed;” but on the same page the 
 writer tells us “how this Commission was really executed, and proves 
 that raising money for the king by all possible means was it’s real 
 object,” by quoting from Adams’s Calendar, which, Mr. Seyer says, is 
 by “far the best he had met with, and contains much general English 
 history.” % It was written by William Adams as far as the year 1639. 
 
 * Macaulay’s History of England, vol. i., p. 90. 
 t Vaughan’s History of England under the House of Stuart, p. 268. 
 
 Appendix LVI. 
 
 t Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 292; and vol. i., p. xi. 
 
396 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 “ Our marchauts of Bristoll (says tlie writer) were much troubled this 
 year (1637-8) and the year before by pursuivants, and many were 
 served to appear in London, where by oaths they were severally 
 examined and constrained to swear, what commodities they had sent to 
 sea and what commodities they had received home from foreign 
 countries in many years before in sundry ships, according to notes of 
 information, which the Commissioners had procured and collected of 
 their entries in the custom-house books; and likewise what they did 
 know of others, then - friends, and partners, that had not made true 
 entries: whereby some were constrained, for discharge of their 
 consciences, to accuse one another. These examinations and answers 
 were recorded; and many of our merchants after their coming home 
 were served up again, and new examined. From September to the 
 month of December, 1637, our city was never free from commissions, 
 commissioners, and pursuivants of sundry sorts, which lay in several 
 parts of our city, to make enquiry not only against marchants, but 
 against other tradesmen, who were examined and sent up to London, 
 and great impositions laid on them to the grief of many; insomuch that 
 all shopkeepers stood in great fear of them especially sopemakers, who 
 were constrained to pay £4 custom for every ton of sope they made and 
 every man rated what quantity he should yearly make ; and account of 
 every man’s doings was weekly taken by some appointed for oversight 
 thereof. Some were known to make more than they were allowed or 
 paid for; whereupon about 30 of them were served up to London, 
 where against their wills they were retained long with great expences, 
 imprisoned and fined in above £20,000, and were bound to more 
 inconveniencies before they could be discharged.” * 
 
 The writer then enumerates the flagrant wrongs done to men of every 
 grade in society, from the dealer in every kind of merchandise, to the 
 occupants of church lands, to ministers, clerks, constables, church¬ 
 wardens, and other officers, and ancient men—by these Commissioners; 
 “ examining them what they knew more than such notes and names of 
 houses and religious places, which they brought with them: so they 
 were brought unto sundry places, from whence they collected great sums 
 of money for matters not enquired of in many years before.” To these 
 
 Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 293. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 397 
 
 inquisitorial measures the commissioners added that of a disgraceful 
 espionage, for they “ examined clerks belonging to the merchants to 
 hear what they could inform; of whom one clerk they here (in Bristol) 
 imprisoned for not giving them satisfaction; and then carried him to 
 London and imprisoned him again. Another clerk being from home, 
 they came about midnight into his house and bedchamber to take him 
 away; where not finding him, they searched his house for books.” 
 
 “ All these severe extremities, being more than their commission 
 could maintain, our marchants taking into consideration, four Alderman 
 and other marchants of good estimation rode voluntarily to London in 
 the cittie’s behalf, accompanied with attendants to wait on them, and 
 some others likewise, that were served up with them. These gentlemen 
 upon their knees made petition to our King’s Majesty to take con¬ 
 sideration of their miseries: whereupon his most excellent Majestie 
 graciously embraced them, being sorry that by wrong information he 
 had granted such commissions, which then he could not recal. He gave 
 them liberty to prefer a bill against them in the starchamber; and to 
 retain any counsellors whom they pleased, to plead for them before the 
 lords of his most honourable privy-council: which was a most gratious 
 favour; for before, those commissioners, being their adversaries, were as 
 lords and judges over them; as if law and justice lay in their own 
 hands. These gentlemen stayed in London about eight weeks at no 
 small expences for trial, whereof as yet they could come to no end. But 
 his Majesty graciously wished them to follow their suit, and when it 
 came to the highest, his Grace would mediate between them! ” In 
 this way the king trifled with the petitioners and dismissed them to 
 their homes; and “It cannot be matter of surprise to find that after 
 such provocations a considerable part, perhaps a majority, of the 
 inhabitants of this city joined in the opposition which was made to the 
 King and his ministers.” * 
 
 The feeling of the inhabitants of Bristol towards the king may be 
 judged of from what has been stated; after which, no unprejudiced 
 reader ought to be surprised at what follows in this narrative. The 
 city was, as already said, in the hands of the Parliamentarians; Colonel 
 Essex was removed from his post of governor, because, as Mr. Seyer 
 
 Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 293, 294. Appendix LVH. 
 
398 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 tells us, lie “ began to be suspected by his own party, as a person not 
 thoroughly attached to their cause;” and he says that the Colonel was 
 accused, among other things, “ of keeping company with persons of 
 known royalist principles, such as Mr. Yeomans.” * He was succeeded 
 by Colonel Nathaniel Fiennes, a member of the House of Commons, who 
 was second son of Lord Say, an influential member of the House of 
 Peers, under whose rule complaint was made that he “ was not always 
 very scrupulous in raising his assessments,” and a letter from Fiennes 
 is quoted by Mr. Seyer, professing to prove it. In this letter it is 
 related that “ the city is at this time invironed and in great imminent 
 danger to be swallowed up by many cruell and barbarous enemies of 
 Papists, Irish Rebells and others: and most of the inhabitants of this 
 citie have, and all ought to take an oath and protestation for defence 
 thereof with their lives and fortunes.” The governor then goes on “ to 
 require you (the person addressed) forthwith to pay my servant Ralph 
 Hooker to be employed for the defence of the citie, the sumrne of two 
 hundred pounds; which summe in respect of your estate is below the 
 proportion required of other persons of your qualitie by ordinance of 
 Parliament. And if you shall refuse in this time of so great necessitie, 
 you may expect whatsoever the desperate resolution of soldiers reduced 
 unto extreame necessitie may put them to act against your persons and 
 estates, unlesse by a speedy contribution towards their supply you shall 
 prevent the same.” Now as Fiennes acted with “A Committee 
 appointed here, as in other places which had submitted to the 
 Parliament, for the purpose of levying the usual assessments which 
 the Houses (of Parliament) had imposed,” it is difficult to see how the 
 governor himself, individually, could have done any wrong in the 
 matter, especially as the mayor of the city, the two sheriffs, and other 
 respectable merchants and citizens, as well as some of his own officers, 
 acted with him, as a council of advisers. It seems as if the writer 
 would damage, if possible, everything that was not done on behalf of the 
 king; hence we find him saying that “These oppressions naturally 
 reduced the wealth and prosperity of the city to a very low state;” 
 forgetting he had already intimated that the oppressions of the monarch, 
 and the petition of the citizens against them, with tbe manner in which 
 
 * Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 319. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 390 
 
 they were trifled with, was a more likely cause than the conduct of 
 Fiennes, to effect it, as the latter doubtless sent a similar and equally 
 peremptory demand to every citizen alike, after the military fashion in a 
 beleaguered city. 
 
 “ Another grievance to which the loyalists were subject was having 
 illegal oaths and protestations tendered to them.” The oaths here 
 complained of as illegal, appear to refer only to the person taking them, 
 and merely requiring him to “ oppose the entrance of all troops into 
 Bristol without the consent of king and Parliament and it appears 
 that those who “ scrupled to take these oaths were disarmed, and often¬ 
 times imprisoned,” the act was therefore voluntary, and the person so 
 refusing could move from the city, as Mr. Seyer tells us many others 
 had done, to a place of greater security, where the necessity for such 
 oaths was not known. The exposure to perpetual insult and oppression 
 to which that writer says Churchmen were subject on account of their 
 religion, is no more than could be expected, and the consequence of their 
 own previous misconduct to those who presumed to differ from them in 
 rites, ceremonies, or opinions. His idea seems to be that real religion 
 resides only in the bosoms of those who enjoy the “ advantages of good 
 birth, company and education, hence it was that this (religious) insanity 
 (Puritanism) was chiefly found in the inferior ranks of society, who, by 
 their numbers, made amends for their want of respectability.” * A far 
 better writer, however, and more trustworthy man on such matters, says 
 of these despised Puritans, it was not to be expected “ that they would 
 submit their private judgment to the authority of a Church founded on 
 private judgment alone; that they would be afraid to dissent from 
 teachers who themselves dissented from what had lately been the 
 universal faith of western Christendom. It is easy to conceive the 
 indignation which must have been felt by bold and inquisitive spirits, 
 glorying in newly acquired freedom, when an institution younger by 
 many years than themselves, an institution which had, under their own 
 eyes, gradually received its form from the passions and interest of a 
 court, began to mimic the lofty style of Rome.” t 
 
 In the conduct of those who disputed the claims of the Church of 
 England to their homage in religious matters, Mr. Seyer sees a pretext 
 
 * Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., pp. 329, 338. 
 t Macaulay’s Hist, of England, vol. i., p. 59. 
 
400 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 for the treachery of Yeomans and Boucher; for he says, “The 
 oppressions exercised by these patrons of liberty against the king’s 
 friends, soon produce^what might be expected, an attempt among the 
 latter to relieve themselves from their oppressors; and they entered 
 into a combination for that purpose. The two principal authors and 
 conductors of this attempt were Mr. Robert Yeomans, merchant, who 
 had served the office of sheriff in the preceding year 1641-2; and 
 Mr. George Boucher, merchant; their associates amounted to 2000 
 persons according to their adversaries representation. A short time 
 before the arrival of Colonel Essex, Mr. Yeomans had received a 
 commission from the king at Oxford to raise a regiment for his service 
 at Bristol, and he was himself persuaded, that if he had received it 
 earlier, he could have prevented the rebel forces from entering the city 
 at all. Nevertheless he was afterwards very active in fulfilling it; for 
 he not only was the leader of the loyal party among the citizens, but 
 he brought over at least four of the officers of the garrison, who had 
 served under Essex, and who were probably offended by his removal. 
 To these four officers Mr. Yeomans lent £\0 a-piece, for without some 
 such sums they said, that they could not bring over the soldiers to 
 their purpose; and Mr. George Boucher drew up an oath expressive of 
 attachment to the king and his cause, which oath he had administered 
 to many. Some of the citizens were sent to Oxford several times, 
 where they conferred with the king’s friends and with Prince Rupert 
 and with the king himself. The king greatly approved of their 
 purpose, and said (as was commonly reported at Oxford) that he 
 would make Bristol a famous city when he got possession of it; and 
 it was at last determined that Prince Rupert should draw his army 
 toward Bristol, and on the night of Tuesday, March 7th, 1642-3, 
 should send a sufficient force to Durdham Down, ready to enter the 
 city, when the signal should be given. That same night the Royalists 
 met at Mr. Robert Yeoman’s house in Wine Street, which was on the 
 north side of the street, nearly opposite to the guard-house, having a 
 back door or side door in the lane, where they were to arm, fire-arms 
 and ammunition, swords and clubs being in the house for that purpose. 
 Another party likewise on the same night, to the number of about 
 twenty, met at Mr. George Boucher’s, who lived in Christmas Street, 
 where arms and ammunition and iron instruments of all sorts were 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 401 
 
 provided, and chains and locks to secure St. John’s gate, lest any 
 attack should be made on them by horse from behind: and Mr. 
 Boucher had also forced open the door of St. John’s croud (crypt of the 
 church), that it might serve as a prison (if necessary) during the 
 assault. Another party met at Mr. Thomas Millard’s or Milward’s 
 house, who appears to be a person of some authority in St. Michael’s 
 parish: and on the same night at the house of one Bichard Lucket, 
 apparently in St. Michael’s parish, there met Thomas Stephens and 
 Matthew Stephens and John Pestor, and probably others. Their plan 
 was this; Captain Hilsdon and Lieutenant Moore were that night of 
 the main guard, which was kept at what they called the grand Court of 
 guard, now called the Guard-house, in Wine Street; Hilsdon was to go 
 the second round about midnight, himself on horseback, wearing a 
 scarlet gippo or coat; and when he and his party, whom he had gained 
 over to his purpose, should come to Froom-gate, they were to seize the 
 guard there, which they would easily do as being unsuspected; beside 
 which Mr. Boucher and his party, coming forth from his house at the 
 same time and following them close, would be ready to give them any 
 assistance which they might want; and Thomas Milward’s party at the 
 same time was to come down the hill to the outside of Froom-gate, for 
 the same purpose, Newgate also was to be seized at the same time. 
 Meanwhile Mr. Yeomans and his company were to go to the guard¬ 
 house and secure the guard there, which they expected to do peaceably 
 and without bloodshed, expecting no resistance, being so assured by 
 Hilsdon and Moore, which latter would be on the guard at that time: 
 and they were to seize the ordnance there, and scour the streets with 
 them; that is, as I suppose, if Fiennes’s troops should assault them. 
 No violence was to be used towards any man, of which the king had 
 given them his word, and had given the same in charge to Prince 
 Rupert; and he had issued a Proclamation to that effect, and promised 
 pardon to all in Bristol, except to Colonel Fiennes, which proclamation 
 was printed at Oxford, and was to have been issued as soon as the 
 king’s forces should enter the city, and Mr. Yeomans had an intention 
 to issue the following proclamation; or at least the rebels asserted, that 
 it was found in writing in his house. ‘ All inhabitants of the bridge, 
 high-street and corne-street, keepe within your dores upon paines of 
 your lives. All other inhabitants of this city, that stand for the king, 
 
402 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 the Protestant Religion, and the liberty of the city, let them forthwith 
 appeare at the high-crosse with such armour as they have for the 
 defence of their wives aucl children, and follow their leaders for the 
 same defence.’ As soon as Froom-gate should be in possession of this 
 loyal party, they had agreed to give Prince Rupert notice of their 
 success by ringing out St. Michael’s and St. John’s bells, which was 
 entrusted to the care of Thomas Milward, and the cavalier troops were 
 then immediately to march up to Froom-gate. The Prince had 
 directed that each man who was their friend should wear a piece 
 of white tape on this occasion, and the word was given by Mr. Yeomans, 
 Charles. It was now ten o’clock at night, and all were anxiously 
 waiting for the appointed time, when Hilsdon and Moore sent word to 
 Mr. Yeomans that their plan was discovered, and directed him 
 instantly to dismiss the men that were in his house. But before this 
 could be accomplished, Captain Jeremy Buck, being sent on this service 
 by the governor and council of war, with a party of 20 musketeers 
 taken from the guard at the bridge, surrounded the house and 
 demanded admittance. Mr. Yeomans after some delay opened the 
 door, and was made prisoner, together with his brother and Mr. 
 Arundel: a scuffle ensued between the soldiers and some masters of 
 ships and sailors who were there; but in fine Captain Buck having 
 sent for 20 more musqueteers from the guard-house, secured 23 
 persons, many others having escaped out of the to;) of the house; he 
 took also their arms and a small barrell of gunpowder.” * 
 
 Of the guilt of these men Mr. Barrett does not attempt an extenuation, 
 but Mr. Seyer labours hard to induce a belief—not that they were 
 innocent of a great crime—but that they were instigated to it by the 
 oppression of their religious opponents, which is not correct. Their 
 guilt is augmented, too, by their position; both were merchants, and 
 one of them had recently served the office of sheriff of the city; hence, 
 probably, the severity of their sentence, which, however, was not too 
 severe, when we consider the extent to which their crime would 
 probably have conducted, had they succeeded; or, in case of failure, 
 they thought nothing of the lives that might be lost in the attempt, the 
 women who might be made widows, or the children who might become 
 
 Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., pp. 341—344. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 403 
 
 orphans, through their criminality. These men have been held up as 
 the “two State-Martyrs”—if martyrs to anything it was to their 
 treachery, which the king approved of greatly. * 
 
 About two months after this event Prince Rupert resolved to 
 besiege Bristol, under the instructions of the king, who was advised to 
 it by his friends; and it accordingly commenced July 24th, 1643. 
 The garrison, under Fiennes, consisted of 2500 foot, and two regiments 
 of cavalry—one of light horse, and the other of dragoons. The 
 fortifications not being finished, the prince resolved at once to storm 
 the city; and the next morning began the assault. On the west side it 
 was attacked, unsuccessfully, by the Cornish regiments, but with great 
 impetuosity. The middle division, or that on the Somersetshire side, 
 which was led on by the Marquis of Hertford and Prince Maurice, soon 
 succeeded in gaining the wall; but, by the bravery of the garrison, 
 they were repulsed with considerable loss, both of officers and men. On 
 the Gloucestershire side Prince Rupert conducted his part of the 
 assault with great courage, and almost equal loss, but with better 
 success. “One party led on by Lord Grandison, was indeed beaten 
 off, and the commander himself mortally wounded; another, conducted 
 by Colonel Bellasis, met with a similar fate; but (Colonel) Washington, 
 with a less party, finding a place in the curtain weaker than the rest, 
 broke in, and quickly made room for the horse to follow. By this 
 irruption, however, nothing but the suburbs was gained: the entrance 
 into the town was still more difficult; and by the loss already 
 sustained, as well as by the prospect of further danger, every one was 
 extremely discouraged; when, to the great joy of the army, the city 
 beat a parley,” f which was readily accepted by the royalist chiefs; 
 and it was agreed that the garrison was to march out with their arms 
 and baggage, leaving their cannon, ammunition, and colours. Fiennes, 
 the governor, was accused of cowardice, tried by a court-martial, 
 and condemned to be beheaded; which sentence, by the influence of his 
 father, was remitted. He died in December, 1669. 
 
 Clarendon urges it as not improbable that the pardon of Fiennes 
 was accelerated by complaints made by the Parliament, of the violence 
 
 * Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 342. Appendix LVIII. 
 t Hume’s Hist, of England, vol. vii., p. 522. 
 
 EE 2 
 
404 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 of the Royalists towards the garrison, after its capitulation,* in 
 publishing the articles relating to which, they annex a letter, in which 
 the writer says: “ On Thursday last we rendered the citie of Bristoll; 
 but what faith hath been kept thereafter, let the robberies and spoyles 
 of every particular person declare. Before I could come forth of the 
 gates of the city, I was deprived of my money, plate and baggage, from 
 behind my servants, who were throwne off their horses, and the same 
 cut off their backes and utterly lost, and themselves and their horses in 
 like condition, for ought I know ; and onely wee ourselves with some 
 other gentlemen escaped hither with our lives on Friday night last. 
 And on Saturday came in also the late governour of Bristol, Colonel 
 Fiennes and his brother, with the remainder of the whole soulderie, 
 who were served with the like sauce; such is the faith held with the 
 present victors. These outrages were of great prejudice to his 
 Majesty’s cause,”+—and deservedly so. 
 
 The Royalists’ loss in this assault was very severe, for, besides Lord 
 Grandison and other persons of note, they had five hundred of their 
 best soldiers killed, and Colonels Bellasis, Ashley, and Sir John Owen, 
 wounded. “The conquest of Bristol secured the possession of the 
 neighbouring country. Bath surrendered after the defeat of Sir 
 William Waller, and Berkeley Castle was taken soon after Bristol, and 
 held for the king, by a Scottish Captain as governor; and by means of 
 it the richest part of Gloucestershire was secured to its obedience.” 
 The king and his two sons visited Bristol in August, 1643, on being 
 informed of Prince Rupert’s success. “On Sunday the King went to 
 the College, to hear sermon, the Mayor carrying the golden mace 
 before him, bareheaded, and in his scarlet robes, and after divine 
 service he escorted the King back again to his lodging (in Small Street) 
 in the same manner.” The royal cause, at this time, seemed all- 
 prosperous, but it did not long remain so; for the memorable battle of 
 Naseby, and the total capture there of the king’s artillery and 
 ammunition, gave a fatal turn to the affairs of their party. “ The King 
 retired into Wales and Prince Rupert to Bristol, the siege of which it 
 was easy to foresee would not be long delayed. (In it was a royalist) 
 
 * Hist, of the Rebellion, vol. iii., p. 297. 
 t Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 411. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 405 
 
 garrison of about 5000 men, (with) provisions and ammunition 
 sufficient for a long siege, fortifications much strengthened since the 
 city had been under his (Prince Rupert’s) government, and some 
 probability of being relieved by the King or from the West.” To this 
 add the reputed courage of the Prince, and the greater strength of the 
 garrison than at any former period, and it will be admitted it was not 
 incorrectly thought that it would require no ordinary exertions in the 
 attack. 
 
 On the 21st of August, 1645, General Fairfax, and the second in 
 command of the Parliamentary forces, Lieutenant-General Cromwell, 
 reconnoitred the city, and were occupied two or three days in appointing 
 and settling their guards, the head-quarters of Fairfax being first at 
 Keynsham, but subsequently at Hanham, and afterwards removed to 
 Stoke House, Stapleton, late the seat of the Duchess Dowager of 
 Beaufort. On September 1st Fairfax gave orders for preparing to storm 
 the city, but on the 4th, “summons was prepared to be sent to Prince 
 Rupert, and being agreed unto, was sent in accordingly.” In this 
 summons the General stated that for “the service of the Parliament, I 
 have brought their army before the city of Bristol, and (I) do summon 
 you in their names to render it, with all the forts belonging to the same, 
 into my hands for their use.” * This he did to avoid the shedding of 
 blood. Subsequently several letters passed between the rival com¬ 
 manders, until the Prince, to the astonishment of every one, and the 
 extreme mortification of the Royalists, submitted to the peremptory 
 demands of Fairfax, but not until he was “ left inexcusable for 
 refusing such honourable conditions as were offered; the whole 
 (besieging) army horse and foot being set in a posture round the city;” 
 the storming began, which “ was terrible to the beholders,” the lines 
 broken and entered by the besiegers, who completely mastered them, 
 and began to plant cannon against the castle, (when) a trumpeter came 
 from the Prince to desire a parley, which there was reason enough to 
 refuse. But considering the enemy had fired the city in several places, 
 insomuch as it was probable the whole city would have been consumed 
 if the fire had gone on; the General sent the Prince word that he would 
 embrace a parley, provided he caused the fire to be quenched 
 
 Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., pp. 419, 429, 439. 
 
406 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 immediately, •which was done accordingly,* and so the treaty proceeded 
 on, and by seven at night it was concluded ; ” the terms being, “ That 
 His Highness Prince Rupert, and all noblemen, officers, gentlemen and 
 soulders, and all other persons whatsoever, now residing in the city of 
 Bristol, and castle, and forts thereof, shall march out of the said city, 
 castle, and forts thereof, with colours, pikes, and drums, bag and 
 baggage. The Prince his Highness, all noblemen, gentlemen and officers 
 in commission, with their horse and arms, and their servants with their 
 horses and swords, and common soldiers with their swords; the Prince, 
 his life guard of horse, with their horse and arms, and 250 horse besides 
 to be disposed by the Prince, and his life guard of fire-locks with their 
 arms, and each of them one pound of powder, and a proportion of 
 bullet; and that none of the persons who are to march out on these 
 articles, shall be plundered, searched or molested.” f 
 
 Greatly to the honour of Fairfax and Cromwell, the liberal articles 
 agreed to were in no wise broken. How unlike to this was the conduct 
 of Prince Rupert’s soldiers, when, on a former occasion (July 26th 
 1643), the Parliamentarians marched out of the city after capitulating; 
 “ the conditions (says Mr. Seyer) were very ill observed (by the royalists), 
 for almost all the (Parliament’s) officers’ arms and troopers’ swords were 
 taken from them, and the soldiers in marching away were plundered 
 and ill-treated;” but of course Mr. Seyer has a mitigating circumstance 
 in extenuation of such a breach of faith, at hand, and therefore he adds 
 that it was done “in revenge for what these same soldiers had done at 
 Reading!” + Happily a better spirit possessed the parliamentarians on 
 the present occasion, hence they did not retaliate in revenge for former 
 wrongs done to them; for Mr. Seyer records that “ The Prince, 
 according to the articles, marched out of the great fort, as also many 
 ladies and persons of quality who had convoys appointed them 
 according to agreement. In the Prince his marching out, the General 
 himself attended him out two miles. The Prince, after he was out of 
 the fort, declared which way he intended to go, and propounded 
 Oxford, whither, accordingly, he, and all his company, were safely 
 
 * Ante, p. 99. 
 
 + Seyer's Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., pp. 449, 450. 
 
 J Appendix LIX. Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 410. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 407 
 
 convoyed; and because lie feared the rising of the clubmen * upon him, 
 and not being secure enough in his convoy, as he conceived, he desired 
 the General to let him have 1000 arms for his foot, engaging himself 
 upon his honour, they should injure no man therewith, only to make 
 use of them (if needs were) to keep themselves from the violence of the 
 people, and to return them back again, which accordingly was allowed 
 him, and so many as kept their arms restored them again; but the 
 greatest part of them in their march running away, many of the arms 
 were lost. Divers persons of quality that were in the town, desired 
 liberty to stay a little while longer, till they could provide themselves 
 with horses and necessaries to march away, which civility the General 
 did not deny them.” 
 
 “A great appearance there was of the country to see the marching 
 away of the Prince, and extremely cryed they out against the Prince, 
 give him no quarter, give him no quarter.” t 
 
 Mr. Seyer says, that as “ Our own M S Calendars contain scarcely 
 any thing during the whole civil war, but the main and principal facts ; 
 and at the taking of the city and for some years afterwards the Press 
 was in the hands of the king’s enemies, and no one in Bristol dared to 
 contradict their narrative, it is from necessity (he continues) that I copy 
 the (above) from Sprigge’s Anglia rediviva. The author (of which) was 
 a preacher, a zealous partizan of the Parliament, and deeply infected 
 with the puritanic cant of the age;” yet he immediately adds, “His 
 book is a journal of the proceedings of Sir Thomas Fairfax’s army day 
 by day from its first march till the close of the war; he seems to have 
 attended the army, and to have made diligent enquiry concerning those 
 things which passed, where he was not present.” As Mr. Seyer 
 subsequently says “I give his narrative verbatim,” he seems not to 
 question the veracity of the writer, but is glad to make use of it 
 because of its truthfulness.^ 
 
 After the Royalists had left the city the General and Cromwell 
 “ removed, and went to Bristol, which they found so unlike what it had 
 
 * Appendix LX. f Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 452. 
 
 + Mr. Seyer, in vol. ii., p. 493, finds it convenient to speak in more 
 respectful terms of this person, for writing of December 20th, 1655, he says that 
 on “ the morning of that same day a petition was presented to the House, 
 signed by Joshua Sprigge, formerly an eminent independent preacher,” &c. 
 
408 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 been formerly, in its flourishing condition, that it looked now more 
 like a prison than a city, and the people more like prisoners than 
 citizens, being brought so low with taxations, so poor in habit, and so 
 dejected in countenance, the streets so noisome, and the houses so 
 nasty, as that they were unfit to receive friends or freemen, till they 
 were cleansed.” 
 
 “The taking of Bristol gave the last blow to the Royal cause; no 
 reasonable hope could be entertained of its final prevalence after the 
 loss of this important place: no wonder, therefore, that Prince Rupert 
 was severely judged.” The king was so incensed at his conduct that he 
 dismissed him from his service, and ordered him to quit the kingdom. 
 
 On the 2nd of December, 1645, Major-General Philip Skippon was 
 appointed governor of Bristol, by the Parliament, who entrusted to him 
 the command “of the garrison, castle, and forts there, and of all forces 
 in the same, willing and requiring all officers and souldiers of the said 
 garrison to receive and obey his orders and commands.” * 
 
 Soon after this event the religious dissensions peculiar to the age 
 began to shew themselves among the various sects which were called 
 into existence; some of whom, in their new-born zeal, were, as might 
 be expected, somewhat intolerant in their bearing towards others. It 
 cannot surprise the thoughtful reader, that in a nation so recently 
 released from the trammels of Popery, some few religionists should run 
 into what others think to be extremes. In 1652 the doctrines of the 
 Quakers, as they were derisively called, were promulgated; and after 
 spreading throughout the country, this body of Christians made their 
 appearance in Bristol in 1654,+ where they suffered much persecution on 
 account of their peculiar opinions. Of them Mr. Seyer remarks, “ It is 
 worthy of observation, that almost every one of these fanatics, however 
 mild and patient and simple now, had yet been soldiers in the armies of 
 the Commonwealth;”—a compliment at least, whether intentional or not, 
 to the power of religion; for that writer evidently wishes his readers to 
 believe that their Christianity was of a very questionable character! 
 
 The followers of George Fox suffered much at this time on account of 
 the eccentricities of one of their members, James Naylor, whose 
 
 Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., pp. 419, 429, 461, 464. 
 + The Cry of Blood, p. 2. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 409 
 
 remarkable career in Bristol is fully narrated by Mr. Seyer. They were 
 not fanatics, however, because he was a misguided man; nor were they 
 the less sincere because he was so awfully deluded by the worse than 
 fulsome adulations of the multitude. “ There always were, and still 
 are, occasionally, eccentric members in every section of the church, 
 especially when first rising into notoriety. But the condemnation of a 
 whole community, for the follies or even the crimes of a few individuals, 
 is utterly repugnant to Christian candour. Who, but a reckless, 
 unprincipled partizan, would reproach pious and candid episcopalians 
 for the licentious enormities of the cavalier clergy of Charles the Second, 
 or even for the rampant bigotry of a modern few, who appear to have 
 ransacked the infernal regions for terms sufficiently strong and offensive 
 to express the rancour of their hearts against conscientious Protestant 
 dissenters ? On the same principle, the man who would unnecessarily 
 blazon the fanaticism of James Naylor, and attach it as a stigma to the 
 Society of Friends, discovers more the malignity of his heart than the ob¬ 
 liquity of his judgment. If it be weakness to denounce the man for the 
 sake of the community, it is wickedness to stigmatize the community for 
 the sake of the man. Gough, quoting freely from previous authors, but 
 adding some pertinent observations of his own, while he candidly 
 acknowledges the alleged facts, except those which Naylor himself 
 denied, satisfactorily establishes two important points in extenuation— 
 previous mental aberration, and a subsequent abandonment of his 
 vagaries, in the most humble and comprehensive terms. He also proves 
 that Naylor was not patronized by the Bristol Friends, and that he was 
 faithfully remonstrated with and admonished by Fox and other 
 influential parties in that community. 
 
 “ That he was guilty of blasphemy, in the scriptural acceptation of 
 the term, is by no means satisfactorily proved. The blasphemy, if any, 
 was uttered by his followers, who, in our view, were the more culpable 
 party. He did not intentionally dishonour God, but foolishly imagined 
 himself, in some extraordinary manner, to be the subject of the 
 attributes of Deity; and whatever greatness he arrogated, or allowed his 
 followers to ascribe to him, it was not as James Naylor, but as a 
 supposed chosen vehicle of communicating the divine mind. Utterly 
 indefensible as all such phantasies must necessarily be, they do not 
 amount to the grave and serious crime of blasphemy. Besides, if he 
 
410 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 wei'e guilty of blasphemy, what divine sanction have earthly tribunals 
 to inflict punishment 1 Under a theocracy, when the divine glory was 
 visible, this heinous transgression was punishable with death by the 
 magistracy: but where, under the Christian economy, do we find the 
 least shadow of authority for human interference ? Were the Pharisees 
 (who were undoubtedly guilty of the highest degree of blasphemy) 
 maimed, and branded, and pilloried, and scourged ? Who were the 
 informers? the legislators? the judges? the executioners? the Reverend 
 Divines, who, because their ‘ ghostly admonitions ’ were disregarded, 
 participated in the cruel infliction ? Were they episcopalians ? or 
 presbyterians ? or independents ? In the case of James Naylor, even 
 Seyer is indignant. The Parliament, not being favourites, are con¬ 
 demned; and he justly pronounces the severity of the punishment, a 
 ‘perpetual disgrace,’ both to them and to the ministers of religion. 
 These cruelties were certainly more in unison with the tender mercies of 
 a Spanish Inquisition, than with the mild and benignant spirit of that 
 religion of the interests of which they fancied themselves the exclusive 
 conservators. The glory of the already fading Commonwealth was 
 tarnished, and the stain will never be eradicated.” * 
 
 Naylor’s trial lasted several days, and being “convicted of horrid 
 blasphemy, the House agreed to the following sentence (December 17th, 
 1656). Resolved, that James Naylor be set on the pillory with his 
 head in the pillory in the Palace-yard, Westminster, during the space of 
 two hours on Thursday next, and shall be whipt by the hangman 
 through the streets from Westminster to the Old Exchange, London; 
 and there likewise be set on the pillory with his head in the pillory for 
 the space of two hours, between the hours of eleven and one on 
 Saturday next, in each place wearing a paper containing an inscription 
 of his crimes; and that at the Old Exchange his tongue be bored 
 through with a hot iron, and that he be there also stigmatised in the 
 forehead with the letter B, and that he be afterwards sent to Bristol, 
 and be conveyed into and through the said city on horseback, bare- 
 ridged, with his face backward, and there also publickly whipt the next 
 market-day after he comes thither; and that from thence he be 
 committed to prison in Bridewell, London, and there restrained from 
 
 Fuller’s Dissent in Bristol, p. 261 to 264, 
 
HTSTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 411 
 
 the society of all people, and there to labour hard, till he shall be 
 released by Parliament; and during that time be debarred the use of 
 pen, ink, and paper, and shall have no relief, but what he earns by his 
 daily labours.” . . . “This inhuman sentence, (continues Mr. Seyer) 
 was fully executed on the unhappy maniac,” after which, and his final 
 “discharge from Bridewell, (London,) he returned to this city, and in a 
 meeting with some of his friends, he made a public recantation of his 
 errors in so affecting a manner, that they were convinced of the sincerity 
 of his repentance. He lived some time afterward in this city in a 
 serious and becoming manner, and died on a journey from hence to 
 Wakefield in Yorkshire, where he was born in 161G.” * 
 
 Without some account of this man it is conceived the present work 
 would be incomplete. Mr. Seyer tells us that “This city seems to have 
 been at that time a very hot bed of religious dissention. Quakerism 
 particularly prevailed here. (Besides whom), the leading sects were the 
 Presbyterians, the Anabaptists, and the Independents; and they were 
 in violent hostility to each other; as for the Church of England, it was 
 so entirely subdued (he says), as apparently to be forgotten. The 
 Presbyterians had gained the supremacy; most of the churches were 
 occupied by their ministers; theirs was in fact the established church.”f 
 The dissenters from the church which he regrets was “apparently to be 
 forgotten,” had too much reason to remember Laud, and his courts, to 
 wish the return to power of an arrogant hierarchy established by law. 
 “Some of the most nefarious acts of persecution which ever took place 
 in England were perpetrated here, and yet they are, for the most part, 
 passed by. Instances of the most heroic Christian endurance under 
 them were exhibited, and yet the historians of Bristol seem willingly 
 ignorant of them. Its civic grandeur, its commercial importance, the 
 siege and defence of its celebrated castle, and even its charitable and 
 benevolent institutions, are worthily remembered, but its struggles for 
 conscience sake, its sufferings for truth’s sake, and its invincible courage 
 in contending for a purer faith and worship, yet want an adequate 
 record.” + 
 
 * Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., pp. 491, 495. 
 
 + Ibid, p. 500. “The Church actually established may be described as an 
 irregular body made up of a few Presbyteries, and of many Independent 
 congregations, which were all held down and held together by the authority of 
 the government. ” Macaulay’s Hist, of England, vol. i., p. 159. 
 
 t Caston’s Independency in Bristol, p. 4. 
 
412 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 With the restoration of Charles II. to the throne of his fathers, came 
 also the restoration of Episcopacy, and its re-union to the State. 
 Indeed, although Charles I. had reluctantly assented to a bill which 
 deprived the bishops of their seats in the House of Lords, Episcopacy 
 had never been abolished by law. Since then the Established Church 
 had been revolutionised, both in government and worship; and it was, 
 at this time, in utter confusion; the position, too, of all religious bodies, 
 being peculiar. The election of a new House of Commons, however, 
 resulted in the return of a large majority of men of the Church party, 
 who were “zealous for Episcopacy and the bishops;” and, accordingly, 
 restored them to their former position in the Upper House of Parliament. 
 “Episcopal ordination was now, for the first time, made an indispensable 
 qualification for church preferment. About two thousand ministers of 
 religion, whose conscience did not suffer them to conform, were driven 
 from their benefices in one day. The dominant party exulting reminded 
 the sufferers that the Long Parliament, when at the height of its power, 
 had turned out a still greater number of Eoyalist divines. The 
 reproach was but too well founded: but the Long Parliament had at 
 least allowed to the divines whom it ejected a provision sufficient to 
 keep them from starving; and this example the Cavaliers, intoxicated 
 with animosity, had not the justice and humanity to follow.” * 
 
 Of the sufferings of these good men in Bristol, neither of our 
 historians make the least mention, nor have they even alluded to the 
 circumstance; although both Barrett and Seyer have carefully recorded 
 every thing known to them against the Nonconformists of the time, 
 relative to the ejectment of the Church ministers referred to above—the 
 latter writer, too, with aggravating circumstances; and he has not failed 
 to heap upon them every epithet of obloquy decorum would permit him 
 to make use of, not at all creditable to him as a clergyman, or 
 advantageous to him as a presumed impartial writer. 
 
 “In 1660, in consequence of the return of Charles the Second, 
 notwithstanding all his fair pretensions at Breda, the troubles of the 
 
 * Macaulay’s Hist, of England, vol. i., p. 176. “No settled provision was 
 made for those who should he deprived of their livings, but all were referred to 
 the royal clemency. A severity, which Burnet says was neither practised by 
 Queen Elizabeth in enacting the liturgy, nor by Cromwell in ejecting the 
 royalists ; in both which a fifth of the benefice was reserved for then- subsistence. ” 
 Neal’s Hist, of the Puritans, vol. ii., p. 517. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 413 
 
 church set in like a spring-tide. Nor were the presbyterians, who 
 valued themselves on their respectability, exempt. They, as well as the 
 baptists, were deprived of their place of worship; and, after having 
 spoken disparagingly of the poor baptists for meeting in private houses, 
 were themselves compelled to resort to the same humiliating expedient.”* 
 Subsequently, when commodious rooms were hired by them, for the 
 purposes of worship, the mayor ordered their pastors not to preach; 
 and because they dared not violate conscience by discontinuing the 
 exercise, they were seized by the military, imprisoned in the common 
 gaol of Newgate until tried at the sessions, when, of course, conviction 
 followed, and the despised Nonconformist was heavily fined or 
 imprisoned for the offence! the city authorities taking the initiative in 
 all such unworthy proceedings, which not unfrequently terminated in 
 the death of the victim. 
 
 The “Conventicle Act,” and that known as the “Five Mile Act,” 
 were not only fresh sources of annoyance, but the poor Dissenter, whom 
 they were passed specially to oppress, was made to feel the full force of 
 their infliction; for “ It (the former) forbade the Nonconformists to 
 frequent any conventicles, or places of worship not of the establishment, 
 and it imposed a scale of punishments ranging from three months’ 
 imprisonment to seven years transportation:” and we read that those 
 who were guilty of the heinous offence of attending such places of 
 worship, instead of their parish church, were incarcerated, and “the 
 close, unwholesome prisons were soon crammed with conscientious 
 victims, with men and women, with old and young.” f By the latter 
 act it was required that “every person in holy orders who had not 
 complied with the act of uniformity, should take the oath of passive 
 obedience, and bind himself against making efforts of any kind to 
 introduce change in the government of the church or the state. The 
 persons refusing this oath were prohibited from acting as tutors or 
 schoolmasters, and were not to be henceforth seen within five miles of 
 any city, corporate town, or borough sending a member to parliament. 
 By this means most of the ejected clergy were banished to obscure 
 
 * Fuller’s Dissent in Bristol, p. 36. 
 
 t Pictorial Hist, of England, vol. iii., p. 694. Neal’s Hist, of the Puritans, 
 vol. ii., p. 522. 
 
414 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 villages', where they were not only separated from their friends, but 
 generally surrounded by a people sunk in the grossest ignorance, and 
 sufficiently inclined to make them feel the effects of the most vulgar 
 and rancorous bigotry. This malignant statute was strenuously 
 supported by Sheldon, archbishop of Canterbury, and had the approval 
 of Clarendon.” * 
 
 The chief clerical persecutor of these poor people, in Bristol, was its 
 bishop, Gilbert Ironside, the elder, who was appointed to the see in 
 1660; and who was urged to carry out the Conventicle Act by the 
 archbishop just named, Gilbert Sheldon. The latter prelate, in a 
 circular letter dated May 7th, 1670, insisted on the necessity there was 
 for its execution, by saying, “It becomes us to endeavour, as much as 
 in us lies, the promoting of so blessed a work, ... by God’s help, 
 and the assistance of the civil power, considering the abundant care and 
 provisions this act contains for our great advantages.” f In furtherance 
 of the desire thus expressed, the bishop of Bristol pressed hard upon 
 the Dissenters in this city; his informers coming unexpectedly upon 
 them on “The first Lord’s day (March, 1670); and because we did not 
 know which way they would begin upon us, we shut our public 
 meeting-house door when we understood they were coming. Then they 
 fetched constables, and broke open the door, came in, and took our 
 names, for which some of us were brought before the magistrates and 
 convicted. Then, against the next Lord’s day, we broke a wall, up on 
 high, for a window, and put the speaker in the next house to stand and 
 preach, whereby we heard him as well as if in the room -with us. The 
 bishop’s informers come in again, take our names, for which we were 
 again brought before the mayor, and convicted. So they did the third 
 Lord’s day. And the fourth Lord’s day, the mayor himself, with his 
 officers and some aldermen, came upon us, and turned us out; but 
 seeing they could not make us refrain our meeting, they raised the 
 
 * Vaughan’s Hist. of England, pp. G03, 604. Appendix LXI. 
 
 + Doct. Annals, vol. ii., p. 276. “He sent another circular letter to all 
 the bishops of his province, in which he directs all ecclesiastical judges and 
 officers, breathing the most determined spirit of persecution against the non¬ 
 conformists, and exhibiting his lordship more like a father of the inquisition, or 
 the dragooning commission of Lewis XIV. when he revoked the edict of Nantz, 
 than a Christian and protestant bishop.” Neal’s Hist, of the Puritans, vol. ii., 
 p. 550. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 415 
 
 train bands every last day of the week, in the evening, one band to 
 keep us out of our places, and nailed up our doors, and put locks upon 
 them; so they kept us out by force and power, that we were fain to 
 meet in the lanes and highways for several months.” * 
 
 Guy Carleton, the next bishop of Bristol, was also a violent persecutor 
 of the Dissenters. Although advanced in years when elected to the 
 see, he resolved to destroy all their meetings in the city, where he said 
 he would not leave the trace of them; but being opposed in the doing 
 of it, he went to London, and complained to the king in person. The 
 monarch, after many fair words to the Nonconformists, some of whom 
 had followed the bishop to town, and leading them to hope for a 
 continuance of their liberties longer, “set forth a proclamation as 
 against papists, but in the latter end of it declared, that all the licences 
 formerly given to the dissenters were made void.” To this measure the 
 king was advised by the prelates, who had been summoned by his 
 majesty to confer with him about the settlement of religion. “Bishop 
 Carleton and his clergy greatly rejoiced, that now they should have 
 their wills on us (the dissenters); for now our foundation plea at law, 
 by licences, was taken away. Therefore the bishop, being come home, 
 and his tribe, very speedily begin vigorously to bestir themselves, and 
 lose no time; for the very same week this proclamation came down to 
 make void the licences, the bishop, with divers of his clergy,t got some 
 of the aldermen and some of the military officers together, and goes to 
 Mr. Thompson’s meeting, in the castle, upon the fourth day of the 
 week, his lecture in the middle of the week, being the tenth day of the 
 twelfth month; where finding of him preaching, they, after search, met 
 with him, where the people had conveyed him away, in another part of 
 the house, against the freeness of his own mind. And so they laid 
 hands on him, and brought him before the mayor, to his mansion 
 house, where, after long examination and discourse, about nine of the 
 clock at night, the mayor, bishop, and some aldermen commit Mr. 
 Thompson to Newgate prison for six months.” He was very sick and 
 ill when sent to gaol, “ and although divers persons of note in this city, 
 in the compassion of their hearts for this sick minister, did go to the 
 
 * Broadmead Records, p. 106. Neal’s Hist, of the Puritans, vol. ii., p. C05. 
 
 t Appendix LXII. 
 
416 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 mayor and sheriffs, and to Sir John Knight,* * * § to get leave that he might 
 be permitted to go home; but they could not prevail. And his 
 physician interceded that he might be removed out of that stinking 
 prison,t to some convenient house for air, and to administer somewhat 
 more conveniently to him, and he showed the danger of his condition; 
 yet, notwithstanding, they hardened their hearts, and would not grant 
 it, because the bishop would not give leave.” J Air. Thompson died a 
 prisoner in Newgate for conscience sake; a victim to the malice of Guy 
 Carleton, bishop of Bristol! Three other ministers were incarcerated 
 in the same prison, at the same time, and each for the space of six 
 months, at the instance of this persecuting prelate. 
 
 To instance the numerous acts of persecution, of various descriptions, 
 which the Nonconformists of Bristol underwent at the hands of Bishop 
 Carleton, the successive mayors of the city, with their sergeants, 
 constables, informers, and others, acting under their orders, would be 
 to write a separate volume on the subject. Suffice it to say here, that 
 others of their ministers, besides those before-mentioned, suffered 
 various terms of imprisonment, being separated from their families, 
 and confined in loathsome dungeons, for the sake of their religion. 
 Their places of meeting, of which there were four in Bristol, besides 
 that of the Society of Friends,§ were broken into, their property 
 destroyed, their pastors insulted and dragged from the pulpit to the 
 prison, their goods destrained to pay heavy fines, because they were 
 unable to discharge them in other ways—all of which severities were 
 not unfrequently sanctioned by the bishop in person! Yet, of the 
 sufferings of these men, neither Barrett nor Seyer has a word to say! 
 Had these sufferers been Churchmen there is too much reason to 
 believe that every minute particular relating to the enormities practised 
 upon them, would have been detailed by the last-named writer 
 especially; and the most unchristian names sought for by him, to brand, 
 
 * Appendix LXIII. + Appendix LXIY. 
 
 I Broadmead Records, pp. 220, 224 ; see also Garrard’s Life of Colston, 
 
 p. 290; and ante, p. 211. 
 
 § The severity of the measures against the Friends in Bristol, in one year 
 (1683), for not attending the service of the Established Church, in lines 
 inflicted upon them under the 35th of Elizabeth, amounted to no less than 
 £16,440. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 417 
 
 ■with deserved infamy, the memory of the perpetrators of such foul and 
 disgraceful outrages. * 
 
 Bishop Carleton was translated to Chichester in 1678, and died at 
 Westminster, July 6th, 1685. “The troubled sea of dissent was now 
 subsiding into a calm. James the Second, in prosecution of his 
 favourite design to re-establish popery, was artfully endeavouring to 
 propitiate the persecuted dissenters. Churchmen were disgraced, and 
 nonconformists uniformly soothed, flattered, and caressed. Never had 
 men a finer opportunity of revenge. Had they been so disposed, they 
 might, in this turn of the tide, have overwhelmed their episcopal 
 persecutors: but they were generous; and, influenced by the mild and 
 benignant principles they professed, they availed themselves of the 
 favourable gale, not to bear down upon the enemy, but to renew their 
 intercourse with heaven, of the external symbols of which they had 
 been unjustly deprived.” + 
 
 “ King Charles II. being resolved, as far as he was able, to govern 
 the kingdom, as an Absolute Monarch, among several expedients 
 practised for this purpose, seized on the Charters of most of the 
 Corporations of England, that thus he might bring the election of all 
 the municipal magistrates and common-council men and members of 
 Parliament within the power of the king. Early in the year 1682-3 he 
 began with the city of London, (and soon) proceeded with Bristol,” 
 setting forth that “the Mayor, Burgesses, and Commonalty had been 
 guilty of some ^regularities, and calling on them to answer before the 
 court, by what warrant they claim to be a Corporation, after having 
 thus broken their charter. The Common-council after much debating 
 agreed to surrender their charter, so far as related to the election of 
 officers, and throw themselves on the King’s mercy. The king kept 
 the liberties of the city in his hands until June 2, 1684, when he 
 granted another charter, in which he reserved to the crown the right of 
 removing any member of the Common-council or other officer of the 
 
 * Should the reader wish to verify the truth of these statements, he may 
 advantageously consult the “ Broadmead Records, Edited for The Hansard 
 Knollys Society, with an Historical Introduction by Edward Bean Underhill,” 
 a copy of which is preserved, for reference, in the Bristol City Library. 
 Appendix LXV. 
 
 t Fuller’s Dissent in Bristol, p. 166. 
 
418 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Corporation.” * This power of removing any member of the corporation, 
 or its officers, at the pleasure of the Crown, was renounced by Queen 
 Anne, July 24th, 1710, at which time she granted a new charter to 
 the city, and confirmed all its former privileges. 
 
 This new charter of Queen Anne’s is usually called “The Great 
 Charter,” because by it a free pardon was granted to the mayor and 
 other officers, for having executed their offices without royal authority. 
 By it, also, the corporation liberties were confirmed and enlarged; and 
 it ordains, too, “that Bristol remains for ever a city corporate, and 
 county of itself; and that its magistrates hold government over all its 
 boundaries, by land and water; that the body corporate be known and 
 distinguished as the mayor, burgesses, and commonalty of the city of 
 Bristol; in short, this charter fully confirms every useful regulation, 
 and every important branch of municipal right conferred on the city 
 and corporation by former monarchs.” 
 
 Bristol, as a place of trade and commerce, was, from an early period 
 of its history, second only to London, in the whole of this country; it 
 is now, however, exceeded by the port of Liverpool. In the turbulent 
 reign of Stephen it was “one of the richest (towns) in England, 
 receiving merchandize from neighbouring and foreign places; (and it 
 was) the most famous place of commerce in the kingdom, next to 
 London, frequented by merchants of many nations.” Among others 
 that are mentioned we find the names of Genoa, Spain, France, 
 Flanders, and Norway, as already noticed. In addition to other places 
 with which they traded, the merchants of Bristol also “sailed twice a 
 year to Newfoundland a fishing.” 
 
 This miscellaneous trafficking with the other maritime states of 
 Europe continued to increase throughout the middle ages. The 
 woollen trade, before mentioned, no longer flourishes, but Bristol is 
 now engaged in the manufacture of cotton fabrics, for the making of 
 which a large mass of buildings has been erected in the out-parish of 
 St. Philip and Jacob, in which about one thousand seven hundred 
 hands are employed. In the making of brass, too,—which compound 
 metal was first manufactured, in this country, at Baptist Mills, near 
 
 Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 521. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 419 
 
 this city, but since removed to Keynsham, four miles distant—a large 
 trade is done, the article made by the company engaged in it being 
 esteemed superior to that produced at other places. Here, too, are 
 manufactories of patent shot, which is in great demand both for home 
 and foreign use; and also of iron, lead, glass, floor-cloth, and other 
 articles. Soap manufactured in Bristol is decidedly preferred to that of 
 other makers. Here also are. potteries of great extent, distilleries of 
 considerable magnitude, and sugar refineries probably unequalled in the 
 world—that established by the late Conrad Finzel,* at Counterslip, 
 being the largest. Coal, too, is procured in the vicinity of Bristol in 
 great abundance, and is readily conveyed to the city, by the different 
 railways constructed here, either for home consumption or for export, f 
 Here are large yards for ship-building, and from them have been 
 launched the “Great Western,” and the “Great Britain,” steamships, 
 with many other vessels of considerable magnitude and great interest.^ 
 In the year 1803, an Act of Parliament was obtained for converting 
 the rivers Avon and Froom into a Floating Harbour, by cutting a new 
 course for the Avon, from the line of the city boundary eastward to the 
 Hotwells; the excavating for which was commenced in a meadow near 
 where the city gaol now stands, about eight hundred labourers being 
 soon engaged upon the work. The expenses, in a very short time, 
 amounted to £93,249; the monies received were £94,218, and the work 
 proceeded with rapidity. In 1809 the docks were completed, and the 
 whole now forms a very extensive and commodious float, being two 
 miles and a-half in length, and covering eighty-two acres of ground. 
 At all hours of the day, ships can now pass to the quay of the city, 
 and discharge their cargoes into warehouses, while afloat. The expense 
 of forming this accommodation for the shipping frequenting the port, 
 amounted to upwards of £600,000.§ 
 
 Bristol is well supplied with water by a company which was 
 incorporated in 1846, the supply being procured from Chewton Mendip, 
 East Harptree, and Barrow, in Somersetshire, and conveyed to the 
 city through large pipes or tubes, from which, by means of smaller 
 ones, a liberal quantity is spread over the city and neighbourhood. 
 
 * Appendix LXYI. + Appendix LXVII. 
 
 t Appendix LXVTIL § Appendix LXIX. 
 
 F F 2 
 
420 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Gas has been used in Bristol for many years, Mr. John Breillat, a dyer 
 in Broadmead, having lighted his shop window with coal gas so early 
 as 1811, which gas he made himself on the premises. He sub¬ 
 sequently lectured on the subject, and gave it as his opinion that at no 
 distant day coal gas would be used for the purposes of general 
 illumination’; and to shew that such could be easily effected, and the oil 
 lamps in our streets entirely superseded, he erected some lamps himself 
 in one of our thoroughfares, and burnt gas in them for a time at his 
 own expense. From this small beginning rose the Bristol Gaslight 
 Company (which was the second formed in England), a few gentlemen 
 taking the matter up, and in 1819 obtaining an act of incorporation. 
 From that time, until his death, Mr. Breillat was the much-respected 
 engineer of the company,—which company, with great skid, uutiring 
 energy, and indefatigable industry, for forty years, it was his pleasure 
 to serve. At the first meeting of that body after his decease, they passed 
 this resolution unanimously:— 
 
 “That this board hereby embraces the first opportunity of their assembling 
 since the decease of their engineer, Mr. John Breillat, to record the expression 
 of the very great esteem in which they hold the memory of their departed 
 friend, not only as regards the moral excellencies and strict integrity of his 
 character, but also in evidence of their high appreciation of the sound practical 
 intelligence, the persevering industry, and the warm desire to promote the best 
 interest of the company, which he unceasingly exhibited for the long period of 
 nearly 40 years, during which (after having been the chief instrument in its 
 establishment) he conducted to a successful issue the engineering operations 
 which were entrusted to his care.” 
 
 He was interred in the Bristol Cemetery, where there is a monument 
 to his memory with this inscription:— 
 
 ‘ ‘ Sacred 
 
 to the Memory of 
 John Breillat, 
 
 Civil Engineer. 
 
 He originally introduced Gas 
 into the city of Bristol in 1811, 
 
 Founded the present 
 Gas Light Company, 
 and remained its zealous and 
 able Engineer till his death, 
 which took place 14th April, 1856, 
 in the 86th year of his age. 
 
 His many public and 
 private virtues endeared him 
 to all who knew him.” 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 421 
 
 “ Bristol had the privilege of holding two fairs in the year, each (of 
 which were formerly) to continue eight days, one on the 25th July, in 
 the spacious church-yard of St. James, the other on the 25th January 
 in Temple Street, the times now changed by act of Parliament 1761, to 
 the 1st March and 1st September : here was usually a great sale of 
 every thing in the woollen manufacture, cloth coarse and fine, rugs, 
 blankets, stockings, &c., for exportation; as also of Birmingham wares, 
 &c., from the several manufactories; also leather at the Back Hall, 
 besides all the pageantry of female ornaments, dresses, trinkets, &c., 
 usually displayed on these occasions.” * 
 
 For centuries past these fairs appear to have been a source of 
 annoyance to the legitimate trader, and various were the petitions 
 presented against their continuance. They were, however, regarded as 
 of so much importance, that their extinction, it was thought by 
 interested parties, would involve “ the utter undoyng and destruction of 
 the Towne of Bristowe for ever.” One petition was from “ the 
 Merchaunts and Others of Bristowe against the flay re at Candlemas.” 
 Another was “ The Complaynt of us Grocers Inhabitants of Bristowe 
 agaynst Candlemas ffayre there holden.” A third was “ The Complaynt 
 of the Drapers of Bristowe and Taylors of the same,” against the same 
 fair ; a fourth that of “ The Mercers fishmongers and Skinners,” &c. 
 To these several petitions were appended “ The names of the Councell 
 of the Towne of Bristowe which upon the examynacion of the good 
 occupiers merchaunts and others above uamed craftsmen, which 
 thynketh mete the said ffayre holden at the ffeest of the Purificacion of 
 our Lady to be extynipryshed and utterly to be dissolved.” f All these 
 petitions, however, seem to have failed in effecting the object sought 
 for, and it remained for a gentleman of this city, in our own day, to 
 accomplish what was so ardently desired by the petitioners of centuries 
 long past. To Mr. James Wood, a member of the Town Council, a few 
 years ago (1837), belongs the honour of achieving the suppression of 
 this abomination to the guardians of the morals of our youth, and the 
 lovers of order and decorum. The fairs are now held for Live Stock, 
 Leather, and Wool only; the dancing booths, mountebanks, and jugglers, 
 with their attendant profanities, having disappeared, we hope, for ever, j 
 
 * Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 104. 
 f Proceedings of the Archaeological Institute, 1851, pp. 80, 85. 
 
 £ Appendix LXX. 
 
422 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Besides the civil commotions in which the people of Bristol have 
 been engaged from time to time, there are tumultuous proceedings 
 recorded in their history which may more properly be designated riots, 
 and are generally known by that name. Mr. Seyer has named some 
 which occurred before the Civil Wars of Charles I., but as they rest 
 entirely on the authority of local manuscript calendars, in which no 
 reliance can be placed, they are here regarded as unworthy of credit, as 
 all such documents are in these pages, and treated accordingly. The 
 unhappy differences between King Charles and his Parliament having 
 been reviewed, as far, at least, as Bristol is concerned, as well as the 
 religious disorders which prevailed in this city in the reigns of his two 
 sons, I pass on to notice the disturbance which took place here on the 
 coronation day of King George I., in August, 1714'; and to prevent the 
 charge of party bias being applied to me in the matter, I subjoin a 
 verbatim account of this riot, published from the manuscript of “ A 
 Gentleman who attended the Commission ,” for the trial of the rioters, and 
 therefore likely to be disinterested in what he records. It is as follows:—* 
 
 “THE BRISTOL RIOT, containing I. A Full and Particular 
 Account of the Riot in General, with several Material Circumstances 
 Preceding, and Contributing to it. II. The whole Proceedings relating 
 to the Tryel of the Rioters, before Judge Powys, Judge Tracey, and 
 Air. Baron Price. By a Gentleman who attended the Commission. 
 London: Printed for J. Roberts, near the Oxford-Arms in Warwick 
 Lane, 1714. 
 
 “Sir, “Bristol, Friday Novemb. 26. 1714. 
 
 “I am resolv’d to perform my Promise to you before I left London, 
 to give you an Account of what we went about, the Riot at this Place; 
 but my constant Attendance on my Lord, as it has given me an 
 Opportunity to be well inform’d of every Particular, so it obliges 
 me to shorten my Relation, by leaving out several Things that would 
 be very entertaining, and inserting what’s Material 3 we arrived here 
 on Thursday, having met with a different Reception according to the 
 
 * All the words which are printed in Italics appear so in the original, and 
 those only. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 423 
 
 different Sentiments People had of our Journey, but it must be own’d 
 that the far greater number of his Majesty’s Subjects paid due Respect 
 to the Commission, and wish’d the Judges well in the Discharge of it, 
 as looking upon it to be an Affair of the greatest Consequence to the 
 Peace of the Kingdom. 
 
 “My Lords have done little as yet, but prepare Matters for the 
 Tryal, of which you will have a full and faithful Account from me. 
 I cannot however stay till the close of it, without satisfying your 
 Impatience, to know the true History of this troublesome Business, 
 and it happens that no Body can give you better Information, I 
 having been several times in Company with Mr. Stevens, where the 
 Mob began their Treasonable and Felonious Assault, with Mr. Whiting, 
 the Under-Sheriff, and the Reverend Mr. Gough, a Minister of Sense, 
 Learning and Integrity, and by means of my Friend Mr. Legg, who is 
 Keeper of Newgate, having acquainted myself with the Characters and 
 Behaviour of the Criminals before and since their being in his Custody. 
 The Informations I shall get from them, you will receive by the Post; 
 I will not stay till I return, for ’twill then be too late to do any 
 Service, if you intend, as you hinted, to publish these Memoirs. I 
 hear there are several Persons sent down on purpose, to pick up Scraps 
 of Intelligence, but they are ordinary Fellows of no Acquaintance, and 
 have no opportunities to come at a perfect knowledge of the Matter. 
 
 You will do well to let Mr. R- have my Accounts of Fact, to be 
 
 put into Order by some Friend of his, that the World may not be 
 impos’d upon by false and trifling Relations. 
 
 “Since I began my Letter to you, a Friend of Mr. Stevens was with 
 me, and telling me he had drawn out a complcat Account of the Riot 
 as it related to him, to send it to a Merchant of London, a Particular 
 Acquaintance. I desir’d him to let me have a Copy of that Letter, 
 which he very readily granted, and I shall send it herewith, if I can 
 get it Copy’d in time before the Post goes. 
 
 “ You may assure Mr. II- ’tis genuine, for it will be taken 
 
 Verbatim, and I believe it would give the World more satisfaction to 
 see it in his own Words than in any other. 
 
 “There arc some things previous to this Business, which ’tis requisite 
 you should know, to let you into the Temper and Spirit of the Citizens 
 of this Place. 
 
424 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 “They have among them a sort of Club, who call themselves the 
 Loyal Society , and have under that Name sent up several foolish 
 Addresses in favour of Arbitrary Power , Hereditary Right and Sacheverel, 
 they are very officious on all High Church Festivals, and make more 
 Noise, drink more Beer, and swear more Oaths than half the rest of 
 their Fellow-Citizens. These Wretches, ’tis thought, fomented the late 
 Riot, which they durst not do, if they were not satisfy’d of the 
 peaceable and dutiful Disposition of their Opponents, for four in five of 
 the Sober, Honest, Thriving part of the Magistrates and Citizens of 
 Bristol, are Whigs. And the Tories cou’d never have carry’d any 
 Point here, but by the Interest of a very great Tory, and ’till lately 
 
 Nonjuror, Mr. C-, who has shewn how far he prefers good Works to 
 
 Purity of Life, by laying out some Thousands of Pounds in building 
 Hospitals here, while himself liv’d very much at his Ease with a Tory, 
 
 tho’ of a different Sex at M-ke.* ' The appearance of such good 
 
 Deeds acquir’d him so general a Name here, that the People forgot he 
 
 was a Jacobite, and every one agreed, that Mr. C- was the best 
 
 Man in the World to represent them, and his countenancing the 
 Jacobite Interest, made the Faction rampant in a Place to which he 
 had been so great a Benefactor.f 
 
 “This ’tis necessary you should be acquainted with, to remove any 
 wrong Opinion you may conceive of the Citizens of Bristol, who I find 
 very Loyal to His Majesty, and very thankful to Providence for having 
 the Protestant Succession secured to them: Nay, the Seamen and the 
 common People are generally very good Protestants, and ’tis only the 
 Rotten, Thievish, Drunken part of them that were concern’d in this 
 Riot. Neither durst these have stood, but that of late their Leaders 
 have engag’d the Colliers of Kingswood in their Interest, and whenever 
 they want them, those filthy Ruffians are ready to enter the City to 
 their Assistance; as they did about Two Years ago,J when they were 
 vigorously opposed by that brave Soldier and excellent Lawyer, Major 
 Wade, whom they had the Insolence to assault at the Head of the 
 
 * However reluctant the reader may be to credit these assertions, there 
 can be no doubt that the person referred to was Edward Colston, the founder of 
 Colston’s Hospital, &c., and other charities in this city. 
 
 f Appendix LXXI. 4 Appendix LXXII. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 425 
 
 Militia, but upon his offering to Fire, the Rogues scamper’d, doing all 
 the Mischief they cou’d in their Flight. These High Church Colliers 
 hardly ever heard of Religion, till Cheverel (Sacheverel) was the Word, 
 given them by the Faction, and as they will do any thing for Drink, 
 the Faction take care to give them enough of it when they are wanted. 
 
 “As I passed through Kingswood, which is not above three Miles 
 from the City, I saw several of the Brood of these black Bigots, who 
 begg’d at the side of our Coach, and sang us Songs bare-headed and 
 bare-legg’d for a Mile together. ’Twas in Dependence of the 
 Kingswood Reinforcement, that the Bristol Rioters were so impudent, 
 and the Neighbourhood of such Rogues shews how necessary the Care 
 of our Government is to put an End to such Mischiefs by condign 
 Punishment. True, there’s still so much Spirit among the Faction, 
 that they look on the Process of the Law, as a very great Hardship; 
 and so indeed it must seem to be to Rascals that have been Lawless 
 for these four Years past, but as every thing is carry’d on with the 
 greatest Justice, Equality and Moderation. 
 
 “’Tis only from the Mouths of the Enemies to the Constitution that 
 a Word or a Whisper is heard against the Commission, the justest and 
 most necessary one that ever was given out by the Crown. Some 
 harden’d Creatures there are, who think ’tis Cruel to be Just. What 
 they or their Brethren are, the Criminals own’d before we came down; 
 They not only banter’d the Commission, but threaten’d to insult it. 
 About a Fortnight ago came hither Four Coaches with Six Horses that 
 had left a Hearse behind them at the Half-way House between this 
 City and Bath. The Faction imagining those Coaches brought the 
 Commission, and seeing no Attendants, thinking they might be 
 Insolent with Impunity, as if the Government was afraid of them, 
 some of them cry’d out, No Jefferies , No Western Assizes, but not a 
 Word of that now. They are all hush’d, and the Proceedings are 
 carry’d on with so much Tenderness and Uprightness, that the Tongues 
 of the greatest Jacobites are ty’d, and the Criminals are left to the Law. 
 
 “When the Peace was Proclaim’d here, the above mentioned Loyal 
 Society were very tumultuous in their Joy, and the Scum of the 
 Rabble broke the Windows of all those that did not Illuminate them 
 on that odious Occasion. 
 
426 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 “It is not to be forgotten, that at the last Election, when Sir 
 William Daines stood for Member of Parliament, the Mob, in a most 
 barbarous manner, insulted all his Friends, abusing and wounding 
 
 them. The Sheriff, Mr. -, the Bookseller at the Tolsel, taking no 
 
 more care to suppress the Disorders of the City than those of his own 
 
 Family. The Rabble threatened to break into the House of Mr. -, 
 
 one of Sir William Daines’s Friends, to gut it and murder the Master 
 of it. They were assisted in this by the Kingswood Colliers before- 
 mention’d, and had not Joseph Earl, Esq., one of the Members of this 
 City, and not at all in Sir Williams’ Interest, enter’d the House and 
 defended it all Night in Person, the Mob who had broke it up and was 
 got into the Court-Yard, would tlfen have begun then - Tragical Riots 
 and Traitorous Insurrection, even in the last Reign of Peace and late 
 
 glorious Administration, which order’d Mr.-to be prosecuted for 
 
 Defending himself, and Mr. Earl was so just as to leave the Parliament 
 to go to Gloucester Assizes, on purpose to appear for him. The 
 Innocent were, in those Times, prosecuted for the Guilty, but Justice 
 and Truth will now take Place, and Righteousness prevail in these 
 Courts for ever. 
 
 “I would not keep you so long from the main Subject of my Letter, 
 the last Riot, but to shew you from what Seeds it rose, and by what 
 Party encourag’d, that the Shame and Guilt of it may be laid in the 
 right place. The same mutinous and debauch’d Party have been 
 supported here by some ill Teachers, whose Duty it is to teach Charity 
 and Love. They are proud of imitating the Example of Parson 
 Thompson, Preacher of St. Thomas’s Parish in this City, who outdid 
 even Sacheverel himself, in crying up Arbitrary Power, and asserting 
 Tyranny to be Christianity. 
 
 “This Man was always foremost on any Mutinous Occasion, and us’d 
 to appear at the Head of the High-Church Rabble on those laudable 
 Anniversaries the 29th of May and 30th of January, when Fanatical 
 Dogs and Presbyterian Rogues were the best Words that came out of his 
 Mouth, and Down with 'em, no Popish Plot, no Monmouth was the Cry. 
 For which, and two or three Addresses of Abhorrence of the Rights 
 and Liberties of the Subject, he was made Dean of that Place,* but 
 
 * He was installed Dean of Bristol, May 25th, 1684, in the reign of 
 Charles II.; and died November 29th, 1085, in that of James II. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 427 
 
 the House of Commons sent for him up, had him brought upon his 
 Knees before them, Voted him a Betrayer of the Privileges of the 
 People of England, and, I think they say, sent him to Newgate; 
 however, his Deanery made amends for all; and several little Parsons 
 imitating both his Morals and Principles, having taken the Preaching 
 up Hereditary, Indefeasible, Unalienable Bight to be the High Road to 
 Preferment, flattering themselves, that because Thompson was made a 
 Dean, and Sacheverel Rector of St. Andrew’s, that they may at least 
 become Canons and Prebends, by crying up Church and Church, till 
 they set their Hearers together by the Ears, as they did here, which is 
 the only way to bring it into real Danger. 
 
 “ Here are several Pious and Learned Divines wdio adorn the Doctrine 
 they profess, particularly the Reverend Mr. Bedford of Temple Church, 
 who wrote against the Stage, but these are, forsooth, Presbyterians in 
 their Hearts. And if a Man has any Sobriety of Manners or Sweetness 
 
 of Temper, D - him, cry the Leaders of this Mob, he's a Fanatick, 
 
 as if it was inconsistent with a good Churchman to be either Charitable 
 or Sober, tho’ to be so is the noblest Characteristick of a Church of 
 England Man, as being a Son of the purest Church in the Christian 
 World. The Truth is, the Bristol Mob, like the other English Rabble 
 since Sacheverel's Seditious Progresses, do not mean the Church or 
 Religion in their Riots and Insurrections; it would be preposterous, that 
 either they or their Leaders, who are every where Fellows of the most 
 wicked and scandalous Lives and Characters, shou’d be at all concern’d 
 for the Doctrines of our Orthodox and National Church, W'hich are all 
 pure and peaceable; ’tis a Sham, and the most absurd and ridiculous 
 one that ever poor stupid Souls were abus'd with, but it has put Words 
 in the Mouths of the Rabble here, which they have basely misapply’d, 
 and cry’d out Church and Church, when their Design was nothing else 
 but Jacobitism, that is, Popery and Plunder; for cou’d any one in his 
 Senses imagine, that the Friends of the Church of England could be 
 afraid of Disturbances in a city where there are Twenty Churches, and 
 but One or Two Presbyterian Meetings. Here are, ’tis true, abundance 
 of Quakers, who do not however much increase the Whig Interest, as 
 they call it, so many of them falling in with Pen, who is originally of 
 this Country, Marry’d his Wife here, and his Father Sir William Pen 
 bury’d in Radcliff Church, with a noble Monument over him. 
 
428 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 “ You will wonder how I could collect so many Particularities in so 
 little time, but 'twill not surprise you when I tell you, that most of them 
 
 were already methodiz’d by the Reverend Mr. -, who had done it 
 
 for Helps to his Memory, himself intending an Account of this Affair 
 from the beginning to the end, and in most Places of this Letter, he not 
 only assisted me with his Memoirs, but with his Hand. 
 
 “ What contributed as much as anything to the Ferment here, was 
 the Disposition of the late Lord Lieutenant of Bristol, the Duke of 
 
 B-, who was so lavish of his own and the Publick’s Money in the 
 
 last Elections to serve the White-Staff, the Purse and the Mitre, who 
 were serving their Queen and Country in the manner their Historians 
 told us: ’Tis said here, that Lord— spent near 19000 Pounds to make 
 such Members of Parliament as were grateful to those Worthy Managers 
 and that they very ungratefully let almost half of it go out of his own 
 Pocket. ’Tis not to be doubted, but part of the expended Money was 
 scattered here, for the Faction, as I have observ’d,-are as Poor as they 
 are Pestilent, and could not have got such Mobs together without 
 Foreign Supplies, and the Encouragement of a Lord of his Name and 
 Interest, did doubtless, agitate the Minds of those unthinking people. 
 
 “ "When he dy’d, there was plainly a damp on their Spirit for a time, 
 and the Friends to the Protestant Succession recover’d Heart, insomuch 
 that upon the Staff’s being remov’d, the Joy of the Citizens seem’d to 
 be unanimous, and the satisfaction at the Change appear’d in every Face 
 that made any Appearance at all. 
 
 “ The News of the Queen’s Death (Queen Anne) was receiv’d here 
 with a suitable Concern, and when His Majesty (George I.) was 
 Proclaim’d, everyone strove to outdo his Neighbour in Demonstrations 
 of Loyalty and Affection to the Government. The Mayor, Aldermen, 
 the two Sheriffs, Mr. Beecher and Mr. Swymmer, the Reverend and 
 Honourable Mr. Booth, Dean of Bristol, several Country Gentlemen of 
 the Neighbourhood in the Commission of the Peace, and all the Clergy 
 who were then in Bristol, assisted at the Ceremony which was perform’d 
 at the Tolsel, with great marks of Duty and Zeal; nay, the very Officers 
 
 whom the Duke of B-had put over the Militia, seem’d to be as 
 
 Joyous and as Loyal as the rest of the honest Citizens; the Conduits 
 ran Wine, the Houses were illuminated at Night, and the People in 
 general conceiv’d Hopes that the Differences which had been cherish’d 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 429 
 
 by the Intrigues of the Staff wou’d have had an end; especially there 
 being but one Nest of Papists in the City, and but few Nonjurors, no 
 Body then mention’d the Pretender but with Contempt and Defiance, 
 which is indeed the true and natural inclinations of this Trading 
 Protestant People. 
 
 “ How comes it then, you’ll say, that Eleven Weeks after, this 
 Insurrection should be made here by Jacobites1 Why, in answer to this, 
 you must be content with the Fact and the Reflection of my good 
 Friend, Mr.-, that this Riot running with such a sudden and sur¬ 
 
 prising Violence thro’ most parts of this Kingdom, ’tis look’d upon as 
 the last Convulsion of a desperate dying Faction, and that they had 
 secretly been working to have it kindled to a Commotion. 
 
 “On that happy Day, the King’s Coronation, which was to put an 
 end to their Hopes for ever, the latent Seeds of Sedition planted by 
 the means before mention’d, broke out here and elsewhere, to be 
 blasted and die by the Laws and Hands of Justice : And if the making 
 Examples of the Criminals does put a stop to their Crime, the little 
 Trouble it has given the Nation will sufficiently be made amends for. 
 
 “Having thus prepar’d the way for the Account I intend you, I 
 proceed to enter into the Particulars of that and the Tryal. 
 
 “In the Evening of the Coronation-Day, several worthy Gentlemen 
 made an Appointment to meet in the Great Room of the Custom-House, 
 a very noble new Edifice in Queen-Square in the City. There was to 
 be a Ball and Collation, and the Citizens of the best Fashion of both 
 Sexes made their Appearance there in Honour of the Day. Bonfires 
 were prepared in several Parts of the City. The Windows were 
 generally illuminated, and every one thought Night would have ended 
 as Joyfully as that of the Proclamation did. But the Jacobites having 
 very probably had their Instructions from the Heads of their Faction 
 were prepar’d to disturb the Solemnity, which however those Robbers 
 and Rioters durst not have done, had not the Citizens crowded so much 
 to the Custom-House to share in the Loyal Diversions there. Nor 
 would the Enemies to the Government have been able to get their 
 Crew together at all, unless they had enflam’d the Staunch Part of the 
 Rabble with a Notorious Lye, that an Effigies of Sacheverel was made 
 and lodg’d in a Whig House, with Intention to have it burnt. What 
 a horrid parcel of Mischiefs has that worthless Man been the occasion 
 
430 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 of? And what an Eternal Scandal has he brought on an Honest 
 Name 1 ’Tis great Pity the Nation must be bully’d by a Person that 
 every wise and good Man detests or despises; for those that made use 
 of him for their own wicked Purposes thought him, as the Staff owns, 
 a Man of no Worth, and indeed had he had the least Grain of Sense, 
 he would never have done their vile Drugery, or have had the 
 Effronterie to shew his Head afterwards. Let me digress a little on 
 this Occasion, and I’ll have done with the Doctor, who, as I have heard 
 told since I came here, was going about a new Progress from Oxford, 
 under pretence of meeting Sir Con. his noble Advocate, coming from 
 his Irish Expedition. 
 
 “At Birmingham there was a Riot not so fatal, but as numerous as 
 this at Bristol. The Doctor having given a Sermon at Sutton, and 
 hal’d after him Two hundred of the Rabble of the Town. I do not 
 say ’twas at Sutton, where one Mr. Sacheverel lives, to whom this 
 Rector pretends to be Related, whereas indeed Sacheverel of Holbom 
 was the Son of one of Marlborough, and he the Son of Mr. Sacheverel, 
 an honest Presbyterian Parson of Wincaunton in this Country, where 
 the good Man’s Effigies was actually burnt by the Tantivy-Men, during 
 the Civil Wars; but the Whigs are not for imitating those Wretches in 
 anything. While Sacheverel was in Warwickshire, he was visited by 
 several of the Neighb’ring Yeoman, and some of the Inferiour Gentry, 
 among whom was one Mr. Willis, a Papist, whom the Doctor greeted 
 in a very rude manner; for being apprehensive that the Flying-Post, or 
 some other of his good Friends, would tell what Company he was in, 
 he went up to Mr. Willis, and said, as I am informed here, I wonder 
 how you dare come to see me, knowing who I am, and what an Injury it 
 may do me to be seen where you are. Mr. Willis reply’d, You are very 
 much mistaken if you think I come out of Respect to see you. I did it, 
 as I suppose every Body else here did, to stare at you as a Monster; yet 
 did the Name of that very Man do all that has been done here, and 
 other Parts of the Kingdom, and indeed whatever has been done 
 Insolently and Mischievously against the Government, since his present 
 Majesty’s Accession to the Throne. 
 
 “ Here the Cry was, God bless Dr. Sacheverel; What must that un¬ 
 worthy Man think of himself for the Occasion of so much Mischief! 
 What Murders, what robberies have been committed in his Name, and 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 431 
 
 yet he is as much delighted with the Huzzas the Riotous Mobs give 
 him, as John (James) Naylor the Quaker of Old was, when he enter’d 
 this City, a Crowd of Blasphemous Men Women and Children attending 
 him, and saying Hosanna, for which the Bump (parliament) had him 
 fairly whipp’d and punished, with other wholesome Severities. 
 
 “The Fellows that cry’d Sacheverel, were for the most part Drunk, 
 and their Stupidity may be imagined by their mistaking his Majesty’s 
 Loyal Subjects for Commonwealths — men, Down with the Round Heads, 
 being another Part of their Cry. They broke the Windows that were 
 illuminated, especially Mr. Whiting's the Under-Sheriff, who had given 
 them Offence by shewing himself Hearty in the prosecuting one of their 
 Gang, an Abandon’d perjur’d Wretch. 
 
 “ They also demolish'd Mr. Jefferies's Windows, hating him for his 
 distinguish’d Loyalty to our present Gracious Sovereign. But the 
 Violence of the Storm fell on Captain Steven's Father’s House. 
 
 “ I was in Hopes to have sent you his own Letter before mention’d; 
 but I shall not have Time to procure it, wherefore you must be 
 contented with the following Account of the Attack made on Mr. 
 Stevens's House, as it was sent by an Acquaintance of Captain Stevens's, 
 to a Merchant in London, three or four Days after the Riot was 
 committed.” 
 
 “ Sir, 
 
 “ You may remember the promise I made you, of giving you 
 the best Account I cou’d get of the very beginning of the Bristol Riot, 
 which I think I have in my power to oblige you with now, as follows, 
 
 “ On the day of His Majesty King George’s Coronation, some time 
 before Night, a small party of Rioters appear’d before the House of 
 Air. Stevens,* a Baker, a very wealthy and Eminent Citizen of Bristol, 
 and who has always distinguish’d himself in the Election of Whig 
 Members for the said City. Mrs. Stevens happen’d to be at her Door 
 when they came, and was assaulted forthwith by one of them, who had 
 a Broomstick in his Hand, and then upon her crying out, they thought 
 fit to retire ; as they ^went off, some of the Neighbourhood over-heard 
 
 * The name in the original is spelt Stephens —but here, for the sake of uni¬ 
 formity, the same as in the narrative. 
 
432 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 them say, They'd be with them again in the Evening, which they reported 
 to Mrs. Stevens, and desired them to secure their House; accordingly in 
 the Evening they came, as they promis’d, and found every thing ready 
 for their reception. As good fortune would have it, Capt. Stevens, the 
 Son of Mrs. Stevens, a West-India Captain, had invited some Country 
 Gentlemen to a Bowl of Punch to his Father’s and was making merry 
 in the back part of the House when the Rioters came. At first they 
 try’d all the fair means imaginable to pacify them; (You will have 
 heard that the Pretence was an Effigies of Sacheverel, which was reported 
 to have been in Mr. Stevens’s House,) the People within offer'd them to 
 search, but they would hear nothing of it, when Mr. Stevens found they 
 came rather for Plunder than for the pretended Picture, he show’d them 
 how he and his Friends were ready to receive them if they attempted 
 to break in. The Rioters however took no notice of this warning, but 
 broke tumultuously in, and began to do all the Ill they could. The 
 Captain indeed, who guarded the passage of his Parlour, had a Piece 
 well loaded, and let fly among them as he promis’d; this startled the 
 Rioters a little, who after having pillag’d and plunder’d to their utmost 
 below, retir’d. What Damages in particular they did I can’t learn, but 
 the Till Money, which amounted to near Twenty Pounds, and all the 
 Plate they could come at, with the ruin of all the Liquors they found 
 below, we are certaiu of. The next day the Rioters differ’d among 
 themselves, and returned all the Plate. 
 
 “ I should here add, that they return'd again to Air. Stevens with 
 a resolution to do more Mischief, but the Captain, with his Friends, 
 being ready for them at the Stair hedd, some of the Rioters, out of an 
 apprehension of the Captain and his Friends being Charg’d with 
 Blunderbusses above, ouce more fled. ’Tis said the Peice which the 
 Captain discharg’d had a good effect, for one of the Rioters, who 
 pretended he got a slight Wound with a Sword the Coronation Evening, 
 dy’d the following day, and ’tis generally thought ’twas owing to that 
 Discharge the Captain made. 
 
 “ The Rioters the same Evening had a Design on one of the Sheriff’s 
 of the City, but he being forewarn’d of it, prepar’d a large quantity of 
 Wine and other Liquors, to win them, if possible, which had the desired 
 effect, for when they came to attack him, he bespoke them with all the 
 Candour imaginable, and distributed his Liquors among them; this 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 433 
 
 Bait took them, and lie, while they were drinking, made all the haste 
 he could with an exact List of the Rioters: By this Artifice this 
 Gentleman sav’d himself and his Family, and had an opportunity of 
 doing his Country a real piece of Service, by securing the Names of 
 these notorious Rebels to his Gracious Majesty King George. After 
 this Gentleman’s Entertainment of the Rioters, they proceeded to the 
 Custom-house, where all the chief Lady’s of the City were entertain’d 
 with a magnificent Ball by some Gentlemen of the Place; all of a sudden 
 a shower of the largest Stones that could be found, came pouring in 
 on the whole Company, this put a stop to their Entertainment, and had 
 it not been for some of their Servants and Custom-house Officers, who 
 went out against them, more wou’d have ensu’d, but such was the Spirit 
 of these mean Rebels that they soon fled, and put an end to their 
 infamous Riot, on such a day as that of his most Sacred Majesty King 
 George’s Coronation. 
 
 “ I forgot to tell you of an unheard instance of Barbarity, which was 
 their knocking down a poor Quaker, wdio came to appease them, and 
 
 then trampled him to Death. Their Cry was Sacheverel and 0 -, 
 
 and D-n all Foreigners. 
 
 I am Sir, 
 
 Yours, &c., 
 
 “ As soon as the Mayor heard of the Riot, and the Pretence they 
 made for it, their Doctor’s Effigies, he very prudently ordered Constables 
 to go not only to Mr. Stevens's to keep the Peace, but even to search his 
 House, and give the Rabble their Idol, if it was found there, in hopes 
 that would have satisfied them; but neither that nor Capt. Stevens’s fair 
 Speeches had any effect upon them. They first broke all Mr. Stevens’s 
 Windows to pieces, and then got into his House by the Shop, which 
 they rifled. 
 
 “ Mr. Stevens is a substantial Honest Man, and collects the King’s 
 Tax, which was the Purchase the Mob came for. It happen’d all the 
 Cash was removed, except the Twenty Pound mention’d in the Letter. 
 They would have forc’d their way up Stairs, but Mr. Stevens, and his 
 Son, defended that Pass so well, that they could not force it. 
 
 “ In this Dispute one of them was run into the Body, and another 
 shot. The latter is dead, and received the Reward of his Wickedness 
 
 G c; 
 
434 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 on the spot. They rifled the House below Stairs, took away the 
 Furniture, Plate, Bread, and threw the Meal about the Shop. Nay, 
 they were so very mischievous, that they tore Mr. Stevens's Shop-Book. 
 
 “ The Magistrates were not Idle all this while, they repair’d to the 
 Place where the Rioters were acting then- Yillanies, and at the Hazzard 
 of their Lives endeavour’d to quell them. 
 
 “ They so far succeeded, part by Threats, and part by Perswasions, 
 as to prevent their continuing the Tumult as the Mob design’d, and to 
 visit and rifle other Houses as well as Mr. Stevens's. That these Rascals 
 who had the Doctor so much in their Mouths, meant nothing but 
 Tumult and Pillage, may be seen by their Compounding with the 
 Sheriff for their Bellies full of Beer to save his Tenement. 
 
 “ When the Riot was over, the Magistrates were very diligent to have 
 the Chief of them apprehended. They ordered a Reward of Fifty 
 Pound to be paid by the Chamberlain to any one that should discover 
 the Murderer of Mr. Thomas the Quaker beforemention’d, and there 
 being a good List taken of the most busy of the Rioters. About 
 Twenty of them were seiz’d the next Day and sent to Newgate. 
 
 “A Relation of the Fact was transmitted to the Government, and a 
 Representation of the Necessity of a vigorous Prosecution of the 
 Criminals, for really, unless they had been punish’d, this City had 
 never been safe, the Mob and their Confederates of Kingswood would 
 doubtless have carry’d the Pillage much farther next time. 
 
 “ In the former Riot, when some of the Rabble were Taken and 
 carry’d to the Town Hall at the Tolsel, the rest of the Mob assaulted 
 the Town Hall, and forc’d the Magistrates, who were loath to exasperate 
 them farther, and come to extremities, to give up their Brethren, so 
 that nothing less than the Prosecution now carrying on, could have 
 secur’d the Peace of this City. 
 
 “As to the Tryal itself, you cannot expect much yet: The Court did 
 not Sit till Friday Morning, and that Day was spent chiefly in 
 Challenges made by the Rioters to the Impannel. The Jury are Men 
 of known Probity, and whatever is the Fate of the Prisoners, they are 
 sure to have Justice. The Rioters are divided into Two Parts, Twelve 
 or Fourteen in each, and will be Try’d one after another. 
 
 “ All this day has been spent in hearing the Witnesses on the Crown 
 side. Mr. Sergeant Cheshire, who has argu’d very eloquently and 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 435 
 
 strenuously against the Rioters, was taken ill in Court, but he is now 
 very well again. Mr. Lwtwich spoke with his accustomed Learning and 
 Eloquence, and Mr. Cowper has shewn he is worthy the Blood that 
 flows in his Veins, and to be Nephew and Son of Two of the Greatest 
 Lawyers that ever England bred. 
 
 “ The Faction are hard at Work to bring off their Fellows if possible. 
 ’Tis now Ten o’Clock, and they say they have Thirty Witnesses to bring 
 into the Hall in favour of the Prisoners. You will have the particular 
 of this Day’s Tryal, and the remainder of the Prosecution in due time. 
 As also the Characters and Behaviour of the Criminals. The Names of 
 the Jury, and everything worthy your Curiosity. If the Charge be 
 given the Jury to Night, for the first Parcel of the Rioters Try’d to 
 Day, ’tis thought the Verdict will not be known ’till after the Post is 
 gone. I shall suspend my own, and only acquaint you, that the Fact 
 lias been as plainly prov’d upon them as ever Fact can be prov’d, and 
 that with the most odious and aggravating Circumstances. 
 
 “ Postcript. 
 
 “ Novemb. 29. 
 
 “ I have little to add to what goes before, the Tryal is yet young, but 
 my next you shall have what has past here in that Affair, with the 
 Names of the Grand Jury and Petty-Jury, who are all Men of the best 
 Fashion and Character. The Behaviour of the Mob gives little Hopes 
 of their Remorse, and we did expect they would have been more 
 Mannerly. When we came hither, we were met by several Coaches, 
 Two or Three Hundred Horse, and the Way for Two or Three Miles, 
 was so crowded with Spectators, who all seem’d well pleased with our 
 coming, that we had much ado to get to our Lodgings through the 
 Press. ’Twas an Hour and a-half before we got from Lawford’s Gate, 
 to Guildhall in Broad Street, which is not a mile. 
 
 “ There was no Clamour against us : But now it is likely to go hard 
 with the Offenders, their Well-wishers begin to open their wide Mouths, 
 and Down with the Round Heads was heard in the Hall; the very same 
 Cry that brought the Rabble on the Coronation-Night. You will 
 excuse my want of Method, and get it mended by some more able 
 Hand, if you make any use of what I write, The fact being as I hinted, 
 so plainly made out, the Grand Jury found all the Bills against the 
 
 g,g 2 
 
436 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Rioters but One Yesterday, and this Day the Court has been taken up 
 with Trying Thirteen of them. 
 
 “I have mention'd somewhat of it already, to which I must add that 
 it was Twelve o’Clock on Saturday Night before the Petty Jury brought 
 in their Verdict, so that the mail was made up before it could be known 
 what it was. 
 
 “ The Rabble were insufferably mutinous as the Prisoners were 
 carry’d back from the Hall to Newgate, and some of the Rabble baul’d 
 out No arbitrary Proceedings in the very Court, the Villians insulting 
 thus a Bench that has carry’d themselves with the utmost Candour and 
 Fairness, Several of the Prisoners were Try’d for the Riot only, Six of 
 them were found Guilty, Six others were Try’d for Murder, Two of 
 whom were found Guilty; and one who was Try’d for Murder and 
 Burglary, was also found Guilty. On Teusday others of them will be 
 Try’d for the Murder of the Quaker before-mention’d, and ’tis not 
 doubted but the Murderers will be convicted. 
 
 “There are so many Indictments still to be Try’d, that ’tis thought 
 we shall stay here all this Week, and I shall let no opportunity slip of 
 giving you by every Post, an Account of the Proceedings. 
 
 “I am sorry I cou’d not send you more now, but you will be better 
 satisfy’d with seeing the whole together than in Parcels, which is the 
 reason I reserve the Detail of the Tryals, and give you only the Gross. 
 
 “I had forgot to tell you, that one of the Ringleaders of the Mob 
 who made the Noise in the Court, was cited to the Bar by Mr. 
 
 Justice-, and the Court oblig’d him to give Bail for his Appearance 
 
 next Term, to answer for his Insolence. Notwithstanding this Outrage, 
 the Citizens are generally incens’d against the Offenders, and ’tis only 
 the very Scum of themselves that are so noisy, they beginning to be 
 apprehensive that Justice will overtake their Crimes, and the Criminals 
 be hung up for example. 
 
 “I am, 
 
 “ Sir, 
 
 “Yours, &c.” 
 
 Here closes “A Full and Particular Account of the Riot in General,” 
 which took place when King George I. was crowned; “ with several 
 Material Circumstances Preceding and Contributing to it;” and it is 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 437 
 
 not, I conceive, necessary to narrate the “Detail of the Tryals” of the 
 rioters, which shortly followed. In Mr. Seyer’s account of this riot* 
 he omits all mention of the cause of this senseless disturbance, and 
 perhaps thought himself justified, as a clergyman, in doing so, as a 
 venerated Bristol name seems to be somewhat involved in it; but he 
 was not justified as an impartial historian. He says that this riot 
 resulted from “an unruly mob” who assembled in the evening, “and 
 continued rioting and doing mischief till about midnight,before they could 
 be dispersed.” He admits, however, that it was “a tory mob, and the 
 violence which they committed was (of course) as they said in defence of 
 church and state, and the objects of their rage were the Whigs and Dis¬ 
 senters. The spirit of party (lie continues) was at that time very violent 
 throughout the kingdom, and in few places more so than in Bristol. 
 The Tories and High-church-men were the sauie party, and some who 
 survived were the same men as the Royalists in the reign of Charles I. 
 and II.: most of these were much dissatisfied with the exclusion of the 
 family of Stuart from the throne, and with the succession of the house 
 of Hanover. Their adversaries called them Jacobites, as being attached 
 to Prince James; and Cheverellites, as friends to the principles of 
 Cheverell, as the mob called Dr. Saclieverell: and therefore they did 
 not join, or joined unwillingly in the rejoicings on the accession of 
 King George.” From this statement the riot was clearly of a political 
 character; but because Mr. Stevens and a few other victims to violence 
 happened to be Dissenters, it is made to assume a religious complexion; 
 the fact of the chief sufferer being the collector of the obnoxious king’s 
 taxes, and his having “distinguished himself in the support of the 
 Whig candidate at elections,” weighing as nothing, with Mr. Seyer, 
 against the fact of his being a sectary. He was singled out for 
 pillage, the pretext being that he possessed an effigy of Sacheverel! the 
 offenders being a hired mob of lawless Kingswood colliers, whom that 
 writer, as if to cloke the matter, calls “country people, who came into 
 town for the purpose of riot and plunder which riot, he says, “was 
 after all of no great magnitude,” although attended with robbery and 
 murder, and could not be quelled till midnight! The Government, 
 however, thought otherwise; for a Special Commission, consisting of 
 
 Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii. , pp. 502—571. 
 
438 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 three judges, was appointed for the trial of the rioters at the request of 
 the magistrates, who “ represented the necessity of a vigorous prosecution 
 of the criminals, (fearing) the mob and their confederates of Kingswood, 
 would (unless promptly punished) carry their pillage much farther next 
 time.” Such was the Bristol riot in 1714. 
 
 In July, 1749, a great body of the country people of the county of 
 Somerset came to Bedminster, shouting prodigiously, so as to be heard 
 at a long distance off, and proceeded to attack the turnpike gates and 
 toll houses along the Ashton Hoad, with axes, hatchets, and other 
 implements of destruction, so as entirely to demolish them in about 
 half-an-hour. Cross bars and posts were immediately erected in their 
 room, chains were put across the road, and some stout men were placed 
 to assist the toll-men; but the next day these also were attacked, and 
 summarily destroyed by a mob of people; their shouts alarming the 
 city, to which it was feared they would proceed, and commence an 
 attack upon Newgate and rescue the prisoners, which they had 
 threatened to do. Public notice was given to the people to prepare for 
 their coming, and defend themselves; the rendezvous to be at the 
 Exchange, on the alarm being given by fire-bells. The rioters, however, 
 did not carry out their threat; two of them, named Perryman and 
 Roach, were tried at the next Taunton assizes, found guilty, and 
 executed at Ilchester. 
 
 “In the month of May, 1753, the colliers of Kingswood, Coalpit- 
 heath, and other works, rose iii a tumultuous manner on accouut of the 
 exportation of corn, and the high price of bread. After gathering 
 together for several days, on Monday May 21, between 1 and 2 o'clock 
 in the afternoon they eutered the city through Lawford’s-gate in a body 
 of some hundreds without weapons, and with them many women; and 
 they had a captain at their head, a very tall stout man, with a large 
 hat, and silk handkerchief on a long staff, which served for a flag. 
 They made their way without stopping to the Council-house, and 
 addressed the Mayor and Common-council in a petition, representing 
 the hardships which they and their families endured by the exportation 
 of corn, the dearness of bread, &c.; and praying to be relieved. They 
 were very civilly received, and relief was promised, as soon as it lay in 
 the power of the magistrates; and they were told that an alteration 
 would soon be made in the article of bread. The greater part seemed 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 439 
 
 satisfied with this answer; but many others soon shewing their dislike 
 thereto, the proclamation against riots was redd: after which a 
 gentleman of the Common-council exhorted them to disperse. Soon 
 after part of them divided from the main body and went to the Quay, 
 where they forcibly went on board the Lamb, Captain John Price, 
 bound for Dublin, laden with wheat and other merchandize; they 
 broke the bar, which secured the main hatch, removed a hogshead 
 full of goods which was on the deck into another ship, and began 
 hoisting up the wheat. The Magistrates hearing of this violence sent a 
 body of constables, headed by a gentleman of the Common-council 
 carrying a drawn sword, to oppose them and to prevent them from 
 carrying off the corn and visiting other vessels. The constables went 
 furiously to work with their long staves and struck down several of the 
 colliers; of whom others had broken heads and were otherwise beaten: 
 some leaped overboard into the mud, and while some made what 
 resistence they were able, others escaped by flight. The constables 
 having thus delivered the vessel were coming off victorious, carrying 
 with them some of the colliers, whom they had taken prisoners: but 
 those who escaped soon informed their companions what had happened: 
 upon which a strong party went down Small Street to rescue the 
 prisoners, at sight of whom the constables let them go and shifted for 
 themselves. The colliers then drove all before them and turned up 
 Broad Street. Here another fray happened, and the constables laid 
 upon them with their staves manfully, while the colliers pelted them 
 with stones. They also beset the Council-house, dashing the windows 
 to pieces, and wounding several persons in it with stones and brickbats; 
 Councillor Elton in particular received a wound in his leg. However 
 at length the constables with some assistance got the better of the 
 colliers, who took to their heels, threatening that they would be 
 revenged on the constables, and would return again well provided with 
 arms. Several of them being taken were brought before the Magistrates, 
 who after gentle reproofs and telling them the danger to which they 
 exposed their lives, dismissed them on promise of their good behaviour 
 for the future: only one person, being probably a ringleader, was 
 detained and committed to Bridewell. The disturbances occasioned 
 the Magistrates to give orders for the citizens to provide themselves 
 with fire-arms, powder and ball, cutlasses, &c., the militia to be raised, 
 
440 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 and a strong guard to be kept at tlie Guildhall, ready against the 
 colliers’ second visit. On Tuesday they still gave out that they would 
 come with vengeance, and all things were prepared to give them a 
 warm reception. Wednesday the city remained in peace, only advice 
 was received that the colliers were gathering round Kingswood as 
 many as possible to join them, in order to make good their repeated 
 threatenings. Thursday they still took great pains to collect a large 
 body, vowing to give the city a visit that day, and notice was given by 
 several persons of their intention. Whereupon between 5 and 6 
 o’clock in the evening, the militia well armed and a large number of 
 the most respectable merchants and tradesmen and others, together 
 with the const aides armed, marched into the Old-market by beat of 
 drum; but the colliers failing in their resolution, the militia, &c., 
 returned to their rendezvous. But between 9 and 10 o’clock the same 
 evening, another alarm was given by a body of weavers and low-lived 
 persons, who came to Lawford’s-gate by beat of drum, with a captain 
 at their head, shouting. The Mayor upon this headed the militia, and 
 marched up to the gate by beat of drum: but this mob making no 
 opposition, the Mayor ordered the gate to be shut, and the militia to 
 their former rendezvous; and the city remained quiet all night. 
 Friday between 10 and 11 o’clock in the forenoon, the Mayor received 
 a letter, giving him notice that the colliers were up in a very great 
 body, joined by weavers, hatters, pedlars and others, and that they 
 intended to be in the city in two hours time, and that they were then 
 at the New-cliurch (then building) about a mile and a-half from the 
 city. Immediately on this advice 50 dragoons of the Scotch Greys, 
 who came that morning from Gloucester, the militia, the citizens, and 
 constables were ordered to arms to be ready to receive them. About 
 one o’clock at noon the colliers entered the city by way of Milk Street, 
 and a party of them advanced to Bridewell in order to rescue him of 
 their gang, who was there imprisoned: and as they climbed tire gates, 
 one of them, a young man, was shot dead by a musket shot from the 
 prison. Notwithstanding this, they gave three cheers over the dead 
 body, and removed it. They then fell to work on the gates, made a 
 breach in them, dashed the windows to pieces, broke open the prison, 
 rescued their companion and did other damage. Before they got off, a 
 party of gentlemen came up, and fired upon them; some were killed 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 441 
 
 and many wounded, and some of the gentlemen also were wounded. 
 During this conflict the Mayor, at the head of a party, marched down 
 the Pithay to attack them and to aid those gentlemen, who had so 
 roughly handled them; but they having driven them off, there was 
 little for the Mayor to do. After this sharp bout the colliers dispersed 
 into several parties, some running one way and some another, and 
 some were driven through Castle Street, and some through Broad 
 Street, &c., getting off as they could. Some of the gentlemen extending 
 their pursuit too far were knocked down, and much wounded: but 
 happily some of the most resolute citizens made their way through 
 Lawford’s-gate down West Street, and brought off Messrs. Brickdale, 
 Knox and Miller: Mr. Davis and others escaped with pistol in hand 
 down the lane leading to St. Philip’s-plain, (and one or two gentlemen 
 were actually carried off and kept in a coalpit many days, and not 
 without great difficulty at last released.) During the whole encounter 
 four of the rioters were killed, many wounded, and 29 made prisoners. 
 It was computed that then- number was about 2000. This attack of 
 the colliers afforded matter of mirth and conversation for many 
 succeeding years; while the conduct of well known citizens and the 
 folly and strange dialect of the assailants were in general remembrance.”* 
 Mr. Seyer continues, “Similar disturbances on the same account 
 happened in Yorkshire, and at Manchester and several other places in the 
 northern counties; at Leeds eight or nine of the rioters were killed by 
 the soldiers in quelling the tumult. The writer whom I here quote (he 
 says, Smollett) attributes these excesses to the neglect of a whig 
 government, which out of too nice a tenderness for popular liberty had 
 taken no care to restrain the licentious insolence of the vulgar by 
 proper laws and regulation.” By referring to Smollett, however, 
 I find that he rather blames the magistracy than the Government, 
 of whom he males no mention: his words are, “Commotions of the 
 same kind were excited in Yorkshire, Manchester, and several other 
 places, in the northern counties. At Leeds a detachment of the king’s 
 troops were obliged in their own defence to fire upon the rioters, eight 
 or nine of whom were killed on the spot; and indeed, so little care had 
 been taken to restrain the licentious insolence of the vulgar by proper 
 
 Seycr's Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., pp. 596, 599. 
 
442 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 laws aud regulations duly executed under the eye of civil magistracy, 
 that a military power was found absolutely necessary to maintain the 
 peace of the kingdom.” * The laws and regulations here referred to 
 were, as I understand the matter, of a local character, and appear to 
 relate to the duty of the magistrates only. 
 
 But of all the riots which agitated this city during the last century, 
 that known as the Bristol Bridge riot, in 1793, was “the most melancholy, 
 the most horrid, and, in every respect, the most distressing to the humane 
 mind. For some years past, it was a matter of astonishment to many, 
 that there was then no apparent likelihood of a speedy cessation of the 
 tax imposed by the Bristol Bridge act, the purposes of which, it was 
 premised, might have been fulfilled. 
 
 “Some enquiries were made into the business ; and, in consequence 
 of the spirited exertions of Mr. D. Lewis and others, the tolls had been 
 let by public auction, for the last five years ; since which the Trustees 
 have published their accounts annually, tho’ without stating them from 
 the beginning, which has long beeii the very anxious tho’ vain, 
 expectation of the public. From then- last statement, it was generally 
 concluded, that the whole tax would cease aud determine at the ensuing 
 Michaelmas. This had been previously and publicly declared, by the 
 Broker employed by the Trustees to let the tolls by auction, at the 
 Michaelmas (1792) preceding. The citizens, some of whom paid more 
 than one hundred pounds per annum toll, were, of course, exceedingly 
 delighted with the idea of so near a termination of an impost, which 
 had so long been considered as peculiarly burthensome and oppressive. 
 The Trustees did not condescend to undeceive them; nor did they, 
 either at the time or subsequently, contradict the public declaration of 
 their Broker. But in the midst of the general joy which pervaded all 
 ranks, the public spirit was suddenly damped by the authoritative 
 mandate of the Trustees, who advertized the tolls to be let for another 
 year. Surprise sat on every countenance ; while murmurs, and renewed 
 calculations, were heard in every street, and in almost every company. 
 Even those who had little or no immediate concern in the business, felt 
 an indignation at the flagrancy of the deception. An opposition was 
 determined upon by some public-spirited gentlemen ; who, instead of 
 
 Hist, of England, vol. ii., p. 318, 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 443 
 
 bringing the Trustees to a general account by legal means, with more 
 cunning than wisdom undertook to counteract them by strategem; and 
 having conceived an idea, that if the tolls were not taken for nine days 
 they could not afterwards be legally demanded, bargained with the late 
 rentor for a cessation of collection during the last nine days of his term, 
 for a sum adequate to his loss thereby, which was raised by subscription. 
 In consequence, the gates were thrown open, and passengers went over 
 the Bridge toll-free, for the first time, on the evening of Thursday, 
 September the 19th. A stranger would scarcely believe with what 
 excessive gladness this act was accompanied on the part of the public : 
 a gladness, which nothing but the idea of a deliverance from oppression 
 could have excited. People of all descriptions lined the Bridge, and 
 testified their approbation, whilst the populace huzzaed most vociferously, 
 whenever a horse or carriage passed. Near the gates were a number of 
 indiscreet persons, who, not content with being joyous spectators, 
 thought proper to become actors upon this occasion; and having cut 
 down the gates, which were the property of a gentleman who had rented 
 the tolls, they made a bonfire with them. This gave fresh vigour to their 
 joy, with which they were so madly intoxicated, as to pull down the 
 toll board, and commit it to the flames. None of the respectable 
 spectators, and there were many such, endeavoured to prevent this 
 needless and illegal mode of exultation ; which they doubtless would 
 have done, had they any apprehension of further mischief; and indeed 
 the nature of the offence scarcely entered the minds of any, almost 
 every one rather turning his thoughts to what he believed to be the 
 illegal cause, the Trustees advertising the tolls to be let for another year. 
 The next day the Trustees published extracts from the act of 
 Parliament, which enacts the punishment of death for taking down the 
 toll-board (that is so long as the act continued in force) and offered a 
 reward of fifty guineas for discovering the offenders. But they did not 
 adduce any proof that the act was still in force, tho’ almost all the 
 citizens understood that it was not; but only said there was a remaining 
 debt of £2500, without mentioning the means they were already 
 possessed of to pay the same. The public were still of opinion, that 
 the demanding or collecting another year’s toll would be illegal. Other 
 gates were erected on Saturday the 28th of September (tho’ the then 
 rentor’s term was unexpired) for the purpose of commencing the 
 
444 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 enforcement of another year’s toll the following day; the public opinion 
 of its illegality remaining unremoved. There were, notwithstanding, 
 no public precautions taken to prevent illegal modes of opposition. 
 Numbers of people stopped to see the new gates; some expressing then- 
 disapprobation; others their hopes that no mischief would ensue; many 
 blaming the conduct of the Trustees; and a very few censuring that of 
 the subscribers: In fact, except some huzzas, it was merely a concourse 
 of people, some discoursing, and others gaping about, similar to that 
 daily seen in Corn Street, before the Bush Tavern, and near the 
 Exchange. Bye and bye some mischievous villians (probably half 
 drunk, it being Saturday night), procured faggots and other 
 combustibles, and without the least opposition, proceeded to set on 
 fire the newly erected gates, which were soon in flames, and the evil- 
 minded and the thoughtless rejoiced in the conflagration. Previously 
 to this the crowd was a constantly changing body, some continually 
 arriving, others continually going: but now the far greater part of those 
 who came that way, made a stop, to see the bonfire. At length, when 
 the fire was nearly exhausted, and, it is probable, the assembly would 
 have soon dispersed (the gapers having nothing more to see, and the 
 rioters having completed the mischief) behold the magistrates appeared, 
 and with them, a party of the Herefordshire militia; the bonfire gentry 
 quitted their post, retreated, and left the military in possession of the 
 expiring embers. The multitude now increased astonishingly; numbers 
 had followed the magistrates and the soldiers; many passengers, who 
 (probably) would not have loitered to see a gate burnt, now stopped to 
 view the soldiers, and to hear what His Worship should be pleased to 
 say; whilst parties were continually arriving, who, hearing the drums 
 beat to arms, came running to learn the occasion. Some of these 
 dastardly rioters, who had burnt the gates, and who on the approach of 
 danger had sheltered themselves behind the innocent spectators, taking 
 a villanous advantage of their situation, threw stones, &c., at the 
 military, and even at a magistrate who was delivering an harangue, but 
 who, being one of the Trustees, and not ascribing any of the blame to 
 himself, or to his associates, did not gain much attention; neither did 
 the riot act, which was read, tho’ not heard by many (comparatively) 
 and supposed by most to allude only to the rioters, in which class 
 peaceable citizens could not think of including themselves: of course, 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 445 
 
 though sonic of the most prudent went away, great numbers continued 
 to look on. The skulkers still watched their opportunities, and now 
 and then a stone or an oyster-shell was thrown. The military fired; 
 but whether with orders from the magistrate is not known: the Mayor 
 knew not of the circumstance. One man was killed, and the people 
 dispersed. 
 
 “ The next day, being Sunday, Sept, the 29th, about twelve o’clock, 
 the tolls were attempted to be taken. There was a crowd of people 
 again assembled ; and as the idea of injustice, which they attached to 
 the measure, was rather strengthened than otherwise, some of them 
 endeavoured to impede it, by vociferating, No toll! hissing, &c. The 
 civil power attended, and great exertions were made to enforce the 
 impost. Some of those who cried, No toll! and others who interrupted 
 the persons who collected, were taken into custody ; but some of them 
 were again rescued from the constables.—It was a scene of confusion 
 which was by no means adapted to the solemnity of the day; and, in 
 the opinion of many, it would have been at least prudent to have 
 deferred the collection till the morrow.—Whenever a horse or carriage 
 came up, the person guiding the same scarcely knew how to act, some 
 telling him to go on, others to stop; sometimes the parties were first 
 stopped, and then ordered to pay ; and at other times the horses were 
 driven beyond where the parties would have stopped. It did not 
 appear that any of them wished to force a free passage, but being 
 prepossessed with the prevailing idea that the toll was illegal, did not 
 chuse to give away their own or their employer’s money, till it was 
 demanded of them; and some blows about the heads and necks of the 
 horses was the consequence. The magistrates sent for the military, to 
 awe the people into submission. The interruption of the populace was 
 now in a great measure done away, and the tolls were gathered by the 
 aid of the civil power (tho’ not with the utmost civility) the soldiers 
 assisting it merely by their presence.” 
 
 The following day “ Monday, Sept. 30, 1793, will ever be remembered 
 in this city, with ‘ horror and dismay.’ At nine o’clock in the morning, 
 the toll was again attempted to be collected; and the populace again 
 interrupted. Some passengers paid; othei's did not, being violently 
 urged, and in a manner compelled to pass, by the mobility. Tho 
 assistance of the civil power was again deemed necessary: several 
 
446 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 constables, witli two magistrates, attended to assist tlic toll-gatherers; 
 and much confusion ensued. The people who were looking on, and 
 many of those who passed by, crying, Go on ! No toll! with such a 
 variety of hissing, huzzaing, and clamorous noises, as frequently 
 startled the horses ; some passengers rode or drove their horses too 
 near a temporary chain that was now extended across the bridge; and 
 others did not voluntarily stop to pay. Some of these were taken into 
 custody; several scuffles ensued : and some persons were rescued. In 
 one of these engagements, a desperate villain, attempting a rescue, drew 
 his knife to stab a constable, who, fortunately, had the presence of mind 
 to seize the fellow by the wrist, and striking him forcibly on the hand, 
 made him drop his murderous weapon. In another, the magistrate was 
 knocked down; as was also a person who assisted him. Between 
 ten and eleven o’clock a magistrate read the riot act three times; the 
 last reading was ended exactly at eleven,” and it was then demanded 
 that the people should disperse within an hour, a solemn warning 
 being given of the consequence of their refusing compliance, which 
 however was unregarded. 
 
 “Early in the afternoon, the magistrates returned, to assist the 
 collectors, who still found no cheerful compliance with their demands; 
 whilst the loiterers expressed their sentiments, occasionally, in the same 
 manner as others did in the morning; and whenever it could be 
 discovered from whom the voice proceeded, the uttercr was taken into 
 custody; but, as the seizure of such persons was sometimes not in the 
 gentlest manner, and the parties seized not always knowing the nature 
 of the offence, there was some resistance. The military was sent for; 
 and from between two and three o’clock till after six, the magistrates 
 took toll, being aided by the presence of the military, with little 
 interruption. Yet the peaceable inhabitants (who had no other 
 communication, unless by water, between the two parts of the city, 
 which are separated by the Avon) suffered much interruption, and some 
 insult; being refused a quiet passage upon the footway, in spite of the 
 most civil remonstrances, and forced to walk over upon the high-road, 
 amidst the carriages, the soldiers, and the crowd which such an 
 interruption naturally occasioned. Between six and seven o’clock, the 
 magistrates, the constables, the soldiers, and those who had stopped to 
 look at them, having left the Bridge, the persons remaining there 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 447 
 
 huzzaed; the soldiers returned, staid a few minutes, and marched off 
 again. It now appeared as if all would soon be tolerably quiet there ; 
 tho’ a few indiscreet persons occasionally stopped to gape about, and 
 chatter, at that end where the tolls had been gathering; seeing some 
 stop, others stopped: but the passengers in general, more prudently, 
 made no delay. Yet even this prudence was no guard against the 
 catastrophe which was approaching. 
 
 “ At a quarter before seven, about twenty boys, who had taken it into 
 their mischievous heads to make a bonfire (instead of going home) ran 
 to the Back, and returned with some faggots, which having set fire to, 
 they skulked aside, to view the progress of the flames. The wood, 
 being somewhat damp, did not at first burn rapidly; one of the sons of 
 Folly now and then approached to stir it, and instantly sheered off. 
 At length, finding no interruption from the cautious vigilence of the 
 Police, and the fire nearly exhausted, some of the most hardened lads 
 burst open the toll-house door, and taking from thence the table, chairs, 
 and what else was combustible, even the door, committed them to the 
 flames. The magistrates having now understood, that the toll-house 
 (which was entirely stone) was about to be burnt down, sent for the 
 military to disperse the people, who were increased by the incautious 
 spectators to upwards of two hundred, many of whom had joined the 
 boys in singing, ‘ God save the King! ’ as tho’ such a specimen of their 
 being royalists put a better face upon the disorder. An officer, with 
 eight men, marching briskly to the spot, the assembly retreated, and 
 the military took possession of the ground, where the fire was now 
 almost extinguished. The riotous few, having procured a supply of 
 oyster-shells, Ac., now attacked the soldiers, partly from behind the 
 spectators, and the officer was wounded in the head. Having no orders 
 to fire, he deemed it most prudent to decamp, whilst the cowardly 
 assailants, taking courage from his retreat, advanced to their former 
 post, and let fly a number of shells, Ac., at the vanquished, who fled 
 with precipitation. As in all cases of riot, victory prompted the wicked 
 to further acts of violence; and if not checked, might have excited them 
 to mischiefs which no person could foresee: their number was increased, 
 and the next act of their atrocious authority was a demolition of the 
 lamps, whilst an idle curiosity, together with a populousness of the 
 thoroughfare, increased the number of the spectators. The drums had 
 
448 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 beat to arms, which gathered a vast concourse from all quarters, to see 
 what was doing; by far the greatest part of whom, resolving to be out 
 of harm’s way, took their stations at a distance, in the adjoining streets. 
 But even this precaution was no protection from the destruction which 
 was now descending. A large party of soldiers (it was then about a 
 quarter past eight) headed by some magistrates, and accompanied by the 
 peace officers, marched down High Street, not to a grave and solemn, 
 but to a very brisk, tune. They had not got more than half way over 
 the Bridge before the riotous threw stones and oyster-shells, and some 
 of the military were struck by them; in consequence, having had 
 magisterial orders, the front rank fired upon their assailants and the 
 gaping populace: some oyster-shells being that instant thrown from that 
 part of the Back near St. Nicholas Church, the rear faced about, and 
 fired directly up High Street. Men, women, and children, flew on all 
 sides; and whilst the press which it occasioned impeded the progress 
 of their flight, it gave the military an opportunity to practice the 
 science of street-firing with astonishing adroitness, the people being 
 brought down by the musquetry in almost every direction; som left 
 their ranks, to level at individual objects: one, in particular, having 
 missed fire, took a second aim at the same mark, and levelled his object 
 with the ground. The firing continued for some time, whilst anxious 
 Compassion vainly listened to hear an order for it to cease. When the 
 Bridge was clear of the multitude, a constable (who had not then his 
 badge of authority) compassionately attempting to jiut a man, appa¬ 
 rently dying, in a more easy posture, was menaced with instant death, 
 and obliged to desist from an intention, which, though by the strict 
 letter of the law it may have been riotous, was highly commendable 
 according to the precepts of humanity. The passengers, continually 
 coming and going to and from all parts of the counties westward (who 
 had no other road through the city) had no public notice not to 
 approach within musquet shot; no messengers were dispatched to 
 apprize them of their danger. The spectators, and indeed the rioters, 
 had not the least idea that the military would fire, before the riot act 
 had been read to them, as it was to the people in the morning; they 
 had no knowledge, that the act being read to others, nine hours before, 
 was a legal warning to them; and they were almost as much surprized 
 by the firing as they were frightened bj ? its terrors. There was then 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 449 
 
 no time for those to escape who would; and some, instead of attempting 
 it, became almost bereft of motion by their fears. Some persons, 
 who were at a distance, were so far from apprehending danger, that 
 they were in conversation with their sides toward the seat of uproar ; in 
 this position a gentleman who was killed in High Street is understood 
 to have been, as the shot entered his neck. Another had his hand in 
 his pocket, and another in his bosom. No precautions were given to 
 citizens to leave their houses, or to descend into their cellars; but they 
 were unawares saluted with musquet-shots in the fancied security of 
 their dwellings. One shot entered a house so far from the Bridge as 
 the corner of Wine Street, nearly opposite the Council House, and 
 passed through the head-board of a bedstead. Dwelling houses were 
 so far, indeed, from being sanctuaries, that an officer rushed, sword in 
 hand, into the house of a respectable citizen, in Bedcliff Street, 
 insisting that the persons within were rioters, tlio’ they were very 
 peaceable tradesmen (among them the Common-cryer), who were in 
 discourse, lamenting the occasion of the troubles: one of the soldiers, 
 who were drawn up in a half moon before the house, ordering the rest 
 to fire into it; and it was with difficulty that the master (who happened 
 to be collected) could prevail upou the officer to desist from the dread¬ 
 ful proceeding with which the company had been menaced.” 
 
 The number of persons killed in this riot was eleven, as recorded by 
 my author. The verdict returned upon nine of them was, “Wilful 
 Murder by person or persons unknown;” upon one, “ Accidental Death;” 
 and upon the eleventh the inquest was not taken. There were also 45 
 persons wounded, and one missing; forty of these wounds being inflicted 
 by gun-shots, and the remainder by sabres, bayonets, Ac. * 
 
 Another writer says that “On Thursday Sept. 19, the toll-gates, and 
 board with the rates of toll payable, were pulled down and burnt. On 
 Friday the 27th, the demolition of the new toll-gates and gutting of 
 the toll house and burning the books was undertaken by the very 
 inconsiderable mob of scarcely twenty persons. During the whole of 
 Saturday, Sunday, and Monday, immense crowds of people assembled, 
 to witness the struggles between some of the magistrates in person, and 
 riders and drivers, in enforcement and resistance of payment. The 
 
 * Abridged from “ An Impartial History of the Late Disturbances in 
 Bristol,” by John Rose, 1793. 
 
 H H 
 
450 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 proclamation was first read on Saturday evening, about nine o’clock, 
 and repeatedly afterward, but disregarded because it was not, from 
 motives of humanity, promptly acted upon; the constant exclamation 
 of individuals one to another being, ‘Oh! they don’t dare to fire!’ 
 Not a petty constable’s staff was to be seen—so that the writer himself 
 mingled with the throng repeatedly, in perfect security. In the 
 afternoon of Monday, the guards formed by the Hereford regiment of 
 militia, under Lord Bateman, on the Bridge, were assaulted by boys 
 and striplings, ‘aided, abetted, comforted and assisted,’ by the curious 
 lookers-on who filled all the converging avenues. Thus goaded to 
 resistance, the soldiers, under direction of the magistrates, fired, but 
 mostly with elevated muzzles, or the slaughter would have been 
 tremendous. The number of killed and wounded was altogether 
 about thirty-six.* The writer was at this instant, between seven and 
 eight o’clock, in professional attendance at the Theatre, but so strongly 
 was he possessed with the belief that only powder had been discharged, 
 of which some of the flying-mob, whom he first met near the Back 
 Hall, repeatedly assured him, that he passed one man lying prostrate 
 as if fallen in his flight through inebriety, at the foot of St. Nicholas’ 
 Church-steps, and, with unabated security, another man lying near the 
 place of the watch-box in the church-yard-railing, from whom a stream 
 issued down the pavement. A bonfire blazed on the Bridge, and the 
 firing of musketry and roll of the drums had not ceased on the side of 
 St. Thomas Street, when he continued onward, through two lines of 
 soldiers drawn from High Street to the north-west toll-house, and 
 across the end of Bridge Street, without any interruption from them, 
 either of word or act. The first unauthorized faces he saw were those 
 of persons peeping out from the steps leading to Bridge Street Chapel. 
 Before he reached the composing-room of Sarah Farley’s Journal-Office, 
 on the upper floor, which commanded a view of the Bridge, all was 
 quiet. After eleven o’clock, he ventured out to view the scene of 
 action, but a shower of rain had washed away every trace of blood.— 
 He thought then, as he does still, that this disastrous event might have 
 been prevented by a well-regulated exercise of every good citizen’s 
 
 * The former account is most likely the correct one, as the names and 
 addresses of the sufferers are there given. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 451 
 
 public duty, in meetings to discuss the supposed abuse of their trust 
 by the Bridge-Commissioners. The path of the Magistrates was plain: 
 they were bound to preserve the King’s peace by all the means in their 
 power. The London riots of 1780, and the consequent lesson to 
 pusillanimous magistrates, were freshly in remembrance. It was no 
 less the duty of the inhabitants, for their own sakes, actively to support 
 the magisterial authority, while on the other hand they sought to 
 obtain legal redress from a disputed toll.” * This would be very good 
 reasoning if the inhabitants were not lulled into a false reliance upon 
 the Bridge Commissioners, that at a given time the tolls would cease, 
 which time they seem to imagine had arrived. 
 
 “The memorable riots of 1831, it is well known, arose out of 
 political causes. Sir Charles Wetherell, the Recorder of Bristol, had 
 rendered himself obnoxious to the promoters of the reform bill by his 
 strenuous opposition to it in the House of Commons. It is very likely, 
 however, that this would have passed unnoticed, and it was believed 
 that he might have performed his duties in Bristol without any mani¬ 
 festation of dislike, had he not declared in the House, in rather 
 contemptuous terms, that the citizens of Bristol were quite indifferent 
 to reform. The consequence was, that resentment prevailed extensively, 
 and that, when in the exercise of his judicial functions he visited this 
 city in April, 1831, a large party went to Totterdown, with a view to 
 give him a convincing proof of his error. 
 
 “As his carriage neared the spot where they were assembled, he was 
 assailed with the most vehement hisses and groans. We shall never 
 forget (says an eye-witness) the start and look of surprise which he 
 gave when the unexpected sound struck his ear. 
 
 “ Ominous as the reception seemed, Sir Charles left the city without 
 personal violence being offered him, and from his subsequent conduct it 
 is evident that he thought he had seen the worst of a Bristol mob. 
 His assertions were repeated in the House of Commons, the citizens 
 were again annoyed, and many expressed their mind in no measured 
 terms. 
 
 “ Discrimination and forbearance not being the characteristic virtues 
 of a mob, a repetition of groans and hisses was naturally to be expected 
 
 * Evans’s Chronological Outline. Appendix LXXIII. 
 
 HH 2 
 
452 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 on the public entry into Bristol of Sir Charles Wetherell at his next 
 visit. The authorities had therefore sworn in a large number of hired 
 bludgeon-men as special constables, called out the constables of the 
 various parishes, and sent a deputation to the Home Secretary to 
 request the aid of soldiers. These steps, together with the sanction of 
 some injudicious party demonstrations, only made matters worse, and 
 increased the excitement in the public mind. 
 
 “ The day appointed for opening the commission of assize was 
 Saturday, October 29th,—a day that will ever form a mournful episode 
 in our chronological calendar. 
 
 “ It was about ten o’clock in the morning when the special constables 
 passed down High Street on their way to Totterdown. At this hour 
 the town presented a scene of more than ordinary animation. As the 
 streets became more crowded, the shutters of the various shops were 
 closed, while many persons were to be seen hastily proceeding on their 
 way to Temple Gate. Still there were no manifestations of disturbance: 
 many of the populace, it is true, deprecated the display of constabulary 
 force which had just been exhibited, and many inveighed against the 
 impolicy of having troops within call, considering such measures 
 rather as incentives to violence, than as calculated to repress it; but it 
 was hoped and believed that no necessity would arise for either being 
 called into action. 
 
 “ On arriving at Totterdown, the special constables halted near the 
 Blue Bowl, between which and the iron bridge about 2000 of the 
 populace had assembled; there were also very many persons along the 
 New Gut, particularly in the direction of the Cattle Market, prompted 
 by curiosity to view the troops. Among the number there were some 
 whose appearance and conduct betokened that they were fit agents for 
 works of violence. These, judging from their exterior, belonged to that 
 class whose subsistence depending chiefly on the opportunities afforded 
 for rapine and plunder, renders them inimical to a well ordered system 
 of government. This was the state of the multitude when a chariot, 
 drawn by four greys, advancing at a rapid rate along Arno’s Yale, 
 announced the arrival of the Recorder. 
 
 “In an instant he was at Totterdown, and was received by the 
 populace with the most astounding yells, groans, and hisses. A few 
 seconds elapsed while he was handed into the Sheriff’s carriage, after 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 453 
 
 which the procession, including the usual attendance of officers 
 connected with the Corporation, mounted on horseback with favours in 
 their hats, and preceded by trumpeters, moved on towards the city. 
 For the better protection of Sir Charles’s person, two gentlemen on 
 horseback rode close by the carriage doors. On arriving at Hill’s 
 Bridge, four or five stones were thrown, some of them striking the 
 carriage in which the Recorder was seated. This circumstance, 
 however, beyond the casting of anxious glances towards the direction 
 whence they proceeded, occasioned no movement on the part of the 
 constables, whose attention seemed exclusively directed to the safety of 
 their charge. 
 
 “By the time the procession had reached Temple-gate, the crowd, 
 which had collected to an immense number, literally choked up the 
 road, and retarded it on its way; the demonstrations of feeling became 
 more and more deafening, and occasionally a stone or other missile was 
 hurled in the direction of the Recorder. On coming within sight of 
 Bristol Bridge, he was saluted with the most unequivocal and 
 opprobrious marks of displeasure from the individuals who had there 
 posted themselves to witness his arrival, and who occupied the 
 foot-paths as well as the balustrades. As he passed over it, and on his 
 way up High Street, his carriage was again assailed with stones. At 
 length the cavalcade arrived at the Guildhall, in Broad Street; but the 
 pressure was so great that some minutes elapsed ere it was judged 
 prudent for Sir Charles to alight. He was, however, handed out in 
 safety, and immediately proceeded to take his station on the bench. 
 The doors of the Hall were then thrown open to the populace, and, in 
 a few minutes, the area was completely choked up. 
 
 “ The usual forms for opening the commission now commenced by 
 reading the Charter; but the noise and confusion occasioned consider¬ 
 able interruption. With a view to allay the uproar, some constables 
 were sent into the body of the hall, among the people, who then 
 adopted a different species of annoyance, by coughing, which at length 
 they ended in a general burst of indignation. 
 
 “In this manner the usual preliminaries were gone through, ending 
 by the adjournment of the Court, by Sir Charles, till eight o’clock on 
 Monday morning. The Recorder then withdrew from the bench, and 
 the populace, after some further marks of their displeasure towards the 
 
 / 
 
454 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 learned Judge, gave three cheers for the King, and retired into the 
 street. 
 
 “ The Recorder had, during the formality of opening the Commission, 
 made some observations calculated to further irritate the excited 
 assembly; his remarks, now that they were conveyed by them to the 
 crowd in the street, were repeated with great bitterness. Considerable 
 agitation became apparent. Parties of low characters were seen 
 hurrying backward and forward between Broad Street and Small 
 Street, lest Sir Charles should escape by the private entrance of the 
 Guildhall in the latter Street. 
 
 “In half an hour, he made his appearance at the front of the Hall, 
 and entered the Mayor’s Carriage. The demonstrations of the mob 
 however went no farther than a tremendous volley of yells mingled 
 with cries of ‘Reform.’ At this moment, Broad Street, and indeed, the 
 whole line of route to the Mansion House,* in Queen Square, was 
 filled with a dense mass of people. As the carriage passed along, 
 nothing but hisses and groans, mingled with expressions of contempt, 
 could have met his ear. There was, however, no violence; and 
 nothing transpired indicative of danger to his person, or to the peace 
 of the city, until he arrived at the Mansion House; when just as he 
 was about to alight, a number of stones struck the carriage, breaking 
 some glass; but Sir Charles entered the Mansion House without 
 receiving the slightest injury. 
 
 “The proceedings which now immediately followed, have been 
 generally regarded as those which led to the violence of the mob. The 
 special constables, instead of acting upon the instructions given them 
 by the Mayor, Chas. Pinney, Esq., that they should perform their duty 
 with the utmost precaution and forbearance, rushed pell-mell among 
 the people, and seizing a man, at random, dragged him before the 
 Magistrates, as one who had thrown stones at the Recorder; whether 
 or not they w'ere able to identify the offenders it is impossible to 
 determine; it will be admitted that their ability to do so must have 
 been very doubtful. At all events this w r as the general belief; and 
 correct or not, did not fail to produce a dire effect on the gathered 
 throng. Had they even stopped here, matters might have gone no 
 
 * Tlie Mansion House, for the mayor’s residence, was first fitted up for 
 that purpose in 1784. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 455 
 
 further; but elated with their success, they sallied forth, and in a short 
 time had secured some five or six persons after a most ill-judged 
 fashion; using their staves most unmercifully and indiscriminately. 
 One of the victims was carried by the people to the Infirmary, with a 
 fractured scull. 
 
 “Up to this point, it must be confessed, the mob were guiltless of 
 any decided outrage; and it is much to be regretted that the 
 magistrates did not now personally employ persuasive means to 
 disperse them. Had they gone among them, as was done under very 
 similar circumstances, when a former recorder, Sir Vicary Gibbs, 
 roused the ire of the multitude, doubtless they would have been 
 listened to—as was Mr. Willcox, the Mayor on the occasion referred to. 
 He stood in front of the Mansion House, for hours together, and his 
 persuasive, conciliatory words were attended with the happiest results. 
 But in this case, the special constables did as they list, no magistrate 
 undertaking to direct or regulate their proceedings. 
 
 “ The multitude now consisted of many thousand persons; and when 
 the constables had been engaged in the way described some ten or 
 fifteen minutes a cry was raised ‘To the Back’—‘To the Back.’ A 
 large body at once proceeded to the pile of faggots, heaped up there 
 for fire-wood, and in a few minutes hundreds returned to the scene, 
 armed with sticks, and bent on mischief; they were however mostly 
 soon disarmed, and the sticks strewed upon the ground. This was 
 about 1 o’clock in the afternoon; and had the advantage now gained 
 been prudently followed up, the strife would no doubt have ceased.— 
 Instead of which, one and another would sally forth single handed 
 amongst the mob, on which a scuffle would ensue, ending in further 
 excitement, and progressive exasperation. 
 
 “ As the afternoon advanced, symptoms of violence increased; sticks 
 were hurled at the constables, and missiles at the windows of the 
 Mansion house, at frequent intervals.—And when, at four o’clock, the 
 shades of night closed on the scene, nearly every pane of glass was 
 demolished, and the destruction of the building seemed inevitable. 
 
 “At this critical moment, when many of the constables had been 
 ordered to retire to their homes for refreshment, and the rioters had 
 become so elated with their exploits as to consider themselves masters 
 of the field, Mr. Pinney, the Mayor, supported by several aldermen, 
 
456 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 came to the front of the Mansion house, and attempted to address 
 them, but in vain. His remonstrances were offered in the kindest 
 manner—and the sentiments he uttered did honor to him,—but it was 
 too late. During his address he was assailed by a shower of stones 
 and brickbats; he persevered, however, for some time, amid imminent 
 peril. At length after repeatedly assuring them that he had no wish 
 to read the riot-act, which would place them all in the position of 
 felons, he exhorted them to go home. So far from being influenced by 
 the chief magistrate, they now rushed upon the few constables present, 
 disarmed them, and beat them severely. One was actually chased into 
 the float, and was with great difflculty rescued from a watery grave. 
 Another was compelled to hurl his staff at the Mansion House 
 windows, as a condition of release. 
 
 “There being now no influence that could curb the mob, nor 
 impediment to hinder the work of destruction, they commenced a 
 general and simultaneous attack on every part of the Mansion House. 
 In a few moments the partly demolished windows and sashes were 
 shivered to atoms, the shutters beaten in pieces, the doors forced, and 
 every article on the ground floor broken up. Tables, chairs, side¬ 
 boards, mirrors, chimney-glasses—in fact everything that the desperadoes 
 could lay their hands on was destroyed. The iron palisades in front of 
 the house, together with the curb-stones in which they were set, were 
 torn up, and furnished many a furious villain with a formidable weapon. 
 Even the young trees were pulled up by the roots and converted into 
 instruments of destruction;—and the dwarf walls were pulled down to 
 provide brick-bats. At the same time a large quantity of straw and 
 combustibles were brought, with which to fire the whole premises. 
 This was the time selected by Sir Charles to make his escape; which he 
 did,—not without danger and difficulty,—over the roofs of the adjoining 
 houses. Having disguised himself he was not observed ; nor was it 
 known except to a few till the next day, when he had left the city, what 
 had become of him. It is clear that if he had made his appearance in 
 the square he would have been murdered. At this very time one party 
 had arranged themselves all round the building to prevent his egress, 
 and whose vigilance it is a marvel he escaped; another party were 
 attempting to barricade the avenues leading into the square, as they 
 were expecting the troops. For this purpose a number of large planks 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 457 
 
 and other timber had been brought from the Back and Quay. In 
 order more effectually to carry on their diabolical work, they took the 
 precaution of putting out the gas-lights, by climbing the pillars. 
 Every preparation had been already made, as it afterwards appeared, to 
 set fire to the Mansion house, and it was only saved from conflagration 
 by the accidental difficulty of obtaining a light, for lucifer matches were 
 not in common use in those days. 
 
 “ At six o’clock, a troop of the 14th regiment of cavalry arrived, and 
 soon after they were joined by a troop of the third dragoon guards. 
 Their arrival was the signal for renewing the reform cry, as the soldiers 
 as well as the king were considered to sympathise with it, and they 
 were received with the most enthusiastic cheering from all quarters; 
 and the thousands who had posted themselves on the walls and other 
 elevated situations, waved their hats without manifesting the least 
 symptoms of fear or sense of danger. The troops however effectually 
 restrained all further attack upon the Mansion House that evening, and 
 continued to parade the square and adjoining streets, the people 
 constantly greeting them with cheers for the King and Reform. 
 
 “ Immediately on the arrival of the troops in Queen Square, at six 
 o’clock on Saturday evening, the magistrates gave orders to Colonel 
 Brereton to ‘clear the streets,’ but did not suggest the means to be 
 employed. The Col. on the other hand, would not take on himself 
 the responsibility of firing among the people or cutting them down, 
 consequently their number increased rather than diminished. About 
 nine o’clock an order was given to ‘draw swords;’ here was at least the 
 appearance of preparing for action, and this position was maintained 
 with the least effect, till twelve, when another order was issued for 
 employing coercive measures. An attack on the mob was the result, 
 the military using the backs and sides of their swords. 
 
 “ It was about this time that a party of rioters left the Square, and 
 proceeded to attack the Council House; they began by smashing the 
 windows, and endeavouring to force the doors. Information of this 
 new outrage speedily reached the Mansion-house, whence an emphatic 
 order to charge was instantly given to the troops. The scene now 
 became one of the greatest confusion; the people fled in all directions, 
 and in many cases were pursued to the very outskirts of the city. 
 Those of them who had assembled at the Council-house were also soon 
 
458 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 scattered; large numbers, however, taking refuge in the numerous courts 
 and alleys of Broad Street and Wine Street, from whence they assailed 
 the troops with stones, one of which, thrown from the top of the 
 Pithay, struck a soldier, and so irritated him, that he turned round and 
 shot a man, named Stephen Bush, dead upon the spot. The feeling of 
 friendliness with which the mob had hitherto regarded the soldiers, 
 was now changed into hatred. It was rumoured that the soldier had 
 dismounted and followed Bush into a corner. This however was not 
 true, but its effect on the people was to intensify their feeling of anti¬ 
 pathy. During the charge many were severely wounded by sabre cuts, 
 and one man subsequently died at the Infirmary. The mob was 
 however most completely dispersed, and by one o’clock the streets were 
 perfectly quiet. 
 
 “ Sunday morning dawned on the city with its usual tranquillity, with 
 the exception that some scores of persons sauntered about the square. 
 No danger being apprehended, at eight o’clock orders were given to the 
 troops to withdraw for refreshment, as they had now been on duty 
 more than twenty-four hours. Strange to say, they had scarcely dis¬ 
 appeared, when a party of desperadoes entered the Mansion-house, and 
 speedily ransacked every room from the cellar to the attic. The wearing 
 apparel, table linen, china, and other articles of value, were utterly 
 destroyed. The handsome furniture was hurled from the windows to 
 the ground and broken to atoms. The Mayor and Major Mackworth, 
 who had remained on the premises up to this time, were now obliged 
 to fly from their vengeance by a perilous scramble over the tops of the 
 adjoining houses. 
 
 “ But another, and a most deplorable cause of danger now began to 
 show itself: during the sacking of the Mansion-house the wine cellars 
 received especial attention from the visitors. Here were three thousand 
 six hundred bottles of wine in the hands of an excited mob. The 
 scenes which followed beggar description: hundreds, of both sexes, and 
 of all ages, greedily swallowed the intoxicating draught, and rushed 
 hither and thither, regardless of danger, and bent upon mischief, until, 
 overcome by their excesses, they lay by scores upon the ground, in a 
 state of drunken insensibility—some to awake no more. Not only in 
 the square were these disgusting scenes to be witnessed, but in many of 
 the central streets it was the same. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 459 
 
 “There was a strong public feeling among the mass of well- 
 conducted persons respecting the Corporation: who considered that 
 they gave too much attention to class interests, irrespective of the 
 public good, and this feeling was now not a little increased by the 
 consideration that the scenes of debauchery around them had their 
 origin in an improper use of the public money, one proof of which was 
 the enormous stores of wine which that body had laid up for the 
 obvious purpose of self-indulgence. In the course of the morning the 
 troops were recalled, and some skirmishes took place on St. Augustine’s 
 Back, in which one man was killed and seven or eight were wounded. 
 
 “The Mayor, driven from the Mansion-house, repaired to the 
 Guildhall, where he issued a number of notices to the citizens, 
 requesting their immediate attendance. They assembled in a consider¬ 
 able body, but returned home, after a long and fruitless discussion, the 
 magistrates having resolved on nothing definite for restoring order. 
 
 “About one o’clock a small party of desperate fellows having been 
 assured by a gentleman at the Mansion-house that Sir Charles 
 Wetherell had left the city, the ringleader coolly replied, ‘then we have 
 nothing more to do here; we’ll now go to the Bridewell and get out 
 the prisoners taken up last night, and then we can go to the jail and 
 get out the prisoners he came to try.’ They departed to the Bridewell; 
 the doors were at once assailed with sledge-hammers, and an entrance 
 gained. Mr. Evans, the keeper, had just sat down to a dinner, which 
 he was not permitted to finish, for the prisoners were at once set free, 
 and the prison set on fire. The outer gates, too, ponderous as they 
 were, were removed from their hinges and thrown over the bridge into 
 the river. All this was accomplished in less than an hour. The party 
 then proceeded, with an air of triumphant confidence, through the very 
 heart of the city, towards the New Gaol on the Cut. Here they were 
 joined by an additional body of rioters; besides these, there were many 
 thousands of lookers on, posted along the New Cut, on the opposite 
 side of the river, and indeed on every spot commanding a view of the 
 gaol. This edifice (built about 30 years previously *) was surrounded 
 by a high wall, and the entrance protected by a double set of gates, the 
 inner ones being of massive iron. This apparently inaccessible 
 
 This is an error, the New Gaol was occupied first in 1820. 
 
460 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 building was, however, entered. By means of sledge hammers, iron 
 bars, and other instruments, the doors were forced from their hinges, 
 lock and bolts were destroyed, the cells were thrown open, and all the 
 prisoners, amounting to 175 in number, were set at liberty. At the 
 same moment the Governor's house was entered, the furniture broken 
 to pieces, and the fragments thrown into the float. The prison van 
 and the gallows apparatus were also dragged out and launched into the 
 water, the whole of which was speedily carried away by the ebbing 
 tide, the multitude testifying their approval of the deed by rending the 
 air with their shouts of exultation. During these proceedings, some of 
 the magistrates made a fruitless attempt to interfere, but they were 
 driven off by a shower of stones. A detachment of Dragoons also came 
 up, and were hailed by the crowd with great enthusiasm, which the 
 soldiers acknowledged by lifting their caps, and then departed. Mr. 
 Herapath went into the gaol, and addressed the rioters, for half an 
 hour, and was listened to by some with respectful attention, but with 
 the majority it was of no avail; they intimated that they would next 
 destroy the dock gates, and then the banks. This last piece of infor¬ 
 mation induced Mr. Herapath to proceed to the Council-house, where 
 he found some of the aldermen, before whom he laid some plans calcu¬ 
 lated to allay the further progress of the destroyers. They were, 
 however, rejected. 
 
 “The next objects of destruction were the toll-houses, which were, 
 comparatively speaking, trifles, and were very soon reduced to ruins. 
 Having demolished these, the Gloucester County Prison, at Lawford’s 
 Gate, was the next scene of destruction. The same method of attack 
 was here employed as on the other large buildings; sledge-hammers 
 and crow-bars soon did their work, and the prisoners therein confined 
 were set at liberty. They then set fire to the building, which was ere 
 long reduced to a mass of ruins. At the same time that one party of 
 the rioters were engaged in destroying this prison, another party 
 proceeded to the Bridewell, to accomplish its demolition, as upon the 
 first attack only one wing had been partially destroyed. Not more 
 than a score of men remained here, and yet, strange to say, no effort 
 was made on the part of the authorities to preserve the remaining 
 portion of the building from destruction. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 461 
 
 “ But so it was, and the advantageous moment was lost when the 
 outrage might have been stopped. A greater number of rioters 
 returning, flushed with success, they very soon completed the de¬ 
 struction of the premises. At this time, about half-past eight, the 
 reflection in the sky from the three burning prisons was awfully grand. 
 A small body of men at the same time proceeded to the Lock-up 
 House for Debtors, in Tailor’s Court, Broad Street, kept by Ponting, 
 the sheriff’s officer, and demanded the liberation of the prisoners con¬ 
 fined there. This was speedily conceded to them, and they departed 
 without doing injury to the premises. The terror entertained by many 
 gentlemen was so very great that they removed the plates from their 
 doors, and took precautions to prevent their houses, and also their 
 persons, from being recognised. 
 
 “ So confident had the rioters become, on account of the great success 
 their measures had met with, that small parties now departed one one 
 way and one another, in quest of objects to destroy. Accordingly, one 
 small detachment began the work of destruction at the Bishop’s Palace, 
 where, having gained admittance, they broke into the wine cellars, and 
 then proceeded to destroy the valuable furniture; the work of demolition 
 was a little stayed by the spirited intervention of a few gentlemen, who 
 managed to separate the rioters, and for a time preserved the premises; 
 three of the ringleaders they succeeded in taking, and confined them in 
 one of the cellars. At the same time the crowd outside was rapidly 
 increasing, and assumed an aspect which threatened a recommencement 
 of the assault. A detachment of the 3rd Dragoons, who were quartered 
 at the Horse-bazaar, were then called out for the protection of the 
 Palace, and the other soldiers who still continued in the square were 
 also withdrawn for the same purpose; this last was an unfortunate step, 
 as the events will show. 
 
 “ At the time of the departure of the military from Queen Square, 
 the number of the crowd was not very considerable; it was, however, 
 gradually increasing, and it was easy to perceive that many among them 
 were most eager to finish the destruction of the Mansion-House, so soon 
 as a favourable moment offered. The scenes in the wine cellars were 
 still to be seen, and the liquors were handed about in plenty among the 
 crowd. The soldiers being gone, and the number of the rioters having 
 considerably increased, the work of burning the Mansion House was 
 
462 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 commenced. A fire was lighted in one of the kitchens which was 
 underneath the banquetting-room, and it was soon in a mass of flame. 
 Without waiting until the fire would spread of its own accord from floor 
 to floor, they proceeded to the several apartments and fired them one 
 after another, so that in a very few minutes the whole building was 
 in flames. 
 
 “ As a proof of the great speed with which this was done, it may be 
 mentioned that the troops had scarcely arrived at the Bishop’s Palace, 
 when they were told, by the glare of the flames, what had taken place. 
 Finding the Palace in a state of tolerable security, they returned to the 
 Mansion House in hopes of being in time to stay any further mischief. 
 They had barely returned to the Square, when looking back in the 
 direction whence they had come, they saw by the reflection in that 
 direction, that that building had also fallen a prey to their vengeance ; 
 thus in hopes of saving both buildings, the destruction of each was 
 facilitated. In a short time after their arrival in the Square, the roof, 
 together with the front of the Mansion House, came down upon the 
 pavement with a tremendous crash. 
 
 “ The soldiers finding that their presence was without avail, in con¬ 
 sequence of no one giving them orders to use forcible means, almost 
 immediately returned to their quarters, with the exception of a few of 
 them who were ordered to keep guard at the Guildhall and Council 
 House. About this time a troop of Yeomanry, under the command of 
 Captain Codrington, came into the city, but on finding no one to issue 
 orders as to their line of duty, they returned homewards. 
 
 “ The destruction of the Bishop’s Palace was ere long completed, and 
 nothing remained save a mass of ruins. Some of the more desperate 
 of the rioters then proposed to destroy the Cathedral, and proceeded to 
 take means for this object. A few spirited persons were happily able to 
 prevent the demolition of it. Some gentlemen, among whom may be 
 mentioned Messrs. B. Ralph, J. Livett, and J. Horton, happening to go 
 near the Bishop’s Palace late at night, one of them passing through the 
 crowd saw forty or fifty lads collected around a fire, and a man with a 
 pole and flag, surrounded by a number of people, making ready for the 
 destruction of the Cathedral and Chapter House. The floor of the 
 latter being covered with leaves torn from the books, it was considered 
 best to begin with firing that noble apartment. Mr. Norton endeavoured 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 463 
 
 to gain a hearing, but was not listened to. He then went into the 
 cloisters, where he met the other above-named gentlemen, and with 
 them resolved to do whatever they could to preserve the venerable 
 building. Mr. Kalph then went to the mob, and seizing the ringleader 
 told him the Cathedral was public property, and that no reformer or 
 friend of the king would destroy it. After a pause, the man shouted, 
 
 ‘ reform and not burn the College: ’ and then went to his comrades, who 
 agreeing with him repeated the cry. Some boys who had anticipated 
 some delight from the destruction of the building, continued near the 
 spot, occasionally throwing pieces of lighted paper into the chapter 
 house. The active precautions of the individuals already alluded to, 
 prevented any damage being done, notwithstanding that they were in 
 the course of their useful efforts assailed with sticks, stones, and brick¬ 
 bats. At length becoming wearied, the crowd gradually diminished, and 
 by half-past one in the morning, the place was clear. 
 
 “The Bishop, Dr. Gray, who had been in town during the week, left 
 in the afternoon of this day, having preached in the Cathedral in the 
 morning, without heeding the stormy and fearful scenes that were 
 raging in the neighbourhood. 
 
 “Up to this time the rioters in Queen Square and other places had 
 vented their fury only upon public buildings, and after the destruction 
 of the Mansion-house it was hoped that their anger would have been 
 satisfied. This was not to be, and great was the horror and 
 consternation manifested when it was understood that they contem¬ 
 plated destroying the dwelling houses in the Square. The attack 
 commenced, as in former instances, by smashing the windows and 
 forcing the doors, they then plundered or destroyed the valuable 
 articles within, and at last set fire to the premises. At one house, that 
 of Messrs. Leman, a great number of very valuable books were thrown 
 among the crowd, who soon tore them to pieces and scattered the leaves 
 in all directions. They thus proceeded from house to house, firing one 
 after another, and about twelve o’clock, the whole mass of buildings 
 from the Mansion-house to the middle avenue, including the Custom 
 House, and all the warehouses and other premises in Little King 
 Street, were one mass of blaze. At the Custom House the domestic 
 department was on the second floor: here were collected the inmates, 
 who were assembled round a table eating and drinking. While thus 
 
464 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 engaged they were thunderstruck—seeing the flames burst in upon 
 them; they immediately rose and rushed about in a state of the 
 utmost terror, hoping to be able to save themselves. Some precipitated 
 themselves from the windows and were much injured by the fall, but 
 others who were up higher, got upon the house-top, and throwing 
 themselves down, met with instant death; while others after 
 hesitating what course to pursue, threw themselves into the flames 
 and were burnt to death. A few escaped by getting upon the balcony 
 and sliding down from thence by means of the pillars. The demolition 
 of the Custom House w r as soon finished, and the crowd pursued their 
 way, destroying as they went. 
 
 “The next objects of destruction were the North and West sides of 
 Queen Square, which were besieged, pillaged, and afterwards set on 
 fire in a wonderfully short space of time. Some of the old houses in 
 King Street, which were chiefly composed of wood, were set on fire by 
 the wind taking the flames in that direction, and were totally destroyed. 
 On the West side of Queen Square stood the excise office, which was 
 the first of the buildings attacked on that side; some of the scenes 
 witnessed about that part were most dreadful. Women were seen 
 endeavouring to force their way through the flames, in doing which 
 their clothes were set on fire, and but for the speedy and most 
 praiseworthy exertions of some sailors who observed the dangerous 
 situation in which they were, many of them would have been burnt to 
 death; after doing all in their power to rescue the human beings who 
 were in danger, they employed themselves in staying, as much as 
 possible, the fury of the flames.* 
 
 “ On the morning of Monday, the rage and strength of the multitude 
 seemed to have spent itself in some measure; and about five o’clock, 
 a.m., a detachment of the 23rd dragoons arrived in Prince’s Street. 
 The inhabitants of some of the houses there accosted them, and were 
 told in reply by the officer in command, that if assisted by a number of 
 the citizens they would be able to restore order in that neighbourhood, 
 and to prevent the destruction of more property. Several men volun¬ 
 teered their aid, and they set forward with the troops in prosecution of 
 then’ good work. At an earlier stage of the disturbances, the late 
 
 Appendix LXXIV. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 465 
 
 Rev. Mr. Edgworth, a catholic priest, then resident in this city, had, 
 in company with his colleague, the Rev. P. O’Farrell, gone to the 
 Council House and promised immediately to find two hundred and 
 fifty able men, ready to do their utmost in quelling any further outrage. 
 Singularly enough, this offer was disregarded, one of the aldermen 
 thinking that the civil and military force were not of sufficient number 
 to stay the tumult. Mr. Edgworth on the Monday again went to 
 proffer the same assistance, which, incredible as it may seem, met with 
 a similar response. 
 
 “A small number of the rioters seemed inclined to proceed with 
 more outrages, but they were speedily dispersed by the military under 
 the command of Colonel Brereton, the soldiers for the most part using 
 merely the flat of their swords; consequently none were killed, and very 
 few wounded. After seeing the mob retire, the troops returned to their 
 quarters; an officer, Major Mackworth, riding off to Keynsham, to order 
 the 14th to return, so as effectually to quell any further assault that might 
 be made. Though the violence of the mob was not manifested at this 
 time, the same plundering was continued by women and lads, as wel 1 as 
 men, and the same scenes of drunkenness and debauchery were still to 
 be witnessed in the Square. Here and there knots of men collected 
 together, while one among them addressed the rest on the subject of 
 their recent success, and the very effectual gaol delivery they had been 
 the means of accomplishing in the morning. 
 
 “About ten o’clock the 14th returned to Bristol, and the magistrates 
 issued an order for the streets to be cleared. This accordingly was 
 done; the military, some of whom had been injured on the previous 
 day, were glad of being able to perform their duty which they ought to 
 have been ordered to do by the Major when they first came into the 
 city. Now the mob was so much diminished in numbers, as well as in 
 strength, that there was scarcely any occasion for this act of severity. 
 Many were killed, and others most severely wounded by the soldiers. 
 Orders were given for all the inhabitants, except those who had been 
 sworn in as special constables, to remain within their houses. 
 
 “ The constables walked about the streets in companies consisting of 
 from sixty to a hundred individuals; and used their utmost to send the 
 people to their homes, and to save as much property as possible. They 
 
466 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 also succeeded in taking a great many of the rioters prisoners ; and in 
 the course of a day or two, as many as two hundred were in custody. 
 
 “ The list of lolled and wounded, as subsequently made out, was— 
 killed, twelve; wounded, ninety-six; this list, however, included only 
 those who were taken to the hospitals, many more were killed and 
 burnt while engaged in plundering the houses. 
 
 “ The total loss of property has been estimated at £200,000. 
 
 “On Tuesday morning, November 1st, 1831, the city was restored to 
 order; but it was many days before the terror and excitement of the 
 people was diminished. 
 
 “ A special commission for the trial of the rioters was opened at the 
 Guildhall on January 2nd, 1832, before the Lord Chief Justice Tyndal, 
 and Mr. Justices Taunton and Bosanquet'; 114 persons were indicted 
 for various offences committed during these disturbances. Against 12 
 no bill was found; 21 were acquitted, and 81 convicted. Of those 
 convicted, 5 were condemned to death, one of whom was spared on 
 account of insanity; against 26 the sentence of death was recorded; 
 1 was transported for fourteen years, 6 for seven years, and 23 were 
 sentenced to various terms of imprisonment. 
 
 “ Courts-martial were held on Col. Brereton, the military commander 
 of the district, and upon the second in command, Captain Warrington. 
 Col. Brereton, finding that the trial was going against him, and that he 
 would in all probability be cashiered, put an end to himself by blowing 
 out his brains. Captain Warrington was ordered to be cashiered, but 
 was allowed to sell his commission. Ex officio informations were also 
 filed against several of the magistrates for neglect of duty, and against 
 the Mayor, Mr. Pinney, whose trial took place before the Court of 
 King’s Bench. His defence was that the citizens refused to confide in, 
 or assist the magistrates, and that consequently, deserted as they were 
 by their fellow-citizens, they could not have acted more efficiently. 
 Upon these grounds a verdict of acquittal was given; and the other 
 informations were withdrawn. 
 
 “ Whenever such convulsions take place in a community, they will 
 almost always be traceable to one cause, namely, an unnatural state of 
 society, arising from misgovernment. Hence it is not difficult to 
 understand how, at that period, the openly corrupt character of our 
 political and civil institutions on the one hand, and the constant excite- 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 467 
 
 ment of the mind of the populace by the agitation of the Reform Bill, 
 on the other, generated throughout the country, by a very natural 
 process, an uneasy, undefined desire for vengeance, especially among the 
 less educated classes. In our own city this feeling at length found 
 vent in acts of open violence and frightful disaster.” * 
 
 Bristol once gave the title of earl to the family of Digby, who were 
 first ennobled by King James I.; Sir John Digby, youngest son of Sir 
 George Digby, of Colesliill, Warwickshire, having been created Baron 
 Digby, and afterwards Earl of Bristol, by that monarch. These titles, 
 however, became extinct on the death of his grandson, John, the 3rd 
 earl, in lG98.f Subsequent to this, John Hervey, of Ickworth, in 
 Suffolk, was created Baron Hervey, of Ickworth, in 1703, and Earl of 
 Bristol, in 1714, and his descendant, the 5th Earl, was created 
 Marquis of Bristol in 1826.$ 
 
 The office of High Steward of Bristol has been invariably filled by 
 noblemen holding the highest situations in the Government. It first 
 commenced in 1540, in the person of Edward Seymour, Duke of 
 Somerset, the powerful Protector of the kingdom in the reign of Edward 
 VI., and the builder of the sumptuous palace on the Strand, London, 
 known as Somerset House. The following is a list of the 
 
 LORD HIGH STEWARDS OF BRISTOL. 
 
 1540 Edward Seymour, Duke of Somerset, Lord Protector, beheaded on Tower 
 Hill, January 24th, 1552. 
 
 1546 Edward, Earl of Hertford, son of the above, was Ambassador to the 
 Arch-Duke in the reign of James I. 
 
 1549 Sir William Herbert, descended from the Earls of Pembroke. 
 
 1570 Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester, K.G., and of the Privy Council to 
 Queen Elizabeth, died September 4th, 1588. 
 
 15S8 William Cecil, Lord Burleigh, Prime Minister of England upwards of 
 half-a-century, died August 4th, 1598. 
 
 * Curiosities of Bristol. 
 
 t Arms.—Azure a fleur-de-lis argent with a mullet for difference. 
 + Arms.—Gules, on a bend argent three trefoils slipped vert. 
 
 II 2 
 
4G8 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 1598 Robert Devereux, Earl of Essex; Queen Elizabeth’s unhappy favourite, 
 beheaded February 25th, 1601. 
 
 1G00 Thomas Sackville, Earl of Dorset, Lord High Treasurer of England, died 
 April 19th, 1608. 
 
 1608 Robert Cecil, Earl of Salisbury, son of the above-mentioned Lord 
 Burleigh, K.G., and Lord High Treasurer of England, died May 24th, 
 1612. 
 
 1613 William Herbert, Earl of Pembroke, K.G., Lord Chamberlain of the 
 Household to James I.; died April 10th, 1630. 
 
 1630 Richard Weston, Earl of Portland, Lord High Treasurer of England, died 
 March 13th, 1634. 
 
 1635 Philip Herbert, Earl of Pembroke and Montgomery, Lord Chamberlain of 
 the Household to Charles T., a “ strange and bad man,” died January 
 23rd, 1650. 
 
 1650 Sir Henry Vane, beheaded as a Regicide, June 14th, 1662. 
 
 1651 Oliver Cromwell, Protector, died September 3rd, 1658.* 
 
 1661 James Butler, Duke of Ormond, K.G., Lord High Steward, died July 
 21st, 16S8.+ 
 
 1715 James, Earl of Berkeley, K.G., Vice-Admiral of Great Britain, died in 
 the month of August, 1736; buried at Berkeley. 
 
 1738 Philip Yorke, Earl of Hardwicke, Lord High Chancellor of England, died 
 March 6th, 1764. 
 
 1756 William Henry Cavendish, second Duke of Portland, K.G., died May 
 1st, 1762. 
 
 1786 William Henry Cavendish, third Duke of Portland, K.G., Lord- 
 Lieutenant of Ireland, First Lord of the Treasury, &c., died October 
 30th, 1809. 
 
 1810 William Wyndham Grenville, Baron Grenville, First Lord of the Treasury, 
 (bed 1834. 
 
 1834 Henry Charles Somerset, sixth Duke of Beaufort, died November 23rd, 
 1835. 
 
 1836 Henry Somerset, seventh Duke of Beaufort, K.G., died November 17th, 
 1854. 
 
 1854 Henry Somerset, eighth Duke of Beaufort— the present Lord High 
 Steward. 
 
 The office of Recoi'der commenced in the reign of Edward III. It 
 
 is, however, not merely one of antiquity and dignity, but of great 
 
 * Appendix LXXV. 
 
 f It is not known that any person was High Steward between the death of 
 the Duke of Ormond and the accepting of that office by James, Earl of 
 Berkeley—an interval of 54 years. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 469 
 
 importance ; and as such has been filled by men distinguished by their 
 
 profound legal knowledge. The following gentlemen have been 
 
 RECORDERS OF BRISTOL. 
 
 1344 William cle Coleford, the first Recorder mentioned. He drew up, in 
 writing, the laws by which the town was to be governed, with the 
 customs and liberties of the townsmen. 
 
 1394 Simon Oliver appears to have succeeded to the office at Colefcrd’s death, 
 and probably held it until the appointment of, in 
 
 1430 Sir Richard Newton, who took the name of Cradock in after-life, calling 
 himself Newton-Cradock. Upon his elevation to the Judicial Bench, in 
 1439, he resigned the office of Recorder, and dying about the year 1450-1, 
 was buried, with his lady, in Yatton Church, Somersetshire. See ante, 
 p. 107. 
 
 1439 Sir John Inyn, buried in the Church of St. Mary Redcliffe. See ante, 
 p. 355. 
 
 1403 Thomas Young succeeded, but resigned the Recordership in 1468, on 
 being appointed a Justice in the Court of Common Pleas. He was several 
 times elected Member of Parliament for Bristol. 
 
 1468 Michael Harvey was the next Recorder, but of whom nothing further is 
 mentioned. 
 
 1483 John Twynyho. He was also Member of Parliament for the town in 
 1472 and 1484. 
 
 1486 Thomas Treymayle. He was made a Justice of the Court of King’s 
 Bench in 1488. 
 
 1500 John Greville. It is uncertain to what family this gentleman belonged, as 
 nothing but his name is recorded. 
 
 1505 William Glenville. The same remark applies also to this gentleman. 
 
 1517 Sir John Fitz-James was made a Justice of the Court of King’s Bench in 
 1522, when he resigned the office of Recorder. In the same year he was 
 elevated to the dignity of Lord Chief Baron; and to that of Chief Justice 
 of the Court of King’s Bench in 1526. 
 
 - Thomas Cromwell, Earl of Essex, Lord High Chamberlain of England, 
 
 beheaded July 24th, 1540.* 
 
 1541 David Brook, sergeant-at-law, succeeded the Earl of Essex this year. 
 
 * “ For so much the £20 charged in this side paid to the Lord of Essex, 
 late Recorder of this Town, for his fee due to him at the feast of the nativity of 
 our Lord God, in anno 1540, which customary used to be paid at one time: and 
 for that the said Lord of Essex was beheaded before that feast, in the same year, 
 anno 1540, we the auditors find that the £20 ought not to be allowed in this 
 account.”—Chamberlain’s Accounts. This is the only proof known to exist 
 that he served the office, but which, however, he appears to have filled till his 
 death. 
 
470 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 1549 Robert Kelway, of whom nothing is mentioned hut his name. 
 
 1552 John Welsh, or Walshe, was made a Justice of the Court of-Common 
 Pleas. He was Member of Parliament for Bristol in 1552, 1553, 1554, 
 1555, 1559, and 1563. 
 
 1574 Sir John Popham. He was made a sergeant.at-law in 1570, and solicitor- 
 general in 1579, when he resigned the Recordership of Bristol. In 1581 
 he was attorney-general, and raised to the dignity of Chief Justice of the 
 Court of Queen’s Bench in 1596, at which time he was knighted. He was 
 bom at Huntwith, in Somersetshire, in 1531; and when raised to be Lord 
 Chief Justice of England, was regarded as one of the most upright and able 
 judges that ever sat upon the English bench. He died at his seat, at 
 Wellington, in Somersetshire, and was buried in the south chapel of 
 Wellington Church, beneath a magnificent tomb thus inscribed:—“ Sir 
 John Popham, Knighte, lord chief justice of England; and of the honour¬ 
 able privie counsel to Queen Elizabeth, and after to King James, died the 
 tenth of June, 1607, aged seventy-six, and is here interred.” 
 
 1585 Thomas Hannam, was Member of Parliament for Bristol in 1585, 1586, 
 1589, and 1593. 
 
 1593 Sir George Snigge, buried in St. Stephen’s Church; see ante, p, 260. 
 
 1615 Sir Nicholas Hyde, was Member of Parliament for Bristol in 1625; and in 
 the following year made Lord Chief Justice of the Court of King’s Bench; 
 soon after which he resigned the Recordership. 
 
 1630 William Noy. He was born, 1577, and from being for many years “ the 
 stoutest champion of the subject’s liberty,” became Attorney-General to 
 King Charles I., when ‘ ‘ his learning and ingenuity (were) employed in 
 searching after precedents, and devising plans in support of maxims which 
 he had been recently forward to oppose. Among the neglected records in 
 the Tower, he discovered certain writs, which, on particular emergencies, 
 had been issued to the different seaports, and sometimes to the maritime 
 counties generally, requiring them to supply a given number of vessels for 
 the defence of the kingdom.”* This invention of the odious impost called 
 Ship-money has stamped his name with an “ imperishable infamy.” He 
 died August 6th, 1634. 
 
 1630 Sir John Glanville was made a Sei’jeant-at-law in 1637, elected Member 
 of Parliament for Bristol in 1640, and Speaker of the House of Commons, 
 and knighted in the following year. He died October 2nd, 1661, and was 
 buried in Broad-Hinton Church, Wiltshire. 
 
 1646 Edmund Prideaux, of whom no particulars are recorded. 
 
 1651 Serjeant Bulstrode Whitelock, was also High Steward and Recorder 
 of Oxford, but resigned that of Bristol in 1655, and died January 26th, 
 1676. During the Protectorate of Oliver Cromwell he was sent, in 1654, 
 Ambassador to Sweden, where he upheld the dignity of the English 
 Government, and asserted the wisdom of the Protector’s policy. 
 
 Vaughan’s Hist, of England under the Stuarts, p. 265. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 471 
 
 1655 Jolm Doddridge was Member of Parliament for Bristol in 1656, but was 
 displaced. 
 
 1658 John Stephens was Recorder, but of whom no other mention is made. 
 
 1662 Sir Robert Atkyns was appointed Solicitor-General to the Queen of 
 Charles II. In 1672 he was made a Justice of the Court of Common 
 Pleas, which he resigned in 1680, and the Recordersliip of Bristol in 1682, 
 retiring into private life; from whence, however, he was recalled in the 
 following year, at the earnest request of the family of Lord William Russell, 
 to aid in the defence of that nobleman. He was Member of Parliament for 
 the County of Gloucester in the only one called by James II., and by William 
 III. was made Lord Chief Baron in 16S9, and was appointed speaker to the 
 House of Lords in the same year, and so continued until 1693. During 
 the ensuing year he retired altogether from public life, to Saperton Hall, 
 near Cirencester, where he died, in 1709, aged 88 years.* His son was 
 the historian of Gloucestershire. 
 
 1682 Sir John Churchill, of Churchill, in the County of Somerset, was Member 
 of Parliament for Bristol in 1685, and Master of the Rolls, to which office 
 he was appointed in the same year. 
 
 1685 Hon. Roger North was the youngest of the 14 children of Dudley, Lord 
 North. 
 
 1688 William Powlett, probably a descendant from the family of Powlet, 
 Marquis of Winchester. 
 
 1704 Sir Robert Eyre was Master of the Rolls in 1708, a Justice of the Court 
 of Queen’s Bench in 1710, Lord Chief Baron in 1723, and Chief Justice of 
 the Court of Common Pleas in 1725. 
 
 1728 John Scrope, one of the Secretaries to the Treasury, was Member of 
 Parliament for Bristol in 1727. He resigned the Office of Recorder to the 
 city in 1735. 
 
 1735 Sir Michael Foster was a native of Marlborough, where he was born 
 December 16th 1689. He was entered at Exeter College, Oxford, and 
 soon after marrying Martha, eldest daughter of James Lyde, Esq., of 
 Stanton-Wick, Somersetshire, in 1725, he removed to Bristol, where he 
 soon attained eminence as a lawyer, and as its Recorder. He was 
 appointed a Justice of the Court of King’s Bench, in which office he 
 remained until his death, which occurred November 7th, 1763, and he was 
 buried in Stanton Drew Church. There is a couplet which says, 
 
 “ Each Judge was true and steady to his trust, 
 As Mansfield wise and as old Foster just.” 
 
 * “ Sir Robert Atkins, Recorder of the city of Bristol, having too much 
 abetted with the Fanaticks, did, by order from his Majestie, resigne his place 
 of Recordership, in December this yeare, 1682.” Bristol Memorialist, p. 289. 
 
472 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 1764 Dairies Barrington was, successively, marshal of the high court of Admiralty, 
 a Welsh Judge, second judge of Chester, and also a distinguished legal 
 writer. He died unmarried. 
 
 1766 John Dunning, the great and noted pleader, was next appointed Recorder. 
 He was a native of Ashburton, in Devonshire, and, in the lapse of years, 
 became Attorney General. When created a peer of the realm he 
 selected the name of the place of his nativity as his future title, which 
 was that of Baron Ashburton. 
 
 1738 Richard Burke, brother to the celebrated orator and member of 
 Parliament for Bristol, Edmund Burke. Of the Recorder, who was 
 Member for Bedwin in Wiltshire in 1766, Under Secretary of State, 
 Deputy Paymaster-General to the King’s troops in India; a great wit, 
 and a writer of the first order, who died in 1798,—Goldsmith, in the 
 “ Retaliation,” writes— 
 
 “Here lies honest Richard, whose fate I must sigh at, 
 
 Alas that such frolic should now be so quiet, 
 
 What spirits were his, what wit, and what whim, 
 
 Now breaking a jest, and now breaking a limb, 
 
 Now wrangling and grumbling to keep up the ball, 
 
 Now teasing and vexing, yet laughing at all ; 
 
 In short so provoking a devil was Dick 
 
 That we wished him full ten times a day at old Nick, 
 
 But missing his mirth and agreeable vein, 
 
 As often we wished to have Dick back again.” 
 
 1794 Sir Vicary Gibbs, Attorney-General to the Prince of Wales, afterwards 
 King George IV. 
 
 1818 Sir Robert Gifford was born at St. Leonard’s, Exeter, where his father was 
 a grocer. He was educated at a school near that city; went to London in 
 1800, and was admitted a Member of the Middle Temple; was called to 
 the Bar in 1808; appointed Solicitor-General in 1817; and became subse¬ 
 quently Attorney-General, Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, 
 Master of the Rolls, and a Peer of the Realm by the title of Baron 
 Gifford, of St. Leonard’s, in !the County of Devon. He died at Dover, 
 September 4th, 1826, aged 47 years. 
 
 1S26 Sir John Copley was appointed Recorder of Bristol, September 28th in 
 this year, but presided at only one gaol delivery, being almost immediately 
 raised to the office of Master of the Rolls, and Lord High Chancellor of 
 England, and to the peerage as Baron Lyndhurst. His lordship is perhaps 
 the greatest Judge at Equity or Common Law that ever occupied the 
 Bench. 
 
 1827 Sir Charles Wetherell, Attorney-General to George TV., was the third son 
 of the Dean of Hereford. He died at Preston Hall, Aylesford, near 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 473 
 
 Maidstone, Kent, from the effects of an accident, August 17th, 1846, aged 
 76 years. 
 
 1846 Richard Budden Crowder, afterwards a Judge of the Court of Common 
 Pleas, was knighted in May, 1854. He died December 5th, 1860, aged 64 
 years. 
 
 1854 Sir Alexander J. E. Coekburn, Attorney-General; raised to the dignity of 
 Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas, in November, 1856. 
 
 1856 Sergeant Kinglake, M.P., the present Recorder. 
 
 “ The office of Town Clerk is of considerable antiquity, and has been 
 held by men deeply versed in Criminal lav/.” * 
 
 TOWN CLERKS OF BRISTOL. 
 
 1653 Robert Aid worth 
 1676 John Romsey 
 1687 Nathaniel Wade 
 1720 Henry Blaake 
 1731 Sir William Cann, Bart. 
 
 1753 Sir Abraham Isaac Elton, Bart. 
 
 17S6 James Kirkepatrick 
 
 1787 Samuel Worrell 
 
 1810 Ebenezer Ludlow 
 
 1836 Daniel Burges 
 
 1849 Daniel Burges, Jim. 
 
 1409 John Joce 
 1463 Thomas Oseney 
 1479 Robert Ricart + 
 
 1503 Thomas Hardings 
 1521 John Collys 
 
 1551 -Maudeley 
 
 1557 -Wilmot 
 
 1565 William Read 
 1575 William Saxsey 
 1581 Hiram or Hierom Ham 
 1621 James Dyer 
 
 “The Chamberlain is an officer created by Henry VII., 1499, with 
 the same powers as the Chamberlain of London ; he was to be the 
 eustos of the royal grants and muniments, receiver of the revenues, and 
 to have a seal. The office was abolished at the reform in 1831.” The 
 same officer is now called the Treasurer. 
 
 CHAMBERLAINS OF BRISTOL. 
 
 1507 David Leylon 1681 John Cooke 
 
 1551 John Seybright 1702 Edward Tocknel 
 1564 Thomas Hickes 1707 Thomas Thurston 
 
 * Thomas Garrard. 
 
 + Appendix LXXVI. 
 
 K K 
 
474 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 1566 John Willis* 
 
 - James Holledge 
 
 1582 Robert Halton 
 
 1739 Christopher Willoughby 
 
 1584 Nicholas Thorn 
 
 1773 Richard Hawkswell 
 
 1603 Thomas Pit 
 
 1811 Wintour Harris 
 
 1614 Nicholas Meredith 
 
 1815 John Langley 
 
 1639 William Chetwyn 
 
 1822 Thomas Garrard, the last Chamberlain 
 
 
 TREASURERS. 
 
 1650 James Powel 
 
 1837 Thomas Garrard, as above, elected Treasurer. 
 
 1670 William Hasel 
 
 1S56 John Harford 
 
 “1216. At this time 
 
 the king (Henry III.) with his counsellors and 
 
 tutor came to Bristol as to a safe place, at which time he permitted the 
 town to choose a mayor after the manner of London, and with him 
 were chosen two ‘ grave, sad, worshipful men,’ who were called 
 prepositors.” f The following were from time to time selected to 
 fill those offices. 
 
 MAYORS. 
 
 PREPOSITORS. 
 
 1216 Adam le Page 
 
 1217 Martin Underyate 
 
 1218 John Athalle 
 
 1219 Robert Holbrast 
 
 1220 Roger de Staines 
 
 1221 Walter Mombray 
 
 1222 John de Berdwycke 
 
 1223 James de Rowborowe 
 
 1224 Walter de Wynton 
 
 1225 Hugh de Fairford 
 
 1226 John de Marsefielde 
 
 1227 Henry Long 
 
 1228 Nicholas Higham 
 
 1229 John Bruselaunce 
 
 1230 Henry de Berdwycke 
 
 1231 Elias Spryngham 
 
 1232 Walter de Fraunces 
 
 1233 Richard Aylward 
 
 1234 Jordan Brown 
 
 1235 James leWarre 
 
 Stephen Hankin, Reginald Hazard 
 Richard Martyn, Hugh Upwell 
 Richard Palmer, John Snowe 
 John Oldham, Henry Vynepenny 
 Peter le Goldsmith, Robert de Monmouth 
 John de Rumney, Philip le Coke 
 Robert de Weston, William Dexe 
 Thomas le Spycer, Walter Ubbely 
 Robert Martyn, John Metheham 
 Richard de Bury, John de Broadways 
 William Colepeke, Nicholas Coker 
 Alexander Rope, Henry de Tame 
 William Chard, Richard Bryan 
 Nicholas de Portbury, William de Hayle 
 Ralph Atship, Walter le Rede 
 John de Kerdyff, John Atwall 
 Henry le Walleys, Thomas de Pedeston 
 Gilbert le Plomer, Thomas le Chaloner 
 Thomas Updyke, John Ergleys 
 William Clarke, John de Belliter 
 
 * Appendix LXXVH. 
 t Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 668. 
 
HISTORY OR BRISTOL. 
 
 475 
 
 1236 Richard de Horton 
 
 1237 Phillip de Pawlet 
 
 1238 Thomas de Weston 
 
 1239 Robert le Bell 
 
 1240 Richard Ay 1 ward 
 
 1241 William Spackstone 
 
 1242 John Veils 
 
 1243 Ralph Moiny 
 
 1244 Walter Nesliam 
 
 1245 Elias de Axbridge 
 
 1246 Richard Frostall 
 
 1247 Richard Aylward 
 
 1248 Reginald de Panes 
 
 1249 Galfridus le Wright 
 
 1250 John Adrian 
 
 1251 Roger de Bury 
 
 1252 Elias Long 
 
 1253 Thomas Rowse 
 
 1254 Raynold White 
 
 1255 Henry Adrian 
 
 1256 Adam de Berkham 
 
 1257 Roger de Stokes 
 
 1258 Clement Romney 
 
 1259 William de Gloucester 
 
 1260 John de Lyne 
 
 1261 Robert Kilmanam 
 
 1262 Adam de Berkham 
 
 1263 Thomas Rowse 
 
 1264 Henry Adrian 
 
 1265 Stephen Ormstoue 
 
 1266 Thomas Selby 
 
 1267 Simon Clarke 
 
 William Golde, Richard de Bury 
 Thomas Aylward, Roger Cantocke 
 Richard Osmonde, John de Gallande 
 William le Chilton, Henry le Challoner 
 William de Bellemonte, Robert de Kilmainam 
 William de Leigh, Robert Parmeut 
 Thomas Rice, Richard Hackall 
 Paul Cut, Roger Snake 
 Ralph Nupton, John Walker 
 John de St. Barbara, Richard de Tilley 
 David le Wright, Richard de Lemster 
 William Tonnard, John Norfolk 
 John Weston, Walter de Berkham 
 Walter Tropp, William Snake 
 Walter Dalznage, Henry Farnkam 
 Thomas de Norwood, John Cornhill 
 Robert de Bellemont, Gilbert de Malbrege 
 John Attwood, John Atknowle 
 Ralph Ouldham, William Haseldene 
 Hugh Mitchel, William Sevar 
 Robert Shirley, W illiam Freebody 
 Thomas Eldisham, Robert Pickeridge 
 Roger Piper, Thomas Winfield 
 John Hartshorn, Robert Hornebey 
 Ralph de Bird, Roger de Cantock 
 Thomas Tremworth, Richard Rustheton 
 Thomas Hemmingfield, Geoffry Usher 
 Harry de Puxton, Robert Tremworth 
 .Joseph Caparon, William Chadburn 
 Ralph Bard win, John Exhall 
 Raynold Richards, John Puxton 
 William de Belmonte, Roger de Bercham 
 
 This year the Prepositors were called Seneschals or Stewards. 
 
 MAYORS. 
 
 SENESCHALS. 
 
 1268 Robert Mansell 
 
 1269 Robert Fisher 
 
 1270 Ralph Palden 
 
 1271 John Wissey 
 
 1272 Richard de Welles 
 
 1273 Peter de Keinsham 
 
 1274 Thomas de Haselden 
 
 John Legatt, Peter Marten 
 Simon Adrian, Roger Draper 
 Richard de Cliston, Thomas Haselden 
 Roger de Cantock, William Bradwick 
 Robert Snowand, Simon de Wedrnore 
 John Salkin, Ralph de Ax 
 Simon Adrian, William de Marina 
 K K 2 
 
476 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 1275 Gerrard le Francis 
 
 1276 Simon de Bardney 
 
 1277 John de Lydeyard 
 
 1278 Roger le Tavernor 
 
 1279 Peter de Rumney 
 12S0 John Beauflour 
 
 1281 William Horncastle 
 
 1282 Roger Piper 
 
 1283 Peter de Rumney 
 
 1284 Richard de Mangotsfield 
 
 1285 Richard de Mangotsfield 
 
 1256 John de la Ware 
 
 1257 Roger de Grafton 
 1288 Roger le Draper 
 12S9 Roger Turtle 
 
 1290 Richard Mangotsfield 
 
 1291 Simon de Burton 
 
 1292 Thomas de Tilly 
 
 1293 Walter Francis 
 
 1294 Simon de Bourton 
 
 1295 William Randolph 
 
 1296 Simon de Bourton 
 
 1297 John Snow 
 
 1298 Richard Mangotsfield 
 
 1299 Roger Turtle 
 
 1300 Thomas de Tilly 
 
 1301 Walter de Adrian 
 
 1302 Simon de Bourton 
 
 1303 Thomas le Grave 
 
 1304 Simon de Bourton 
 
 1305 Simon de Bourton 
 
 1306 William Randolph 
 
 1307 John Snow 
 
 1308 John Taverner 
 
 1309 John Taverner 
 
 1310 William Randolph 
 
 1311 J. Danseller 
 
 1312 William Bore 
 
 1313 John le Taverner 
 
 John de Portshead, Robert Lancaster 
 
 Robert de Kingswood, Raynald de Capener 
 
 Robert Truelove, William de Scriven 
 
 John Bryan, Nicholas Atokes 
 
 John Hoddy, Thomas Coston 
 
 John de Cardiff, Robert de Whetmarsh 
 
 William Wedmore, Robert Golding 
 
 Richard Atokes, William Boyse 
 
 Richard Tunbrill, William Witchwell 
 
 Henry Horncastle, Galfrid Snell 
 
 Thomas de Weston, John Tonney 
 
 William Howden, Thomas Prestley 
 
 Thomas Royston, John Bennington 
 
 John de Chedclre, John le Long 
 
 Hugh de Langbridge, John Francis 
 
 Simon de Burton, William Randolph 
 
 John de Cheddre, John de Snow 
 
 Walter Glen, Simon Ricroft 
 
 Walter Godshalf, Thomas de 'Weston 
 
 Robert de Ottery, William Rowbrough 
 
 Thomas Updish, Robert Holdbush 
 
 Robert de Ottery, William Rowbrough 
 
 John de Long, Adam Welshot 
 
 Jeffery Godshalf, William Marina 
 
 John Francis, Hugh de Langbridge 
 
 Richard de Colepitt, W illiam de Glassonbury 
 
 Robert Bostock, John Horshalt 
 
 Robert Ottery, Nicholas Rowbrough 
 
 John Tike, Roger Beauflour 
 
 William Updish, Robert Hornhurst 
 
 Robert Ottery, Nicholas Rowbrough 
 
 John de Cheddar, John de Long 
 
 Nicholas Brerton, Thomas de Barwick 
 
 William Le Olive, Gilbert Pickering 
 
 Robert de Ottery, Adam Welscott 
 
 John Ramney, Walter- Trapin 
 
 Thomas Spicer, Robert Randolph 
 
 John Beauliower, Thomas le Spicer 
 
 Lawrence de Cary, Richard de Whitt 
 
 This year Seneschals were left out and Bailiffs chosen in their place. 
 
 MAYORS. 
 
 BAILIFFS. 
 
 1314 Raynald de Paines Richard Winsman, Johnle Honte 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 477 
 
 1315 William Randolph 
 
 1316 Robert Passons 
 
 1317 Richard Tilly 
 
 1318 Roger Terrill 
 
 1319 William de Axe 
 
 1320 Richard de Tilly 
 
 1321 Richard de Tilly 
 
 1322 Roger Terrill 
 
 1323 John de Keinsham 
 
 1324 John de Romney 
 
 1325 John de Romney 
 
 1326 Roger Turtle 
 
 1327 Hugh de Langbridge 
 
 1328 John Francis 
 
 1329 John de Axbridge 
 
 1330 Roger Turtle 
 
 1331 Everard le Frances 
 
 1332 Roger Turtle 
 
 1333 Roger Turtle 
 
 1334 Hugh Lanbriuge 
 
 1335 Roger Turtle * 
 
 1336 Everard le Frances 
 
 1337 Stephen le Spicer 
 
 1338 Stephen le Spicer 
 
 1339 Everard le Frances 
 
 1340 Roger Turtle 
 
 1341 Roger Turtle 
 
 1342 Robert Wrington 
 
 1343 Stephen le Spicer 
 
 1344 Stephen le Spicer 
 
 1345 Robert Gwyen 
 
 1346 Robert Gwyen 
 
 1347 Robert Wrington 
 
 1348 John le Spicer 
 
 1349 Robert Gwyen 
 
 1350 John Wickham 
 
 1351 John Spicer 
 
 1352 Jolm de Cobbinton 
 
 1353 Richard le Spycer 
 
 1354 Richard le Spycer 
 
 1355 Thomas Babcary 
 
 1356 Reynald le French 
 
 Robert Holburt, John Wellishotte 
 Richard Colepeck, Henry Winpenny 
 Thomas Fraunces, Hugh de Langbridge 
 Richard de Paines, Richard le White 
 Roger de Littlebury, Jeffery de Wraxall 
 William Hangfield, Hugh de Prowt 
 Gilbert Pickeril, Clement Turtle 
 Thomas le Spicer, Hugh de Langbridge 
 Everard le Fraunces, Stephen le Spicer 
 Stephen le Spicer, Gilbert Pickerill 
 John Fraunces, Walter Prentis 
 Robert Guyen, Robert de Wrynton 
 John de Romney, Nicholas Free 
 John Atwell, Henry de Francis 
 Roger Plewett, Henry Babcary 
 Stephen de Spicer, Henry Babcary 
 Josias de Ramy, Thomas Terpin 
 Stephen le Spicer, Henry Babcary 
 Josias de Ramy, Peter Testin 
 Stephen le Spicer, Thomas Terpin 
 Richard de Caine, Walter de Pelevell 
 Thomas Tilly, John de Laxham 
 Robert de Wrington, John le Spicer 
 Peter Testin, William Hanny 
 Thomas Turpine, John de Cobbinton 
 James Tilly, Thomas Blanket 
 Thomas Turpine, Thomas Blanket 
 William Hains, Thomas Albon 
 John Curtis, William Hanny 
 William Hains, Thomas Albon 
 John Neal, James Tilly 
 Robert Codner, William Hanny 
 Roger Banner, Walter Wenlake 
 John Cobbington, Roger Prentis 
 Edmund Blanket, Raynald French 
 John de Castlecary, Walter Darby 
 Robert Chedre, Walter Derby 
 Thomas de Coventry, John de Castlecary 
 Robert Attwell, John Stoke 
 John Stoke, Richard de Dean 
 Richard Hemming, John Cobbinton 
 Walter Derby, Thomas lulling 
 
 Appendix LXXVIII. 
 
478 HISTORY 
 
 1357 Walter Frampton 
 
 1358 Reynald le French 
 
 1359 Thomas Babcary 
 
 1360 Robert Chedre 
 
 1361 Richard Brandon 
 
 1362 Robert Chedre 
 
 1363 Walter Derby 
 
 1364 John Stokes 
 
 1365 Walter Frampton 
 
 1366 John Stokes 
 
 1367 Walter Derby 
 
 1368 John Bath 
 
 1369 Elias Spelly 
 
 1370 John Bath 
 
 1371 Richard Spycer 
 
 OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Richard Bromdon, Jeffery Beauttower 
 John Stoar or Sore, Henry Vyell 
 Walter Derby, John Stoke 
 Elias Spelly, Henry Somerwell 
 Walter Derby, William Canynges 
 Elias Spelly, Henry Williston 
 Henry Williston, William Woodrover 
 William Hayle, John Bate 
 John de Stowe, Henry Williston 
 William Somervell, John Keene 
 William Dagon, John Blunt 
 John Blunt, John Vyell 
 William Canynges, John Vyell 
 Thomas Beaupenny, Henry Vyell 
 John Inhynge, John Preston 
 
 MAYORS. SHERIFFS. 
 
 BAILIFFS. 
 
 1372 William Canynges 
 
 1373 William Canynges 
 
 1374 Walter Frampton 
 
 1375 William Canynges 
 
 1376 Walter Derby 
 
 1377 Thomas Beaupeny 
 
 1378 Elias Spelly 
 
 1379 John Stokes 
 
 1380 Walter Derby 
 
 1381 William Canynges 
 
 1382 Elias Spelly 
 
 1383 Thomas Beaupenny 
 
 1384 Walter Derby 
 
 1385 William Canynges 
 
 1386 Thomas Knappe 
 
 1387 William Somervell 
 
 1388 John Vyell 
 
 1389 William Canynges 
 
 1390 Elias Spelly 
 
 1391 Thomas Knappe 
 
 1392 John Canynges 
 
 1393 John Somervell 
 
 1394 William Froome 
 
 1395 John Barstaple 
 
 1396 Thomas Knappe 
 
 1397 John Banbury 
 
 John Vyell 
 John Vyell 
 Thomas Beaupeny 
 Henry Vyell 
 William Somervell 
 Walter Studly 
 William Coombe 
 Thomas Knappe 
 William Somervell 
 John Candever 
 John Canynges 
 Robert Candever 
 Thomas Sampson 
 John Somervell 
 Peter Barogh 
 William Froome 
 William Wodrowe 
 John Barstable 
 Thomas Athay 
 John de Banbury 
 Walter Seymour 
 John Havering 
 John Stephens 
 Roger Toker 
 William Warmister 
 John Pryston 
 
 Thomas Sampson, Walter Hudly 
 Thos. Sampson, N. Studley 
 Thos. Sutton, Reginald Towker 
 No Bailiff's this year 
 William Coombe, Thos. Knappe 
 Thos. Sampson, WalterTyddeley 
 William Elingham, John Stanes 
 John Stanes, John Barstable 
 Robt. Candever, John Canynges 
 Walter Seymor, John Priston 
 John Stanes, Wm. W r armister 
 John Somervell, Peter Barogh 
 John Young, William Draper 
 Roger Tucker, John Bright 
 W illiam Froome, Thomas Athay 
 Thomas Colston, John Snell 
 Thomas Athay, John Stephens 
 John Banbury, John Havering 
 Robt. Dudbrook, JohnSelwoode 
 John Burtone, Rich. Hanteford 
 Thos. Norton, Rich. Brookworth 
 William Solers, Thomas Blunt 
 John Pryston, John Castle 
 Robt. Dudbrook, Jn. de Sodbury 
 Robt. Brookworth, J. Hardwick 
 William Draper, Henry Rokerill 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 479 
 
 1398 John Canynges 
 
 1399 Thomas Knappe 
 
 1400 William Froome 
 
 1401 John Barstable 
 
 1402 John Stephens 
 
 1403 Thomas Knappe 
 
 1404 Robert Dudbrook 
 
 1405 John Barstable 
 
 1406 John Droyse 
 
 1407 Thomas Blunt 
 
 1408 John Fisher 
 
 1409 John Droyse 
 
 1410 John Seely 
 
 1411 Thomas Young 
 
 1412 John Cleve 
 
 1413 Thomas Norton 
 
 1414 John Droyes 
 
 1415 John Sharpe 
 
 1416 Thomas Blount 
 
 1417 Robert Russell 
 
 1418 John Newton 
 
 1419 James Cokis 
 
 1420 Thomas Young 
 
 1421 John Spyne 
 
 1422 Mark Williams 
 
 1423 JohnBurtone 
 
 1424 John Leycester 
 
 1425 John Cleve 
 
 1426 Robert Russell 
 
 1427 John Newton 
 
 1428 Roger Levedon 
 
 1429 JohnBurtone 
 
 1430 John Leycester 
 
 1431 Richard Tranode 
 
 1432 John Sharpe 
 
 1433 John Fisher 
 
 1434 Thomas Holeway 
 
 1435 John Milton 
 
 1436 Richard Foster 
 
 1437 Clement Baggod 
 
 1438 Hugh Whitford 
 
 * Jeffry Barber, oi 
 Berks, where his tomb 
 
 Robert Baxter 
 Thomas Blunt 
 Robert Dudbrook 
 Thomas Norton 
 John Seely 
 Thomas Glouster 
 John Droyes 
 Mark Williams 
 John Fisher 
 Thomas Young 
 John Olyffe 
 James Cokys 
 Nicholas Exeter 
 John Spine 
 John Sharp 
 John Newton 
 Robert Russell 
 William Bendy 
 David Dudbrook 
 John Leycester 
 John Burtone 
 David Ruddock 
 Roger Lavindon 
 Nicholas Baggod 
 Richard Trenolde 
 Thomas Holway 
 Thomas Earle 
 Robert Cloveld 
 Nicholas Dennis 
 John Sharpe 
 Henry Gildney 
 John Shipwarde 
 Hugh Whitford 
 Clement Baggod 
 Richard Arfoise 
 Richard Foster 
 Thomas Fisher 
 J ohn Spycer 
 Walter Powel 
 Nicholas Frome 
 William Canynges 
 
 John le Manner, John Sodbury 
 Thos. Glosister, Jeffery Barber* 
 Mark Williams, John Seely 
 Richard Paines, Simon Algod 
 Thos. Young, Nicholas Exeter 
 John Droyes, Adam Inhyng 
 Robert Russell, Gilbert Joyce 
 John Cleve, John Newton 
 James Crokys, David Dudbrook 
 J ohn Spyne, Robert Barstable 
 John Ship ward, John Leycester 
 J ohn Sutton, William Bendy 
 Robert Clovelde, Walter Parle 
 Wm. Stephens, David Ruddeck 
 Thomas Hendy, William Barret 
 William Wetlierly, Walter Milton 
 John Draper, John Milton 
 Nicholas Baggod, John Shipward 
 John Burtone, Nicholas Dennis 
 Roger Levedon, Walter Milton 
 Thomas Hollway, John Langley 
 Henry Gildency, Thomas Fish 
 Richard Trenolde, John Cotton 
 Richard Arves, Edmund Brown 
 Thomas Erie, John Peers 
 John Hethe, Richard Alexander 
 Thomas Hook, Walter Powell 
 Walter Powel, John Snethe 
 Clement Baggod, Hugh Whitford 
 Andrew Parle, John Erie 
 John Talbot, John Triott 
 Richard Foster, John Albinton 
 Wm. Dimster, John Papinham 
 John Spicer, Nicholas Frome 
 Thomas Noreys, Wm. Canynges 
 John English, Thomas Markes 
 Richard Roper, John Stanley 
 Nicholas Hill, William Clynche 
 William Coder, John Forde 
 Thomas Hore, Thomas Belle 
 Thomas Mede, John Gosling 
 
 ' Barbour, was buried in St. Helen’s Church, Abingdon, 
 may still be seen. 
 
480 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 1439 John Sharpe 
 
 1440 Nicholas Freme 
 
 1441 William Canynges 
 
 1442 Clement Baggod 
 
 1443 John Stanley 
 
 1444 John Shipward 
 
 1445 Nicholas Hill 
 144G Richard Foster 
 
 1447 Richard Foster 
 
 1448 John Burtone 
 
 1449 William Canynges 
 
 1450 John Burtone 
 
 1451 John Stanley 
 
 1452 William Coder 
 
 1453 Robert Sturmy 
 
 1454 Richard Hatter 
 
 1455 John Shipward 
 
 1456 W T illiam Canynges 
 
 1457 William Coder 
 
 1458 Philip Mead 
 
 1459 Thomas Rodgers 
 
 1460 W r illiam Canynges 
 
 1461 Philip Mead 
 
 1462 John Wickham 
 
 1463 John Shipward 
 
 1464 William Codar 
 
 1465 William Spencer 
 
 1466 William Canynges 
 
 1467 Robert Jakys 
 
 1468 Philip Mead 
 
 1469 John Shipward 
 
 1470 Thomas Kainsham 
 
 1471 John Hawkes 
 
 1472 John Cogan 
 
 1473 W 7 illiam Spencer 
 
 1474 Robert Strange 
 
 1475 William Bird 
 
 1476 John Baggott 
 
 1477 John Shipward 
 
 1478 William Spencer 
 
 Richard Roper 
 John Stanley 
 John Shipward 
 Nicholas Hill 
 William Coder 
 John Foord 
 John Bolton 
 John Troyte 
 Thomas Balle 
 William Pavie 
 Thomas Hore 
 Robert Sturmy 
 Richard Hatter 
 Thomas Mead ' 
 William Howell 
 Philip Mead 
 Thomas Rodgers 
 William Daine 
 John Wickham 
 John Baggott 
 Robert Jakis 
 Thomas Kenysson 
 William Spencer 
 Richard Alberton 
 John Hawkins 
 John Cogan 
 John George 
 John Gaywood 
 John Hooper 
 Robert Strange 
 W T illiam Bird 
 Henry Chester 
 William Wedington 
 John Jay 
 Edmund Westcott 
 John Foster 
 Thomas Rowley 
 William Wickham 
 Henry Vaughan 
 John Shyven 
 
 William Pavy, John Shipward 
 John Whiteford, William Howell 
 Nicholas Stone, Robert Sturing 
 Richard Hatter, Richard Haddon 
 William Skermott, Wm. Powney 
 Phillip Mead Thomas Rodgers 
 Richard Marshall, Richard Bayly 
 William Deane, William Talbot 
 W r illiam Rolph, John Wickham 
 John Eastmande, John Bennet 
 Richard Abberton, Wm. Spencer 
 John Sharpe, jun., Wm. Dillyng 
 Robert Jakes, John Hosier 
 Thomas Ash, William Raines 
 Nicholas Long, Thos. Keynsham 
 William Hatton, John Cogon 
 John Baggott, Robert Bolton 
 Henry Chester, John Jay 
 John Clerke, Robert Ball 
 John Hawks, John Jay, jun. 
 John Gaywood, John Saint 
 Wm. Woddington, Lewis Morris 
 Robert Strange, Henry Balle 
 John Foster, Jeffry Griffith 
 William Bird, Walter Coston 
 William Rokye, John Gyton 
 Jno Shipward, jun., E. Westcott 
 W T alter Grimsteed, Thos. Rowley 
 William Wickham, John Skevyn 
 John Lancorton, John Goodard 
 Henry Vaughan, John Powke 
 John Stevens, William Dokett 
 John Powke, John Easterfield 
 John Gurney, John Gregory 
 John Swayne, Thomas Flexall 
 Thos. Hexton, William Rowley 
 John Sing, Richard Sherman 
 John Chester, Philip Caple 
 John Batkok, Clement Wiltshire 
 John Drewes, Richard Bond 
 
 Up to this date I have copied the list given by Mr. Barrett, which 
 differs materially from the Mayor’s Calendar, as well as from other 
 
HISTORY OR BRISTOL. 
 
 481 
 
 manuscript lists which have been kindly placed at my service. It is, 
 however, perhaps as correct as any other, and the only one with which 
 the popular reader can be at all familiar. From 1479. the year in 
 which Robert Ricaut was elected Town Clerk, and virtually began the 
 Mayors’ Calendar (ante, p. 473.) I have followed that authority, and 
 have pleasure in presenting the reader, for, I believe, the first time, 
 with a copy of that document, and for the correctness of which I can 
 vouch, as I transcribed it with my own hand. The orthography, too, 
 has been strictly followed throughout. 
 
 In Mr. Barrett’s list William Spencer is said to have been Mayor in 
 1478 instead of 1479; this may have occurred from the simple fact of 
 the writer commencing his mayoralty year with a date differing from 
 the Mayors’ Calendar. 
 
 1479 William Spencer John Chryven 
 
 1480 Edmond Westcott John Powke 
 
 1481 William Wodington William Toket 
 
 1482 John Fforster John Pynke 
 
 1483 Robert Strange John Esterfield 
 
 1484 Henry Vaughan John Stephens 
 1483 William Werkehum John Swayne 
 1486 Edmund Wescote Henry Sherman 
 
 This year Edmund Wescote died 15 days 
 
 John Druez, Richard Bonde 
 John Griffith, John Wolbatt 
 Rob. Bunnok, Jno Houndesley 
 John Langforde, Wm. Regent 
 Thomas Spicer, Henry Dale 
 John Vaughan, Wm. Ganncell 
 John llemmyng, Wm. Spycer 
 Philip Kyngston, Hugo Jonys 
 [Bynor 
 
 after Michaelmas 
 
 1487 William Wykham John Snyg 
 
 1488 John Esterfeld 
 
 1489 JohnPenke 
 
 1490 Robert Strange 
 
 1491 John Stephens 
 
 1492 William Toker 
 
 John Chester 
 Clement Wilteshire 
 Thomas Spycer 
 William Regent 
 Henry Dale 
 
 1493 Clement Wilteshyre John Drewes 
 
 John Jay, Thomas ap Howell 
 Nicholas Brown, John Welsshe 
 John Howel, John Hurler 
 John Taillor, Robert Ffortey 
 George Monony, Rd. Vaughan 
 John Fuyster, David Cogan 
 John Popley, Roger Dawes 
 
 This yere the said Clement Wilteshyre dyed and John Hawker was elected 
 to serve in hys roine. 
 
 1494 Henry Vaughan 
 
 1495 John Esterfekl 
 
 1496 William Regent 
 
 1497 John Drewes 
 
 1498 Henry Dale 
 
 1499 Philip Kyngstone 
 
 1500 Nicholas Brown 
 
 Philip Kyngston 
 Mathew Jubbes 
 Nicholas Brown 
 Hugh Johnes Brewer 
 Richard Vaughan 
 John Jay 
 Philip Grene 
 
 John Keynes, Philip Grene 
 William Estby, John Rowloud 
 David Leyson, John Johnes 
 Thomas Vaughan, John Elyot 
 William Lane, John Spencer 
 John Vaughan, Thos. Wescote 
 Richard Hoby, Walter Rice 
 
 L L 
 
482 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 1501 
 
 1502 
 
 1503 
 
 1504 
 
 1505 
 
 1506 
 
 1507 
 
 1508 
 
 1509 
 
 1510 
 
 1511 
 
 1512 
 151.3 
 
 1514 
 
 1515 
 
 1516 
 
 1517 
 
 1518 
 
 1519 
 
 1520 
 
 1521 
 
 1522 
 
 1523 
 
 1524 
 152-5 
 
 1526 
 
 1527 
 
 1528 
 
 1529 
 
 1530 
 
 1531 
 
 Richard Vaughan Hugh Elyot, Sheriff 
 George Monony Thomas Snyg 
 
 Hugh Johnes John Colas 
 
 Henry Dale Richard Amefick 
 
 David Philips, alias William Jeffreys 
 [Cogan 
 
 Roger Dawes Thomas Elyot 
 
 John Baton, Bailiff 
 Thomas Parnaunt 
 John G'aple 
 William Godford 
 Edward Penson 
 
 John Harrys 
 
 This yere the saide Thomas Elyot dyed & Thomas Smyth merchaunt was 
 chosen in hys rome of Sheref. 
 
 Philip Kyngston 
 John Vaughan 
 Richard Hoby 
 John Cabutt 
 J olm Poplay 
 John Rowland 
 John Ellyott 
 William Bedford 
 Robert Thorn 
 Roger Pawes 
 Jolin Vaughan 
 Richard Hoby 
 
 William Edwardes 
 John Edwax-des 
 Johu Matthew 
 John Williams 
 Ralph ap Rys 
 Johu Hutton 
 Thomas Dale 
 John Shypman 
 John Ware 
 Richard Abyngdon 
 Thomas Pacy 
 John Drewes 
 
 John Weller 
 Simon Gerbys 
 Wiliam Nele 
 John Wilkyns 
 Robert Hutton 
 Humphrey Browne 
 Thomas Broke 
 William Wapley 
 Richard Tonell 
 William Vaughan 
 Edward Pajn 
 John Pope 
 
 supplied his yere. 
 
 This yere the Maire died and John Jay 
 
 John Edwards 
 John Willyams 
 Roger Dawes 
 John Shipman 
 William Wosley 
 John Wilkyns 
 John Hutton 
 Richard Abyngdon 
 Thomas Broke 
 John Ware 
 Richard Tonell 
 J olm Shipman 
 Thomas 'White 
 
 John Hall 
 Clemens Bays 
 William Shypman 
 Robert Ellyott 
 Gilbert Cogan 
 Robert Chapman 
 Thomas Jeoffreys 
 Henry Whyte 
 David Laurence 
 Thomas Nasshe 
 Nicholas Thorn 
 William Skelke 
 George Hall and 
 
 William Dale 
 
 Robert Salbrige 
 
 Robert Abyngy 
 
 Roger Coke 
 
 William Chester 
 
 John Davys 
 
 John Spryng 
 
 John Gerveys 
 
 George Baderam 
 
 David Hutton 
 
 John Thom 
 
 Thomas Silke 
 
 William Ffreman, Sheriffs 
 
 This yere the said Willyam died the xvilh day October next aft. his 
 election unto his Office, And Robert Adams was elected Shereff of this 
 Shire and Town of Bristowe by the Comon Counsull of the same Towne 
 the xvitk day of Octobre for said to supply and finichye ®. yere. 
 
 William Cary 
 
 1532 Thomas Pacy 
 
 John Manncell 
 
HISTORY 01-' BRISTOL. 
 
 483 
 
 1533 
 
 1534 
 
 1535 
 
 1536 
 
 1537 
 
 1538 
 
 1539 
 
 1540 
 
 1541 
 1512 
 1543 
 
 1544 
 
 1545 
 
 1546 
 
 1547 
 
 1548 
 
 1549 
 
 1550 
 
 1551 
 
 1552 
 
 1553 
 
 1554 
 
 1555 
 
 1556 
 
 1557 
 
 1558 
 
 1559 
 
 1560 
 
 1561 
 
 1562 
 
 1563 
 
 1564 
 
 1565 
 
 1566 
 
 1567 
 
 1568 
 
 1569 
 
 1570 
 
 Clement Bays John Smyth William Pyke 
 
 William Shipman William ap Howell Anthony Payn 
 Roger Coke John Brampton Nicholas Wudhouse 
 
 John Hutton Thomas Hart, John Northale 
 
 Richard Abj ngdon Richard Pryn, Thomas More 
 William Chester Thomas Wynnesmore, Eouland Cow per 
 Thomas Jeffreys William Jay, David Ranys 
 John Spryng William Rowley, William Yong 
 
 Robert Ellyett William Spratt, Richard Mors 
 Roger Coko Richard Watley, Robert Sopcy 
 
 Henry W hite William Ballarde, William Pepwall 
 
 This yere xiiii days before myghclmas the said Harry Whyte mayor Dyed 
 and J ohn Pepe was chosen to supply his Rome. 
 
 Thomas Pacy 
 Nicholas Thorne 
 Robert Adams 
 William Carye 
 John Smythe 
 William Pykes 
 Wil'iam Jay 
 
 Francis Cudryngton, Thomas Launsdon 
 John Gurney, Roger Jones 
 William Carr, Richard Davys 
 John Wells, Thomas Joachym 
 Thomas Harris, William Tyndall 
 John Mathewes, Edward Tynte 
 Edward Prynne, John Stones 
 
 In this yero the new Tolsel was Buylte. 
 
 David Harries 
 Roger Cooke 
 William Chester 
 John Northall 
 John Smythe 
 William Younge 
 Robert Saxcy 
 William Pepwall 
 Robert Adams 
 Roger Jones 
 William Carr 
 John Dykes 
 John Stones 
 Nicholas Williams 
 Anthony Stanbank 
 John Northall 
 John Cutt 
 William Pepwall 
 John Stone 
 Thomas Chester 
 
 Roger Malwarde, Thomas Shewarde 
 William Jones, Nicholas Williams 
 Thomas Tyson, Anthony Standbank 
 John Tickes, Senr., John Pickes, Junr. 
 Giles Whyte, John Cutte 
 Thomas Shipman, John Griffitke 
 George Snygge, William Butler 
 Arthur Eycarte, William Tucker 
 John Browne, John Prewett 
 Thomas Chester, Thomas Kelke 
 Michael Sowdeley, George Higgyns 
 John Wade, Thomas Colston 
 John Robertes, William Belsher 
 Thomas Yonge, Richard Davys 
 Edmund Jones, Thomas Slocumbe 
 William Young, John Jones 
 Philip Langley, Thomas Aldworth 
 Dominick Chester, Walter Pykes 
 Robert Smyth, Thomas Kyrkeland 
 Thomas Rowland, Richard Cole 
 
 LI J 
 
484 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 1571 William Tucker 
 
 1572 John Stone 
 
 1573 John Brown 
 
 1574 Thomas Kelke 
 
 1575 George Snygge 
 
 1576 John Prewett 
 
 1577 John Wade 
 
 1578 Thomas Colstone 
 
 1579 John Roberte 
 15S0 Thomas Yoimge 
 
 1581 Thomas Stocombe 
 
 1582 Phillipp Langley 
 
 1583 Thomas Aldworth 
 
 1584 Walter Pyke 
 
 1585 Thomas Bowlande 
 
 1586 Pochard Cole 
 15S7 William Hickes 
 
 1588 John Barnes 
 
 1589 Robert Kitchin 
 
 1590 William Birde 
 
 1591 William Hopkyns 
 
 1592 Walter Stanfast 
 
 1593 Thomas Aldworth 
 
 1594 Michael Pepwell 
 
 1595 Ffraunces Knyght 
 
 1596 W illiam Parfey 
 
 1597 William Yate 
 
 1598 John Webbe 
 
 1599 William Ellys 
 
 1600 John Horte 
 
 William Hick, John Barnes 
 Thomas Waren, Randall Hassall 
 William Gittons, Robert Kitchinge 
 Edward Porter, William Burde 
 William Salterene, Robert Halton 
 Michael Pepwall, Nicholas Blake 
 John Ashe, Richard Ashurst 
 William Hopkyns, Walter Stanfaste 
 William Prewett, Ralfe Doole 
 George Badrame, Ffraunces Knyght 
 William Parfey, William Yate 
 Bartholomew Cooke, Humphrey Andros 
 John Webb, Thomas Polington 
 William Ellys, Walter Davys 
 Richard Kelke, Ryse Jones 
 Henry Goughe, John Horte 
 John Hopkyns, Edward Long 
 William Vawer, Ralph Hurte 
 Nicholas Hobbes, John Oliver 
 John Whitson, Christopher Kedgwyn 
 George Snowe, Hugh Griffith 
 Thomas James, Walter Williams 
 Richard Maye, John Yonnge 
 John Barker, Richard Smyth 
 Mathew Haveland, Thomas Pitcher 
 Richard Rogers, John Slye 
 John Butcher, Robert Aldworth 
 John Eglesfilde, Richard George 
 William Carye, Abell Kitchen 
 William Colstone, John Harrisone 
 
 This Mayor died on the 4th day of May when Rice Jones was elected to 
 finish the year. 
 
 1601 John Hopkins 
 
 1602 William Vawer 
 
 1603 Ralph Hurte 
 
 1604 John Whitson 
 
 1605 Christopher Kedgwin 
 
 1606 Thomas James 
 -John Barker 
 
 John Boulton, Thomas Hopkins 
 William Hopkins, John Flownes 
 John Aldworth, Thomas Ffarmer 
 William Barnes, George Richardes 
 William Cole, George Harrington 
 John Powbero, John Guy 
 Thomas Packer, John Doughtie 
 
 This yeere the said Mr. John Barker dyed the xiii day of September, and 
 the next day Mr. Richard Smyth was chosen Mail - who contyneud the 
 rest of the yeere untill the feaste of St. Michaell the Archangell then 
 next following. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 485 
 
 1607 
 
 1608 
 
 1609 
 
 1610 
 1611 
 1612 
 
 1613 
 
 1614 
 
 1615 
 
 1616 
 
 1617 
 
 1618 
 
 1619 
 
 1620 
 1621 
 1622 
 
 1623 
 
 1624 
 
 1625 
 
 1626 
 
 1627 
 
 1628 
 
 1629 
 
 1630 
 
 1631 
 
 1632 
 
 1633 
 
 1634 
 
 1635 
 
 1636 
 
 1637 
 
 1638 
 
 1639 
 
 1640 
 
 1641 
 
 Matthew Haviland 
 J ohn Butcher 
 Robert Aldworth 
 John Eglesfielde 
 William Cary 
 Abel Kitchin 
 Francis Knight 
 Thomas James 
 John Whitsone 
 Thomas Ffarmer 
 George Harrington 
 J ohn Guy * 
 
 Thomas Packer 
 John Doughtio 
 Robert Rogers 
 William Younge 
 William Pitt 
 Henry Gibbes 
 
 Robert Rogers, Arthur Neads 
 Thomas Moore, William Younge 
 Thomas Aldworth, William Challoner 
 Thomas Witehead, William Pitt 
 William Burrus, Henry Gibbes 
 Christopher Cary, John Barker 
 Christopher Whitsone, John Gonninge 
 John Langton, Humphrey Hooke 
 William Baldwin, John Tomlinson 
 Henry Yate, Henry Hobson 
 Mathew Warren, William Turner 
 Thomas Cecill, Thomas Wright 
 William Lysset, Humphrey Browne 
 Andrew Charlton, Peter Miller 
 Richard Holworthie, Richard Long 
 Edward Coxe, William Jones 
 Oliver Snell, Ezekiel Walhs 
 William Pitt, Nathaniel Butcher 
 
 This yeare William Pitt one of the Sheriffes Died when Thomas Clements 
 was elected & Swome Sheriffe the first of November, 1624. 
 
 John Barker 
 Christopher Whitson 
 John Gonninge 
 John Langton 
 Humphrey Hooke 
 John Tomlinson 
 Henry Yate 
 Henry Hobson 
 Mathew Warren 
 Andrew Charleton 
 Richard Holworthie 
 Richard Longe 
 William Jones 
 
 George Knight, John Taylor 
 John Locke, Walter Ellis 
 Richard Plea, Richard Aldworth 
 Alexander James, Francis Creswick 
 Giles Elbridge, Thomas Colston 
 Derrick Poply, Gabriel Sherman 
 John Gonning, Miles Jackson 
 Thomas Jackson, William Efitzherbert 
 Robert Elliat, Thomas Lloyd 
 John Langton, Thomas Hooke 
 William Cann, William Hobson 
 Richard Vickris, Thomas Woodward 
 Edward Peters, William W'yat 
 
 This yeare Mr. Peter’s one of the Sheriff's Dyed. Abraham Edwards waB 
 chosen and sworne Sheriff in his place, xxv April, 1638. 
 
 Ezekiel Wallis 
 George Knight 
 John Taylor 
 John Locke 
 
 Luke Hodges, George Hellier 
 Mathew Warren, W alter Dayes 
 Henry Gibbs, Edward Pitts 
 Richard Ballman, Robert Yeamans 
 
 Appendix LXXIX. 
 
486 
 
 HISTORY OF ERISTOL. 
 
 1642 
 
 1643 
 
 1644 
 
 1645 
 
 1646 
 
 1647 
 
 1648 
 
 1649 
 
 1650 
 
 1651 
 
 1652 
 
 1653 
 
 1654 
 
 1655 
 
 1656 
 
 1657 
 
 1658 
 
 1659 
 
 1660 
 1661 
 1662 
 
 1663 
 
 1664 
 
 1665 
 
 1666 
 1667 
 
 1668 
 
 1669 
 
 1670 
 
 1671 
 
 1672 
 1673 
 
 1674 
 
 1675 
 
 1676 
 
 1677 
 
 Richard Alderworth 
 Humphrey Hooke 
 Alexander James 
 Ffrancis Creswick 
 
 Joseph Jacson, Hugh Brown 
 Heni'y Creswick, William Colson 
 Nathaniel Cale, William Bevan 
 John Young, Walter Stephens 
 
 John Gonning Mayor for 3 quarters of this yeare. 
 
 Richard Vickris 
 Gabrieli Sherman 
 William Can 
 Miles Jackson 
 Hugh Browne 
 Joseph; Jackson 
 Henry Gibbes 
 George Hellier 
 John Goning 
 Walter Devos 
 Richard Balman 
 Arthur Ffarmer 
 Walter Sandy 
 Edward Tyson 
 Henry Creswicke 
 Nathaniel Cale 
 Sir Robert Cann, Knt 
 Sir John Knight, Knt, 
 John Lawford 
 John Willoughby 
 Sir Thomas Langton, 
 Edward Morgan 
 
 Walter Sandye, Edward Tyson 
 Arthur Ffarmer, George White 
 Robert Challoner, Robert Yate 
 William Dale, William Yeamans 
 James Crofts, George Hart 
 George Lane, Robert Can 
 Thomas Amoiy, Jonathan Blackwell 
 John Pope, Thomas Bubb 
 John Lawford, Christopher Griffeth 
 Thomas Harris, John Bowen 
 Robert Vickris, John Harper 
 J ohn Willoughby, Henry Appelton 
 Edward Morgan, Nehemiah Collins 
 Ffrancis Gleed, Timothy Parker 
 Richard Gregson, Thomas Langton 
 Thomas Stephens, John Hickes 
 & Bart John Wright, Robert Yeamans 
 
 John Bradway, Richard Streamer 
 John Knight, Ralph Olliffe 
 William Crabb, Richard Crump 
 Knt, John Lloyd, Joseph Creswicke 
 Henry Gough, John Aid worth 
 
 John Aldworth died during his year of office and William Willett was 
 elected to serve the rest of the year. 
 
 Thomas Stevens Humphrey Little, Richard Harte 
 
 SirR. Yeamans, Knt. & Bart. Charles Powell, Edward Hume 
 John Knight Thomas Day, Thomas Eston 
 
 John Hickes Richard Stubbs, Thomas Earle 
 
 Christopher Griffeth Edward Young, John Cooke 
 
 Richard Streamer John Cecill, John Dymer 
 
 John Dymer Dyed the ix day of January 1674 and William Haaell was 
 elected for the remainder of the year. 
 
 Ralph Olliffe Samuel Wharton, Edward Ffeildeing 
 
 Sir Robert Cann, Knt & Bart Charles Williams, George Lane 
 William Crabb Henry Gleson, Henry Merrett 
 
 Richard Crampe William Dunning, John Moore 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 487 
 
 1678 
 
 1679 
 
 1680 
 1681 
 
 1682 
 
 1683 
 
 1684 
 
 1685 
 
 1686 
 
 1687 
 
 1688 
 1688 
 
 1689 
 
 1690 
 
 1691 
 
 1692 
 
 1693 
 
 1694 
 
 1695 
 
 1696 
 
 1697 
 
 1698 
 
 1699 
 
 1700 
 
 1701 
 
 John Lloyd 
 Joseph Creswick 
 Richard Hart 
 Thomas Earle 
 
 William Jackson, William Clutterbuck 
 William Hayman, William Swymmer 
 Abraham Saunders, Arthur Hart 
 Richard Lane, John Knight 
 
 The Maior and Sheriff Knight was afterwards Knighted. 
 
 Thomas Eston George Hart, John Coombes 
 
 Ralph Olliffe Nathaniell Driver, Edmond Arundell 
 
 Mr. Maior dyed the next day after sworn. October 9th 1683 William 
 Clutterbuck, Armig. Maior. Mr. Maior was afterwards Knighted at 
 London. 
 
 William Hayman 
 Abraham Saunders 
 William Swymmer 
 Richard Lane 
 Thomas Day 
 William Jackson 
 
 Giles Merrick, James Twyford 
 William Merrick, Robert Yate 
 George Morgan, Edward Tocknell 
 John Sandford, Samuel Wallis 
 John Hine, Thomas Saunders 
 Thomas Liston, Joseph Jackson 
 
 King James haveing Dissolved the new Charter by Proclamation, our 
 former Charter restored, & ® surrender of the former Charter returned 
 and cancelled. The 23rd of October, 1688, Sir William Clutterbuck late 
 Maior by the Old Charter convened the former Members who Chose 
 William Jackson, Maior, Thomas Cole and George White, Sheriffes. 
 
 Arthur Hart 
 Sir John Knight 
 Richard Lane 
 Edmund Arundell 
 Robert Yate 
 Thomas Day 
 
 John Bubb, John Blackwell 
 Robert Dowding, John Yeamans 
 John Bradway, William Opie 
 James Pope, Henry Combe 
 Marmaduke Bowdler, John Bacheler 
 John Hawkins, William Daines 
 
 Mr. Mayor & Sherriff Daines being in London, were both Knighted. 
 
 Samuel Wallis 
 John Hine 
 John Bubb 
 John Blackwell 
 
 William Lewis, William French 
 Peter Saunders, Francis Whitchurch 
 Nathaniell Day, John Day, 
 
 George Stephens, Jolin Swymmer 
 
 This Year a Pile of Brick building Erected on Broad Key the first Brick 
 Building in this City. 
 
 John Bacheler W r illiam Whitehead, James Hollidge 
 
 Sir William Daines, Knt. Robert Boimd, Isaac Davies 
 John Hawkins Samuel Bayly, Richard Bayly 
 
 The 3d of September 1702, Queen Anne Knighted the Mayor. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 488 
 
 1702 William Lewis Abraham Elton, Christopher Shuter 
 
 Queen Ann being at Bath, Mr. Mayor waited on her and was then and 
 there Knighted. 
 
 1703 Peter Saunders 
 
 1704 Francis 'Whitchurch 
 
 1705 Nathaniel! Day 
 
 1706 George Stephens 
 
 1707 William Whitehead 
 
 1708 James Hollidge 
 
 1709 Robert Bound 
 
 1710 Abraham Elton 
 
 1711 Christopher Shuter 
 
 1712 Thomas Hort 
 
 1713 Anthony Swymmer 
 
 1714 Henry Whitehead 
 
 1715 Henry Walter 
 
 1716 Nicholass Hicks 
 
 1717 John Day 
 
 1718 Edmond Mountjoy 
 
 1719 Abraham Elton 
 
 1720 Henry Watts 
 
 1721 John Becher 
 
 1722 Henry Swymmer 
 
 1723 James Donning 
 
 1724 Joseph Jefferis 
 
 1725 Robert Earle 
 
 1726 Peter Day 
 
 1727 Henry Nash 
 
 1728 John Price 
 
 1729 Samuel Stokes 
 
 1730 Edward Foy 
 
 1731 Arthur Taylor 
 
 1732 John King 
 
 1733 Jacob Elton 
 
 1734 John Rich 
 
 1735 Lyonel Lyde 
 
 1736 John Blackwell 
 
 1737 Nathaniel Day 
 
 1738 William Jefferis 
 
 1739 Stephen Clutterbuck 
 
 1740 Henry Combe 
 
 1741 Richard Bayly 
 
 Thomas Hort, Henry Whitehead 
 
 4nthony Swymmer, Henry Walter 
 
 Morgan Smith, Nathaniell Webb 
 
 Abraham Hooke, Nicholas Hicks 
 
 Onesiphorus Tyndall, Thomas Tyler 
 
 Phillip Freke, John Day 
 
 James Haynes, Thomas Clement 
 
 Edmond Mountjoy, Abraham Elton, Junr. 
 
 William Bayly, Poole Stokes 
 
 Richard Gravett, Henry Watts 
 
 John Beecher, Henry Swymmer 
 
 William Whitehead, Richard Tayler 
 
 James Donning, Joseph Jeffries 
 
 Robert Earle, Peter Day 
 
 Henry Nash, John Price 
 
 Samuel Stokes, Edward Foy 
 
 Arthur Taylor, John King 
 
 Robert Addison, Jacob Elton 
 
 John Rich, Noblett Ruddock 
 
 Robert Smith, Lyonel Lyde 
 
 John Blackwell, Nathaniel Wraxell 
 
 Nathaniel Day, William Jefferis 
 
 Michael Puxton, Stephen Clutterbuck 
 
 Ezekiel Longman, Henry Combe 
 
 Richard Bayley, John Bartlett 
 
 Henry Lloyd, Abraham Elton 
 
 John Berrow, John Day 
 
 Edward Buckler, William Bamsdale 
 
 Edward Cooper, William Barnes 
 
 John Foy, Buckler Weeks 
 
 Michael Pope, Benjamin Glisson 
 
 Thomas Curtis, James Laroche 
 
 David Peloquin, John Clements 
 
 Morgan Smith, Abraham Elton 
 
 Joseph lies, Henry Dam pier 
 
 John Combe, Giles Baily 
 
 Michael Becher, David Dehany 
 
 Walter Jenkins, William Martin 
 
 John Chamberlayne, Henry Mugleworth 
 
 The Mayor dying 17th May, 1742, John Bartlett was elected Mayor for 
 the remainder of the year. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 489 
 
 1742 
 
 1743 
 
 1744 
 
 1745 
 
 1746 
 
 1747 
 
 1748 
 
 1749 
 
 1750 
 
 1751 
 
 1752 
 
 1753 
 
 1754 
 
 1755 
 
 1756 
 
 1757 
 
 1758 
 
 1759 
 
 1760 
 
 1761 
 
 1762 
 
 1763 
 
 1764 
 
 1765 
 
 1766 
 
 1767 
 
 1768 
 
 1769 
 
 1770 
 
 1771 
 
 1772 
 
 1773 
 
 1774 
 
 1775 
 
 1776 
 
 Sir Abraham Elton, Bart. 
 
 John Berrow 
 
 John Day 
 
 William Barnes 
 
 Edward Cooper 
 
 John Foy 
 
 Buckler Weekes 
 
 Thomas Curtis 
 
 James Laroche 
 
 David Peloquin 
 
 John Clements 
 
 Abraham Elton 
 
 Morgan Smith 
 
 Henry Dampier 
 
 Giles Baily 
 
 William Martin 
 
 Henry Mugleworth 
 
 Jeremiah Ames 
 
 John Durlin 
 
 Isaac Elton 
 
 John Noble 
 
 Richard Farr 
 
 Henry Swymmer 
 
 William Cossleye, Jeremiah Amos 
 Isaac Elton, John Durbin 
 John Foy, Buckler Weekes 
 Thomas Marsh, John Noble 
 Henry Swymmer, Richard Farr, Junr. 
 John Berrow, Giles Bailey 
 John Daltera, Isaac Baugh 
 William Barnes, Junr., John Curtis 
 George Weare, Joseph Love 
 Henry Dampier, Isaac Baugh 
 Daniel Woodward, Edward Whatley 
 Henry Bright, Thomas Harris 
 Thomas Knox, Thomas Deane 
 Henry Weare, James Hilhouse 
 Nathaniel Foy, Austin Goodwin 
 Robert Gordon, Isaac Piguenit 
 Samuel Webb, John Berrow 
 Charles Hotchkin, John Noble 
 Isaac Piguenit, Samuel Sedgley 
 Joseph Daltera, William Barnes, Junr. 
 William Weare, Thomas Farr 
 Andrew Pope, John Durbin, Junr. 
 James Laroche, Junr., John Bull 
 
 Mr. Laroche was Created a Baronet by Letters Patent under the Great 
 Seal of Great Britain bearing date the twenty-fourth August, 1776, by 
 the Name and description of Sir James Laroche of Over in the Parish of 
 Almondsbury in the County of Gloucester, Baronet. 
 
 Isaac Baugh 
 William Barnes, Junr. 
 George Weare 
 Edward Whatley 
 Thomas Harris 
 Thomas Deane 
 
 Isaac Elton, Junr., Michael Miller, Junr, 
 W illiam Miles, Henry Cruger, Junr. 
 Edward Brice, Alexander Edgar 
 John Crofts, Henry Lippincott 
 John Merlott, George Daubeny 
 Isaac Eltyn, Junr., Henry Lippincott 
 
 Mr. Lippincott was Created a Baronet T uly 25th, 1778, of Stoke Bishop, 
 in the County of Gloucester. 
 
 Henry Bright 
 Nathaniel Foy 
 Robert Gordon 
 Charles Hotchkin 
 Thomas Farr 
 Andrew Pope 
 
 Levi Ames, Jeremy Baker 
 John Noble, John Anderson 
 Andrew Pope, Thomas Pierce 
 John Durbin, Junr., James Hill 
 Edward Brice, John Noble 
 John Farr, John Harris 
 
 H M 
 
490 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 1777 John Durbin, Junr. 
 
 1778 John Durbin, Junr. 
 
 1779 Michael Miller, Junr. 
 
 John Fisher Weare, Philip Protheroe 
 Benjamin Loscombe, James Morgan, Junr. 
 Edward Brice, John Harford 
 
 Michael Miller, Junr., Esq., died in his Mayoralty, and John Bull, Esq., 
 was Elected to serve the remainder of the Year. 
 
 17S0 William Miles 
 1781 Henry Crager 
 17S2 Edward Brice 
 1783 John Anderson 
 
 Samuel Span, Joseph Smith 
 Bobert Coleman, John Collard 
 Rowland Williams, William Blake 
 John Garnett, Anthony Henderson 
 
 Isaac Elton, who was elected on the 29th Sep. 17S3, appeared, but refused 
 to take the Oaths, and on the 2nd October following John Anderson, 
 Esq., was chosen Mayor. 
 
 1784 John Farr 
 
 1785 John Crofts 
 
 1786 George Daubeny 
 
 1787 Alexander Edgar 
 
 1788 Levi Ames 
 
 1789 James Hill 
 
 John Fisher Weare, James Harvey 
 Joseph Harford, Stephen Nash 
 Evan Baillie, Thomas Daniel, Junr. 
 John Morgan, Bobert Claxton 
 James Hill, John Harris 
 Henry Bengough, John Gordon, Junr. 
 
 Jeremy Baker was chosen Mayor on the 15th Sep. 1789, and declined 
 serving. On the 5th October following James Hill, Esq., was Elected 
 and Sworn Mayor. 
 
 1790 John Harris James Morgan, Rowland Williams 
 
 1791 John Noble Joseph Harford, Samuel Span 
 
 Matthew Brickdale was elected Mayor on the 15th September, 1791: he 
 refused serving, and on the 3rd October, 1791, John Noble was elected- 
 and sworn Mayor. 
 
 1792 Henry Bengough William Gibbons, Joseph Gregory Harris 
 
 1793 James Morgan Charles Young, John Page 
 
 1794 Joseph Smith Robert Castle, Joseph Edye 
 
 John Fisher Weare was chosen Mayor on the 15th September, 1794; he 
 declined serving: on the 2nd of October following, Joseph Harford was 
 chosen, who likewise declined, and on the 20th of the same month, 
 Joseph Smith was chosen and immediately sworn Mayor. 
 
 1795 James Harvey David Evans, John Wilcox 
 
 William Weare was chosen Mayor on the 15th of September, 1795, which 
 he declined accepting, and on the 3rd of October following, James 
 Harvey was elected and sworn Mayor. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 491 
 
 1796 James Harvey 
 
 1797 Thomas Daniel 
 
 1798 Robert Claxton 
 
 1799 John Morgan 
 
 1800 William Gibbons 
 
 1801 Joseph Eilye 
 
 John Foy Edgar, Azariah Pinney 
 Edward Protheroe, John Span 
 Daniel Wait, William Fripp 
 Henry Bright, Worthington Brice 
 Robert Castle, Samuel Birch 
 Samuel Span, Richard Vaughan, Junr. 
 
 1802 Robert Castle died in liis Mayoralty the 4th of August 1803, and on the 
 13th of the same month David Evans was elected to serve the remainder 
 of the year. 
 
 - David Evans 
 
 1803 David Evans 
 1S04 Edward Protheroe 
 1805 Daniel Wait 
 
 John Foy Edgar, Henry Protheroe 
 Samuel Henderson, Junr., John Haythorne 
 Levi Ames, Junr., Philip Protheroe 
 William Inman, John Hilhouse Wilcox 
 
 John Foy Edgar was chosen Mayor on the 15th of September, 1805: he 
 declined serving, and on the 2nd of October following the Corporation 
 elected Daniel Wait. 
 
 1806 Richard Vaughan, Junr. Henry Brooke, Edward Brice, Junr. 
 
 William Fripp was chosen Mayor on the 15th of September, 1806, and 
 declined serving; on the 2nd of October following Richard Vaughan, 
 Junr. was elected. 
 
 1807 Henry Bright 
 
 Sir Henry Protheroe, Ivnt., John Haythorne 
 
 Henry Bright died November 22nd, 1S07, and on the 1st of December 
 following, the Corporation elected Samuel Birch, Mayor. 
 
 1808 John Haythorne Benjamin Bickley, Philip George 
 
 1809 John Hilhouse Wilcox Michael Castle, George King 
 
 1810 Philip Protheroe William Inman, James Fowler 
 
 Sir Henry Protheroe was chosen Mayor on the 15th of September, 1S10, 
 when he declined serving, and the Corporation elected Philip Protheroe. 
 
 1811 John Hilhouse Wilcox Edward Brice, Benjamin Bickley 
 
 Levi Ames, Junr. was elected Mayor on the 15th of September, 1811: he 
 declined serving, and on the 24th of October, 1811, John Hilhouse 
 Wilcox was chosen. 
 
 1812 Michael Castle George Hilhouse, Abraham Hilhouse 
 
 1813 James Fowler Benjamin Bickley, Philip George 
 
 1814 William John Struth William Fripp, Junr., James George, Junr. 
 
 1815 Sir William John Struth, Knt. Benjamin Bickley, Philip George 
 
 1S16 John Haythorne Edward Daniel, John Barrow 
 
 M M 2 
 
492 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 1817 John Haythorne 
 
 1818 Henry Brooke 
 
 1819 William Fripp, Junr. 
 
 1820 George Hilkouse 
 
 1821 Abraham Hilhouse 
 
 1822 James George 
 
 1823 John Barrow 
 
 1824 Thomas Hassell 
 
 1825 John Haythorne 
 
 1826 Thomas Camplin 
 
 1827 Gabriel Goldney 
 
 1828 John Gave 
 
 1829 John Savage 
 
 1830 John Savage 
 
 1831 Charles Pinney 
 
 1832 Daniel Stanton 
 
 1833 Charles Ludlow Walker 
 
 1834 Charles Payne 
 
 George Hilhouse, Abraham Hilhouse 
 Thomas Hassell, Nicholas Roch 
 James George, Junr., John Gardiner 
 Thomas Hassell, Robert Jenkins 
 Nicholas Roch, Thomas Camplin 
 Gabriel Goldney, John Cave 
 John Savage, Charles Pinney 
 John Gardiner, Charles Ludlow Walker 
 Gabriel Goldney, John Savage 
 Thomas Hassell, Daniel Stanton 
 Charles Payne, Henry Wenman Newman 
 Chas. Ludlow Walker, Thos. Hooper Riddle 
 Hugh William Danson, John Evans Lunell 
 George Protheroe, William Claxton 
 George Bengough, Joseph Lax [Castle 
 
 James Norroway Franklyn, Michael Hinton 
 Janies Lean, Peter Maze, Junr. [Wait 
 
 James Norroway Franklyn, Wm. Killegrew 
 
 Mr. Payne served under the old law until December 1835, when on 
 1st Jany 1836 Thomas Daniel was chosen Mayor. He declined serving 
 by Letter dated 6 January, 
 
 Daniel Cave, chosen Sheriff. 
 
 11 Jany 1S36 William Fripp, Aldn chosen Mayor, vice Daniel 
 9 Nov. 1836 James George, Mayor Thomas Kington, Sheriff 
 
 1837 John Kerle Haberfield Thomas Kington Bayly 
 
 1838 John Kerle Haberlield Francis Savage 
 
 1839 James Norroway Franklyn Richard Vaughan 
 
 1840 Robert Phippen Hugh Vaughan 
 
 1841 George Woodroffe Franklyn Thomas Jones 
 
 1842 James Gibbs 
 
 1843 William Lewton Clarke 
 1S44 Richard Poole King 
 
 1845 John Kerle Haberfield 
 
 1846 William Goldney 
 
 1847 John Decimus Pountney 
 
 1848 John Kerle Haberfield 
 
 1849 John Kerle Haberfield 
 
 Jere. Hill 
 Thomas Wadham 
 John Harding 
 Thomas Hill 
 
 Abr nl Gray Harford Battersby 
 Edward Sampson, Junr. 
 
 Peter Maze, Junr. 
 
 John Jasper Leigh Baily 
 Mr. Baily was seized with illness whilst hunting and died the same day 
 Nov. 22nd, 1860. 
 
 1850 John Kerle Haberfield Joseph Walters Daubeny 
 
 The honour of Knighthood was conferred on the Mayor by the Queen at 
 St. James’s palace. March 26th, 1851. He was accompanied on the 
 occasion by Earl Fitzkarding, Lord Lieutenant of the city. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 493 
 
 1850 Jolin Vining 
 1857 Isaac Allan Cooke 
 
 1852 Robert Gay Barrow 
 
 1853 John George Shaw 
 
 1854 John George Shaw 
 
 1855 John Vining 
 
 1851 Wm. Henry Gore Langton 
 
 John Battersby Harford 
 Robert Bright 
 Philip John William Miles 
 Robert Phippen 
 Albany Bourchier Savile 
 George Oldham Edwards 
 John Henry Greville Smyth 
 
 Mr. Smyth refused to serve the office; Law proceedings were taken 
 against him; * Mr. Edwards the Sheriff of 1856 did the Duties. 
 
 1858 James Poole 
 
 1859 John Bates 
 
 William Henry Harford 
 V\ illiam Montague Baillie 
 
 February 13th, 1860, The Prince of Orange paid a short visit to this city. 
 
 I860 Odiarne Coates Lane 
 
 Joshua Saunders 
 
 November 15th, 1860, The Prince of Wales passed through the City on 
 his return from Canada and the United States of America, and was met 
 by the Mayor, &c., at the Terminus. 
 
 “ Tlie following is a list of such members from the 23d. of Edward 
 the 1st, 1295, who were returned to the parliament for the borough- 
 town of Bristol, whilst part of Gloucestershire, the return being then 
 made by the sheriffs of that county: But since it has been severed from 
 that county, and made a county within itself, the 47th of Edward the 
 3d. 1373, the writs of summons have always issued to, and been 
 returned by our own sheriffs.” f 
 
 1295 John de Taverner, alias Tavern 
 1298 John de Taverner, J. de Cheddre 
 1300 John de Malmesbury 
 
 1305 J. de Wellishott, J. Hasard 
 
 1306 Johanes de Taverner, Rober. de Holherst 
 
 1307 Geff'ery Comper, Nich. Coke 
 
 1309 Stephanus de Bellsmonte, Robert Martyn 
 
 1311 Richard Colpeks, Johes Fraunceys 
 
 1312 Johes Frauncey, Senr., Adam Wallishot 
 
 1313 Johes de Wellestoten, Johes Methelan 
 - Hugo de Langebrugge, Johes de Axebrugge 
 
 * Mr. Smyth’s year of office expiring before the cause came on for trial, 
 the proceedings referred to were withdrawn. 
 
 t Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 149. 
 
494 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 1314 Johes Fiureys, Jobes Tropin 
 
 1315 Robert Wildemarsh, Thomas de Espoter 
 1319 Thomas de Salop, Robert de Lincoln 
 - Gilbert Pokerell, Richard de Wodehull 
 
 1322 Williel de Cliffe 
 
 1323 Laurentius Pinchard, Tho. de Chiew 
 
 1326 Johes de Axebrugg, Johes de Fraunceys 
 
 1327 Johes de Axebrugg, Johes de Romeney 
 - Richard Paves, Hugo le Runt 
 
 1328 Walterus de Espoter, Johes de Broekworth 
 - Johes de Axebrugg, Hugo le Hunt 
 
 1330 Hugo le Hunt, Richard le Paves 
 - Hugo le Hunt, Johes Fraunceys* 
 
 1332 Johes de Romsey, Johes de Axebrugg 
 
 1333 Johes Sterry, Johes de Strete 
 
 1334 Robertus Gyene 
 
 - Johes de Ottery, Johes de Strete 
 
 1335 Robert Gyene, Johes Fraunceys 
 - Hugo de Langebrugg, Johes de Strete 
 
 1336 Johes Fraunceys, Junr., Thomas Tropin 
 - Robert de Gyene, Johes Fraunceys 
 
 1337 Everardus de Fraunceys, Philipus de Torrington 
 - Johes Covely, Hugo Albrighton 
 
 1338 Gilbertus Peekerill, Richardus WoodhuU 
 
 - Everardus le Fraunceys, Philipus de Torington 
 
 - Everardus le Fraunceys, Johes de Strete 
 
 1339 Everardus le Fraunceys, Johes de Strete 
 
 1340 Jacobus Tilley, Thomas Tropyn 
 - Johes le Hunt, Johes de W ellishot 
 
 1341 Robertus Gyene, Philipus Torington 
 1343 Johes de Axebrugg, Johes Fraunceys 
 
 1346 Johes Wicomb, Johes Neel 
 
 1347 Everardus le Fraunceys, Johes de Strete 
 
 1348 Everardus le Fraunceys, John de Strete 
 
 - Everardus le Fraunceys, Tho. de Lodelow 
 
 1350 Johes Colyngton, Johes Seymour 
 
 1352 Johes Seymour, (but one elected) 
 
 1353 Thomas Babbcary, W illiel Coumb 
 1355 Rich, le Spicer, Reginaldus le French 
 1357 Reginaldus le French, Rich. Brampton 
 1S60 Tho. Babbcarey, Galfridus Beauflour 
 
 * This year it was enacted that a Parliament should be holden once in every 
 year, or oftener if need be. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 495 
 
 - Reginaldus le French, Wiiliel. Young 
 
 1362 Walter us Frampton, Edwardus Blanket 
 
 1363 Jokes Sergeant, Jokes Stoke 
 
 1364 Willielmus Hayl, WillieL Cannings 
 
 1365 Wiiliel. Sommerwell, Tko. Denband 
 
 1368 Jokes Bathe, (upon a summons of one burgess) 
 
 - Itiek. Ckamberleyn, Kick. Sydenham 
 
 1369 Jokes Cheddre, Edmund Blanket 
 
 1371 Jokes Bathe, (one only) 
 
 1372 Walter Derby, John Stoke 
 
 RETURNED BY THE SHERIFFS OF BRISTOL. 
 
 1373 Walter Derby, Thomas Beaupine 
 1376 Elias Spelly, Thomas Beaupine 
 1379 Thomas Beaupine, Walter Frampton 
 
 1382 Elias Spelly, John Stokys 
 
 1383 William Canynges, John Candavell 
 
 1384 William Canynges, William Somerwell 
 - John Canynges, William Frome 
 
 1385 Elias Spelly, Walter Dodystill (? Tyddestille or Tyddeley) 
 
 1386 Elias Spelly, Thomas Knapp 
 
 1392 William Frome, John Stephens 
 
 1393 Thomas Beaupine, John Stephens 
 1397 William Frome, John Banbury 
 1400 Thomas Norton, Richard Paunys 
 1402 Thomas Norton, John Boys 
 1407 John Droys, John Newton 
 
 1411 Thomas Norton, David Dudbroke 
 
 1413 Thomas Norton, John Leicestre 
 
 1414 Thomas Young, John Spine 
 - Thomas Blount, John Clive 
 
 1415 Robert Russell, Robert Colville 
 1417 Thomas Norton, John Burton 
 
 1420 Thomas Norton, John Spine 
 
 1421 Marcus W illiams, Richard Trenode 
 
 1422 John Burton, Roger Liveden 
 
 1423 John Burton, Roger Liveden 
 
 1424 Richard Trenode, Walter Power 
 
 1425 Henry Gildenay, John Langley 
 
 1426 John Burton, Henry Gildenay 
 
 1427 John Burton, Henry Gildenay 
 
 1428 Richard Trenode, John Sharpe 
 1431 Thomas Fyshe, Walter Power 
 
496 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 1433 Robert Russell, Walter Power 
 1435 Thomas Fishe, Thomas Young 
 1437 Thomas Young, Thomas Norton 
 1442 Thomas Young, John Sharp 
 1447 Thomas Young, John Sharp, junr. 
 
 1449 Thomas Young, John Sharp, junr. 
 
 1450 Thomas Young, John Sharp, junr. 
 
 1451 Thomas Young, William Canynges 
 1453 John Shipward, John Bary 
 
 1455 Thomas Young, William Canynges 
 1460 John Shipward, Philip Mead 
 
 - Thomas Russel, John Sharp, junr. 
 
 - John Shipward, Philip Mead 
 
 1466 William Spencer, John Bagod 
 
 1467 William Spencer, John Bagod 
 1472 John Twynyhoe, John Bagod 
 1477 John Hawkins, Edmund Westcot 
 1482 Edmund Westcot, William Wykham 
 
 1484 John Twynyhoe, Robert Strange 
 
 1485 John Esterfield, Robert Strange 
 1487 John Esterfield, Henry Vaughan 
 1489 William Toker, John Foster 
 1496 Henry Vaughan, Philip Ringston 
 1504 Henry Dale, Thomas Snygg 
 1509 Richard Vaughan, Henry Dale 
 1511 Thomas Smyth, Richard Hnby 
 1523 Robert Thorn, Richard Hohy 
 1529 Richard Abyngdon, John Shipward 
 1537 Nicholas Thorn, Roger Coke 
 
 1542 David Croke, Robert Ellyott 
 1552 Jolm Walshe, David Harris 
 
 -J ohn Walshe, Thomas Lancedon 
 
 - John Walshe, William Chester 
 
 - William Tindal, Robert Butler 
 
 1559 John Walshe, William Carr 
 1563 John Walshe, William Carr 
 1567 William Carr, Thomas Chestre 
 
 1571 John Popham, Philip Langley 
 
 1572 John Popham, Philip Langley 
 
 1585 Thomas Hannam, Richard Cole 
 
 1586 Thomas Hannam, Thomas Aldworth 
 1589 Thomas Hannam, W r illiam Salterns 
 1593 Thomas Hannam, Richard Cole 
 1597 George Snygg, Thomas James 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 497 
 
 1601 George Snygg, John Hopkins 
 1003 George Snygg, Thomas James 
 1605 Jolin Whitson 
 1614 John Whitson, Thomas James 
 1620 John Whitson, John Guy 
 1623 John Barker, John Guy 
 1625 Nicholas Hide, John Whitson 
 
 - John Whitson, John Doughty 
 
 1627 John Doughty, John Barker 
 1640 John Glanvill, Humphrey Hook 
 
 - Humphrey Hook, Richard Long 
 
 1642 Richard Aid worth, Luke Hodges 
 1654 Miles Jackson, Robert Aldworth 
 1656 Robert Aldworth, John Dodridge 
 
 1660 John Stephens, John Knight 
 
 1661 Sir Humphrey Hook, Knt., Sir John Knight, Knt. 
 
 1670 Sir Humphrey Hook, Knt., Sir John Knight, Knt. 
 
 1678 Sir Robert Cann, Knt. & Bart., Sir John Knight, Knt. 
 
 1679 Sir Robert Cann, Bart., Sir John Knight, Knt. 
 
 1680 Sir Richard Hart, Knt., Thomas Earl 
 
 1685 Sir John Churchill, Knt., Sir Richard Crump, Knt. 
 
 - Sir Richard Hart, Ivnt., Sir Richard Crump, Knt. 
 
 1688 Sir Richard Hart, Knt., Sir John Knight, Knt. 
 
 1690 Sir Richard Hart, Knt., Sir John Knight, Knt. 
 
 1695 Sir Thomas Day, Knt., Robert Yate 
 1698 Sir Thomas Day, Knt., Robert Yate 
 
 1700 Sir Thomas Day, Knt., Robert Yate 
 
 1701 Sir William Daines, Knt., Robert Yate 
 
 1702 Sir William Daines, Knt., Robert Yate 
 1705 Sir William Daines, Knt., Robert Yate 
 1708 Sir William Daines, Knt., Robert Yate 
 1710 Edward Colston, Joseph Earl 
 
 1713 Thomas Edwards, Junr., Joseph Earl 
 
 1714 Sir William Daines, Knt., Joseph Earl 
 1721 Joseph Earl, Sir Abraham Elton, Bart. 
 
 1727 John Scroope, Abraham Elton, Junr. 
 
 1734 Sir Abraham Elton, Bart., Thomas Coster 
 1739 Sir Abraham Elton, Bart., Edward Southwell 
 
 1741 Sir Abraham Elton, Bart., Edward Southwell 
 
 1742 Robert Hoblyn, Edward Southwell 
 1747 Edward Southwell, Robert Hoblyn 
 1754 Robert Nugent, Richard Beckford 
 
 1756 Jarrit Smyth, in the room of Richard Beckford, deceased 
 1760 Sir Jarrit Smyth. Bart., Robert Nugent, afterwards created Lord 
 Viscount Clare 
 
498 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 1768 Lord Clare, Matthew Brickdale 
 1774 Heniy Cruger, Edmund Burke 
 
 1780 Matthew Brickdale, Sir Henry Lippencot, and Henry Cruger, were 
 
 Candidates, when the two former gentlemen were elected; but Sir 
 Henry Lippencot dying during the Election, a new writ was issued, 
 upon which the Election of 1781 took place. 
 
 1781 Matthew Brickdale, George Daubeny 
 17S4 Matthew Brickdale, Henry Cruger 
 1790 Marquis of Worcester, Lord Sheffield 
 1796 Charles Bragge, Lord Sheffield 
 
 1802 Charles Bragge, Evan Baillie 
 1807 Charles Bragge Bathurst, Evan Baillie 
 1812 Bichard Hart Davis, Edward Protheroe 
 ISIS Bichard Hart Davis, Edward Protheroe 
 1820 Henry Bright, Bichard Hart Davis 
 1826 Bichard Hart Darts, Henry Bright 
 
 1830 Bichard Hart Darts, James Evan Baillie 
 
 1831 James Evan Baillie, Edward Protheroe, Junr. 
 
 1832 Sir Bichard Bawlinson Vyvyan, Bart., James Evan Baillie 
 1835 Philip John Miles, Sir Bichard Bawlinson Vyvyan, Bart. 
 
 1837 Philip William Skynner Miles, Hon. Francis Henry Fitzhardinge Berkeley 
 1841 Philip William Skynner Miles, Hon. Francis Henry Fitzhardinge Berkeley 
 1847 Hon. Francis Henry Fitzhardinge Berkeley, Pliilip William Skynner Miles 
 1852 Hon. Francis Henry Fitzhardinge Berkeley, William Henry Gore Langton 
 1857 Hon. Francis Henry Fitzhardinge Berkeley, William Henry Gore Langton 
 1859 Hon. Francis Henry Fitzhardinge Berkeley, William Henry Gore Langton 
 
 In no department of its liistory is Bristol more deficient than in that 
 portion of it which relates to its eminent natives or residents,—men 
 born or residing within its boundaries, and eminent chiefly for their 
 literary or other accomplishments, and whose names have not hitherto 
 come under notice in these pages. The principal cause of this defect 
 is to be traced, at least during the middle ages, to the monkish 
 biographers of those transition times, who saw, in the pasquinade 
 of the poet, the biting irony of the satirist, and the withering sarcasm 
 of those precursors of the Reformation who threw into their writings 
 all the force and pungency of earnest men, the germ of an intelligence, 
 which, if permitted to luxuriate unchecked, would ultimately uproot 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 499 
 
 a despotism which had for ages swayed at will the popular mind. 
 Hence it is no marvel that writers who cast aside the legends of the 
 Church for graver subjects, and renounced the fictions of an interested 
 priesthood for severer studies, should have been passed by in compara¬ 
 tive silence by the supporters of a system of corruption, who found it 
 much more advantageous to eulogise the lazy affluent, than to commend 
 the plodding enquirer after truth, whose investigations tended to expose 
 the pious frauds invented to beguile a credulous and superstitious 
 people. In modern times, too, most writers on our local biography 
 have selected as subjects deserving their regard above all others, the 
 oft-repeated narratives of Robert Fitzharding, the Berkelej 7 s, the 
 Canynges’, and such-like individuals, who have little to recommend 
 them to the honour beyond their wealth or an empty title, and claimed 
 others for natives, who, it can be proved, were not at all connected with 
 Bristol; whilst those who have a much more enduring title to our 
 respect and gratitude have no other record than the mere mention of 
 their names, some slight allusion to their labours and sufferings, and 
 perhaps the date of their decease. Yet these are the truly great men 
 of any era, and to those of the middle ages, especially, we refer with 
 peculiar pleasure, as men who fed the lamp of liberty under adverse 
 and difficult circumstances. By their labours every succeeding 
 generation of mankind will be benefitted to the end of time. 
 
 There is no evidence upon which we can depend, that any literary 
 character flourished in Bristol before the Norman Conquest; but it was 
 here, we are told, that King Henry II., when a boy, commenced his 
 literary career, under an ecclesiastical pedagogue named Matthew. 
 This fact, if true, shews that the old town, even at that early period of 
 its history, had some men, although perhaps not a very numerous class, 
 of considerable mental cultivation and literary acquirements. This 
 information, however, is derived from Mr. Seyer, who, quoting a 
 manuscript calendar, says that the young prince was placed here by the 
 Empress Maud, where he went to school, with some “ of the chiefest 
 mens’ sons of the city.” ' x ' This latter designation of the old town, 
 together with an error in relation to Robert Fitzharding, appears to 
 stamp this document as a modern production, and to shew that it is 
 
 Memoirs of Bristol, vol. i., p. 443. 
 
500 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 one of those which Mr. Seyer himself has said,* were “ written within 
 the last 200 years.” By the “ chiefest mens’ sons,” we are not, I think, to 
 understand the sons of the aristocracy, for in general the nobles of that 
 age disdained letters, esteeming the arts of reading and writing to be fit 
 only for ecclesiastics. We may rather regard this phrase as referring 
 solely to the sons of the principal townsmen, amongst whom was to 
 be found Robert Fitzharding’s eldest son Maurice, who was the first to 
 assume the name of Berkeley, and whose mother had recently founded 
 the Nunnery of St. Mary Magdalen, for the purpose of affording an 
 education to the daughters of those traders in the old town whom the 
 sons of nobles were taught to despise. These facts are interesting as 
 shewing that even then literature was not at so low an ebb in Bristol, 
 as some may be disposed, at first sight, to imagine, but that with the 
 princely Henry were associated other youths, who, like him, had 
 probably early imbibed a taste for the learning of the day from their 
 first instructor, the immortal Matthew, and that in Eva Fitzharding’s 
 nunnery the youth of the gentler sex received an education befitting 
 their rank in society. 
 
 TURGOT, a monk, and celebrated literary character, is said to have 
 been connected with Bristol about this time, but it will be seen 
 by the following narrative, that he cannot be claimed as “a 
 Bristol man,” although we are assured by William Barrett f and Jacob 
 Bryant f that he was, by birth, a Bristolian, yet neither of these 
 writers have done anything towards proving this fact. He was, 
 undoubtedly, a man of considerable note, and he is everywhere spoken 
 of with great respect; but as the claim which has been set up for 
 Bristol to be regarded as the place of his nativity, appears to rest 
 entirely upon the veracity of the manuscripts presented to our local 
 historian by Chatterton, it partakes of the general suspicion which 
 attaches to all the papers given to Mr. Barrett by that gifted genius, 
 and claiming Rowley for their author; and it must be received, 
 accordingly, with a considerable amount of doubt and hesitancy. 
 
 * Memoirs of Bristol, vol. i., p. x. 
 t Hist, of Bristol, p. 31. 
 
 t Observations upon the Poems of Thomas Rowley, p. 571 • 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 501 
 
 In tracing the family of Turgot we find the Scottish genealogists, 
 whilst proving its settlement in their country at a very early period, 
 also very particularly asserting the Anglo-Saxon parentage of the 
 subject of these remarks himself. They maintain that this Scottish 
 branch of the family was not only of the highest antiquity, but very 
 illustrious, for it claimed descent from Togut, a Danish prince, who 
 lived a thousand years before the Christian era. They also state that 
 at the time of the Crusades some members of this family migrated into 
 Normandy, one of whom founded the Hospital of Conde-sur-Noireau, 
 in France, in the year 1281; and from this off-shoot descended (it is 
 believed), the celebrated Anne Robert James Turgot, born at Paris on 
 the 10th of May, 1727—one of the wisest and most able exponents of 
 philosophy and social economy France ever produced, as well as one of 
 its most upright, moral, and enlightened statesmen. 
 
 The family of Turgot was then evidently of northern extraction. This 
 ascertained, the next point is to find out, if possible, where the 
 particular individual member of it, who is said by Mr. Barrett to have 
 been a Bristol man, was actually born. Simeon, of Durham, who was 
 contemporary with Turgot, without referring at all to the place of his 
 birth, says that he came from a remote part of England; which 
 Mr. Bryant interprets to mean Bristol, where, he says, Turgot was a 
 monk; this, however, is undoubtedly an error, as we shall presently 
 see. As one branch of the family settled at an early period in 
 Normandy, so we have reason to believe that another part of it fixed 
 themselves in Lincolnshire, where it is said they were not only highly 
 respectable, but even noble; and in this county, though we know not 
 exactly at what place, I have no doubt that Turgot was bom; for when 
 but a youth, says Simeon, of Durham, he was delivered by the people of 
 Lindsay to William the Conqueror, as one of their hostages for securing 
 the peace of some of the western provinces, a fact which may have 
 influenced the judgment of Mr. Bryant in asserting his Bristol 
 paternity—he supposing that the West of England was intended by 
 this expression. 
 
 When delivered as a hostage to the Conqueror, young Turgot was 
 confined in the Castle of Lincoln, which was situated in that part of the 
 county designated Lindsey, which is the most important of the three 
 districts into which Lincolnshire is divided, the two others being called 
 
502 
 
 HISTOKY OF BEISTOL. 
 
 Holland and Kerstevan, and both lying to the west of it. Hence 
 Lindsey supplied hostages for securing the peace of itself, as well as of 
 these western provinces. Had Mr. Bryant noticed this little circum¬ 
 stance, the opinion he expressed relating to Turgot might have been a 
 very different one; but he seems, like many other writers, to have 
 caught at everything likely to support a favourite theory, rather than 
 investigate facts which might overturn what he was anxious to believe 
 himself, and to induce others to believe also—the authenticity of the 
 Rowley poems. 
 
 We may then, I tliink, fairly conclude that Turgot was bom some¬ 
 where in the county of Lincoln. From Lincoln Castle he contrived to 
 escape into Norway, but the ship which carried him there also conveyed 
 some of the Conqueror’s adherents, who had been dispatched thither to 
 treat with Olave, then king of that country. Although discovered by 
 the Normans before the vessel arrived at its destination, Turgot had so 
 gamed the favour of the sailors that they protected him from the 
 malice of his fellow-passengers, who, though hostile, were not suffered to 
 harm him . On landing in Norway he was presented to the king, and 
 he so won upon the monarch and his people, that after remaining for 
 some years at Court, he left that country to return home, laden with 
 presents; but in a storm which overtook and wrecked the ship on the 
 coast of Northumberland, he lost the whole of the wealth he had 
 accumulated. From that moment he resolved to devote himself to the 
 service of the Church, and he took the vows of a monk accordingly, 
 not, as Mr. Bryant says, in the west, but in the north of England. From 
 Northumberland, where he was shipwrecked, he travelled to Durham, 
 and applying to Walter, Bishop of that See, declared his resolution to 
 forsake the world, and become a monk. In this determination he was 
 encouraged by the good prelate, who committed him to the care of 
 Aldwin, the first prior of Durham, then at Jarrow. From that 
 monastery he went to Melrose, from thence to Weremouth, where, says 
 Simeon, his biographer, the ceremony of his induction into the 
 monastery at Durham was performed about the year 1074, by Aldwin, 
 the prior, who had before been the prior of the monastery at 
 Winchcombe, in Gloucestershire. Here, says Simeon, Aldwin bestowed 
 on Turgot the monastic habit. 
 
 On the death of Aldwin, in 1087, Turgot was unanimously chosen 
 Prior of Durham ; and we learn from Roger de Hoveden, that in 1093, 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 503 
 
 the new church there was commenced, Malcolm, King of Scotland, 
 William the Bishop, and Turgot the prior, laying the first stones. 
 Shortly after his election to the office just named, having established 
 himself in the good opinion of the bishop, he was appointed arch-deacon 
 of the diocese, which office he held with that of Prior of Durham. 
 Under his able management the revenues of the monastery were greatly 
 augmented, large additions were made to its privileges, and many 
 improvements in the structure itself were the results of his prudent 
 government. During the twenty years he held the situation of prior, 
 he frequently visited the various places included in his arch-deaconry, 
 and often preached to attentive audiences. He was a sincere admirer 
 of St. Cuthbert, whose relics were greatly venerated by him, and also 
 by his early friend and predecessor in office, Prior Aldwin, and it is not 
 unlikely that this circumstance, together with his own personal virtues 
 and accomplishments, induced the King, in 1107, to solicit his 
 acceptance of the arch-bishropic of St. Andrews, which he did, but his 
 consecration was for many months delayed. Here he remained for the 
 space of eight years, and as his great worth was particularly known both 
 to the King and his Queen, Margaret, the sister of Edgar Atheling, who, 
 like Turgot, indulged in an unconquerable aversion to the Anglo- 
 Normans, he was appointed confessor to the latter. Some dissensions, 
 however, between him and the King occuring soon afterwards, so 
 disquieted the latter days of the Archbishop, that he was desirous of 
 journeying to Rome to crave the advice of Pope Pascal in the matter. 
 But his strength being unequal to the task, he retired to Durham, for 
 which place he had ever entertained a great regard, stopping on his way 
 at Weremouth, where he performed mass. On arriving at the former 
 scene of his labours he was seized with a slow fever, which, in the course 
 of two months, terminated his valuable life. Here, says Simeon, of 
 Durham, lie died in the year 1115, and Behind tells us he was buried 
 there with Aldwin and Walcher, who were both Priors of Durham, and 
 that the tomb which contained their ashes remained in his time. 
 
 The fact then that Turgot was not at all connected with Bristol is 
 sufficiently apparent, and that some place in Lincolnshire gave him 
 birth. From thence we have traced him to Durham, where, and at 
 places still further north, he spent the rest of his life. Nothing has 
 been adduced of any authority whatever, to shew that he was in any 
 
504 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 way connected with Bristol, or any other place in the West of England. 
 In the north he appears to have spent nearly the whole of his life, and 
 there, too, he died and was buried. Everything that relates to him, 
 appears to be narrated by his biographer, Simeon, of Durham, with a 
 considerable amount of detail; but not one word do we find recorded 
 of his having at any time journeyed at all towards this part of the 
 country. 
 
 Turgot wrote a life of Margaret, Queen of Malcolm III., at the 
 request of her daughter, Maud, wife of King Henry I., of England. 
 Hector Boethius and Peter Bale attribute also the authorship of “ The 
 History of the Kings of Scotland “The Chronicles of Durham 
 “The Life of King Malcolm III.,” and the “Annals of his own Time;” to 
 Turgot. The History of the Church of Durham, likewise, which passes 
 as the work of Simeon, of Durham, has been shewn by the learned John 
 Selden, in his masterly preface to the “Decern Scriptores,” to have 
 really been written by Turgot, Simeon having unjustly taken the 
 honour to himself.* 
 
 BIBERT, or “ Guibert of Bristol, by some called Yuibert, abbot of 
 the famous monastery of Bristol, the Church of St. Augustine, chiefly 
 cultivated throughout his life the philosophy of Aristotle, and sacred 
 literature.” f Mr. Barrett says “ he flourished very early, but the time 
 is not well known.” | Mr. Evans thinks that “in all probability it was 
 toward the close of the twelfth century.” § Bale and Leland are clearly 
 in error in calling this writer “ abbot of the famous Monastery of Bristol, 
 the Church of St. Augustine; ” for his name does not occur at all in 
 the list of the superiors of that convent, as given by the best authorities. 
 I am therefore inclined to believe, with Mr. Barrett, that he was a 
 Benedictine, and most probably a brother of the Priory of St. James, 
 which was founded before the Monastery of St. Augustine ; but whether 
 or not he held any office in that establishment, cannot now be known, 
 as the earliest prior upon record lived in 137 4. Bibert was eminently 
 a scholar, who “ composed, among other works, A History of His Own 
 
 * For a further account of Turgot, see my Fact versus Fiction, p. 7—15. 
 
 + Bale, p. 49. Leland also calls him “ Guibertus abbas S. Augustini de 
 Bristow.” Col. iii., p. 96. 
 
 t Hist, of Bristol, p. 624. 
 
 § Hist, of Bristol, vol ii., p. 377. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 505 
 
 Time, and Some Discourses,” * each comprised in one book or 
 volume. 
 
 “ RALPH, of Bristol, born in this city, was bred (as I have cause to 
 conceive) in the neighbouring convent of Glastonbury.” f He was 
 learned in all the wisdom of the schoolmen of the thirteenth century, 
 when elegant literature gave place to the philosophical and the metaphy¬ 
 sical,—to the logic of Aristotle and the subtleties of disputants. Ralph 
 seems to have been eminent in such attainments, the ascendancy of 
 which were fatal for the time to a higher order of literature, then, as T 
 have intimated, utterly rejected, and wholly divorced from taste. 
 
 On completing his studies at Glastonbury, Ralph went to Ireland, 
 and became the first Treasurer of St. Patrick’s, Dublin, and in 1223 
 was consecrated Bishop of Kildare. He repaired and beautified his 
 cathedral at great expense, and died about the beginning of the year 
 1232.f He wrote the life of his metropolitan, Laurence, Archbishop 
 of Dublin ; and also the Indulgences of the Abbey of Glastonbury, 
 probably in grateful remembrance of the education he had received 
 therein. These Indulgences “ were a relaxation of so many days’ 
 penance enjoined on every person, who should do such or such an act; 
 (as) 14 days to the Abbey of Glastonbury; 15 days to the Church of 
 Torre; and 13 days to the Church of the Holy Trinity of Godenie; 
 both belonging to the said abbey.” § 
 
 RICHARD LAVINGHAM. Of this man Pitseus says, he was “a 
 native of England in the county of Suffolk, as Leland tells us, was 
 brought up from his boyhood in the monastery of Ipswich, of the order 
 of the brethren of Mount Carmel, and there imbibed, after his nurse’s 
 milk, as it were, the first aliment of piety and sound learning. At that 
 tender age he exhibited no slight promise of future excellence. So 
 zealously did he cultivate the higher graces of character that all his 
 fellow-students loved and admired him, a few imitated his example, but 
 none surpassed or even equalled him. When a youth he assumed the 
 clerical garb, and in due time made his public profession ; he spent his 
 life humbly in obedience to every rule, and made progress in all the 
 
 * Bale. t Fuller’s Worthies. 
 t Ware, concerning Ireland, vol. i., p, 384. 
 
 § William of Malmesbury. 
 
 N N 
 
506 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 learning and virtue befitting bis age. At length the course of prepara¬ 
 tory studies being completed, he was transferred to the higher studies 
 of Oxford. And first he devoted himself ardently to Philosophy, and 
 then to Theology, and in both made such extraordinary acquirements, 
 that gradually rising higher and higher, he at length obtained the 
 highest rewards of the Theological school, as Trithemus informs us, 
 and lastly became Professor of sacred Theology. Then he began to 
 shew to all how great a man he was, for he was possessed of a subtle 
 intellect, a graceful elocution, and an acute judgment, to which natural 
 endowments, when varied knowledge and Professional authority were 
 added, it is not to be wondered at that he became eminently distin¬ 
 guished among his contemporaries, both abroad and at home. He was 
 indeed fortunate in the possession of talents which enabled him to be 
 abundantly useful in those unfortunate times in which his lot was cast, 
 for it was then that the heresy of Wicliffe in England, and of the 
 Lollards in Bohemia, was beginning to increase, and to destroy all 
 order, to despise and vilify laws and kings, and even God and the 
 Saints. In boldly combating and repressing these errors he employed 
 great industry, endured great labour, displayed remarkable learning and 
 incredible zeal, and in short, produced the best effects. He hated these 
 sworn enemies of God, and arch-enemies of the Church, with perfect 
 hatred. He frequently encountered and manfully attacked them in 
 public disputations. Pie forcibly denounced them in public discourses. 
 He reproved, refuted, and condemned them utterly, in his written 
 books. These services endeared him wonderfully to King Bichard the 
 second, to whom he was Confessor, and to Simon of Sudbury, Arch¬ 
 bishop of Canterburjq with whom, as we shall presently see, he met his 
 death in a tumult of seditious persons. That he was held in no mean 
 estimation among his eonntrymen, appears from this fact, that almost 
 as soon as arrived at years of manhood he was made Prior of the 
 Convent at Bristol, where some,* I think without sufficient evidence, 
 suppose that he died. For I am of opinion that the King summoned 
 him to his presence, and that he remained for some time in the Palace, 
 guiding the King’s conscience: that he did not resign his office of Prior, 
 but administered it by Deputy, and that whilst being Prior of Bristol 
 he did not die in Bristol, but was killed in London. 
 
 * “He died at Venta Belgarum (Bristol) anno D. 1383.” Leland, com. 
 tom. ii., p. 398. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 507 
 
 “ But let us come to the learning of the man. He left for the 
 benefit of posterity many remarkable and learned productions,” which 
 are particularized by Leland, but which it is unnecessary further to 
 mention here. 
 
 “At last a seditious tumult having arisen in the suburbs of London, 
 he was killed in the flower of his age, together with Simon of Sudbury, 
 and other distinguished men, in the year of human redemption, 1381, 
 when Bichard 2d. was ruling unprosperously over the English people.” 
 
 NICHOLAS CANTILUPE. This man, “born in Wales of an 
 illustrious family descended from the Demetae, was the son of William, 
 Earl of Demetia. Of this family also was the eminently pious Thomas 
 Cantilupe, Bishop of Hereford, of whose piety, as Leland informs us, 
 Nicholas was a worthy representative, for as he was related to him by 
 blood, so by imitating his example he resembled him in character. 
 When a young man he attached himself to the holy order of the 
 Carmelites in the Convent at Bristol. In due time he was sent to 
 pursue his studies at Cambridge, here he made good use of his 
 advantages, and at length receiving the due reward of his virtues and 
 his learning from the University, he was created Doctor of Theology. 
 He was a pious man, learned, grave, modest, of great authority, 
 prudent and wise. These extraordinary natural gifts qualified him to 
 direct others, yet the subtlety of his intellect, his fine understanding, 
 and his taste for the liberal arts and sciences, seemed still more to 
 qualify him to be a student. He is said to have presided with the 
 authority of a Prior over several convents of his order at Cambridge, 
 Bristol, and Gloucester, where he became known to the excellent Duke 
 Humphrey, who loved him and made him his familiar friend. At 
 length he was elected Prior of Northampton, and there to the last day 
 of his life he protected those who -were entrusted to his charge, holily 
 and conscientiously. 
 
 “He was released from the prison house of the body September 27th 
 in the 1411st year from that in which the Word was made flesh, .and 
 whilst Henry the Gth held the sceptre of England.” 
 
 His works, which are numerous, are mentioned by Pitseus, my 
 author. His name, with those of some others, is mentioned here 
 because of his connection with Bristol, not as a native, but by virtue 
 of the office he held in the town. 
 
 N N 2 
 
508 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 JOHN FREUS, or FREAS, says Pitseus, “was born in London, 
 and there from his earliest years was nourished in piety and sound 
 learning. When a youth he was sent to Oxford that he might aspire 
 to higher things, where becoming a member of Balliol College, he 
 zealously devoted himself to those studies of which he had already laid 
 a good foundation. His mind was truly elegant, and he ardently 
 cultivated every branch of polite learning, in which many who had 
 conferred the greatest lustre on their country have here distinguished 
 themselves. At length upon quitting Oxford he resoi'ted to Venta 
 Belgarum, that is Bristol, not for the purpose of remaining there, but 
 in order thence to take shipping to foreign parts, for his great desire 
 was to visit Italy, which he accordingly did. There at Ferrara he 
 attended the lectures of Guarini, devoting himself first to the study of 
 Medicine and then of Civil Law. He then taught the Art of Medicine 
 at Ferrara. He afterwards distinguished himself in the Public Schools 
 at Florence, and then at Padua, where he received a Doctor’s degree. 
 When he perceived that the reputation of his name and learning began 
 to spread he betook himself to Rome, where the road to those honours 
 which he was so eager to attain was more easy. There he found no 
 one liis equal, whether as it regards a knowledge of Greek and Hebrew, 
 or the elegance of his Latinity. His great merits recommended him to 
 the notice of Pope Paul the Second, by whom he was so highly beloved 
 that the Holy Father became anxious to know how best he could 
 reward one who was so well deserving honour in the republic of letters. 
 But whilst he was thus revolving this subject in his mind he received 
 the news that the Bishopric of Bath, in England, was vacant, upon this 
 John Freas he conferred it. But he was never consecrated, for he died 
 only one month after his appointment. We will now (continues 
 Pitseus) give a catalogue of the literary monuments, which living he 
 published, and dying bequeathed to posterity. Part of them he 
 inscribed to Pope Paul the Second, and part to John Tiptoft, Earl of 
 Worcestei, his own Mecaenas.” Then follows a list of the works 
 referred to, which may be found in my author, who adds, “And many 
 other works he wrote as well as translated. He died at Rome in the 
 year 1465, Edward the 4th being King of England.” 
 
 Mr. Barrett includes his name in his list of the Vicars of St. Mary 
 Redcliffe, but this is probably an error. Fuller says he has the merit, 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 509 
 
 with William Grocyn, of having introduced the study of the Greek 
 language into England. 
 
 JOHN SPINE. “I had concluded him born at Spine in Berkshire 
 nigh Newbury, but for these diswasives, 1. He lived lately under 
 Richard III., when the Clergy began to leave off their local surnames, 
 and in conformity to the Laity, to be called from their Father’s. 2. I 
 suspect the name to be Latinized tip incus, and that in plain English he 
 was called Thorn, an ancient name in this city (Bristol);” * where Bale 
 positively says he was born.f Pitts, too, assures his readers that he 
 was “an Englishman by nation, of the city of Bristol, of the Order of 
 brethren of the Blessed Virgin Mary of Mount Carmel, Doctor of 
 Theology, and as it appears Professor at Oxford; a man skilled in 
 Philosophy and Theology; highly educated and a preacher celebrated 
 in his own time.” :{: He appears to have been held in high estimation 
 by associates of his own sect, and by his teachers, whose method of 
 study he so carefully followed in every department, that he ultimately 
 obtained the chief office among them by public suffrage. He was the 
 author of a volume of discourses to the clergy, and also of one entitled 
 “Annual Disputations,” and some other works. He died at Oxford 
 in 148-1. 
 
 JOHN MILVERTON is said, by Collinson, to have derived his 
 name from Milverton, in Somersetshire, “where indeed he was born 
 but fixing himself in Bristol he was there inducted into the sacred rites 
 of the Carmelite Order.” § He, however, finished his studies at Oxford, 
 where he was made a Doctor of Divinity and a professor in the 
 university. “After he had gained for himself a great name by public 
 lectures and scholastic disputes, he was invited to Paris by John 
 Sorethus, General Master of the Order, and was appointed head of the 
 Carmelites in England, Scotland, and Ireland, A.D. 145G; so that his 
 jurisdiction was larger than that of King Edward IV., under whom he 
 flourished. This office with its honour and advantages he occupied for 
 eleven or twelve years. He was a learned man but somewhat arrogant, 
 for he severely rebuked, with more than ordinary jealousy, the excesses 
 
 * Fuller’s Worthies. + Baleus, p. 68. t Titseus, p. 673. 
 
 § Hist, of Somersetshire, vol. iii., p. 18. Fuller’s Worthies. Leland’s 
 Com., tom. ii., p. 466. 
 
510 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 of tlie prelates, ecclesiastics, and even the presidents.” * He was the 
 champion of his order, both preaching and writing, and greatly opposed 
 Wycliffe and his followers; in fact, he was an enemy to all who 
 favoured Church endowments with temporal possessions; advocating 
 poverty, and labouring hard to make all persons believe that Christ 
 himself was a Carmelite, and therefore a professor of voluntary poverty, 
 which he highly commended. He inveighed against the pride, luxury, 
 and riches of the bishops and superior clergy, and his fame as a 
 disputant came to be regarded as of a very high order, both at Oxford, 
 at London, and at Rome; “so that the whole circle of his acquaintance 
 were filled with his praise.” In the first named city, “chiefly at the 
 suggestion of Paulinus, he held repeated meetings for the people in 
 reference to the unbearable ambition and avarice of the bishops. In 
 this matter indeed he perseveringly imitated the example of Henry 
 Parcher, a Carmelite, a man of considerable attainment who urged 
 poverty on the priests of Christ.” t Milverton was at length ex¬ 
 communicated by his diocesan, the bishop of London; and fearing the 
 consequences of the resentment he had incurred, he appealed to Pope 
 Paul II., and fled to Rome, where he also held public meetings, and 
 wrote a book; all of which “so irritated the wounds he had inflicted 
 (as Leland says) in pleading for poverty, that he was forcibly removed 
 by the magistrates to the mole of Hadrian, or, to speak more commonly, 
 the castle of St. Angelo, as it were in a prison.” Here the pope, on his 
 adversaries, the bishops, complaining of his conduct, kept Milverton a 
 close prisoner with the famous papal biographer, Plautina, “the neb of 
 whose pen had been too long in writing dangerous truth,” % and who 
 happened to be there incarcerated at the time. After an imprisonment of 
 three years, during which he addressed letters to the Pope, his ministers, 
 and many Italian nobles, he obtained a hearing of his case before seven of 
 the cardinals, and upon their judgment in his favour he was honourably 
 acquitted; having “put forth a sign of his faith in an excellent 
 document; on which he was restored to liberty, with permission to 
 return to the see of St. David, to which he had been elected (though 
 not consecrated), with the additional offer of a Cardinal’s hat; both of 
 which he modestly declined.” § “ How he came to miss the Bishopric 
 
 * Pitscus, p. 673. f Leland's Com. t Fuller’s Worthies. § Ibid. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 511 
 
 of St. David’s is to me unknown. Perchance he would not bite at the 
 bait, but whether because too fat to cloy the stomach of his mortified 
 sold, or too lean to please the appetite of his concealed covetousness, no 
 man can decide.” “ He wrote divers learned works before, after, and 
 during, the time of his imprisonment; and dying full of years and cares, 
 he ended his life the last day save one of January, 1486, and was 
 buried in the choir of the monastery of the Whitefriars, London, with 
 these nickling hexameters engraven upon his monument. 
 
 “ Clauditur hie subtus prudens veri reserator, 
 
 Carmeli cultor, doctrine firmus amator. 
 
 Rite Johannes Oxeniensis in ordine doctor 
 Six ortkodoxe fidei validus relevator. 
 
 Post provinquecialis vixit pluribus annis, 
 
 Mirifice crebro vexatus tempore dampnis 
 Huic reus est sceleris annus magni tribulantis, 
 
 Gaudeat ob meritum constans robur patientis, 
 
 Ipsum turbauit vir fortis perniciose, 
 
 Tandem catbolice trusus superat speciose. 
 
 Aureolam Dens ut det Mylverton numerose, 
 
 Optemus, fuerat plexus licet invidiose.” * 
 
 THOMAS ROWLEY. Dean Mills says, “ If we give credit to 
 Chatterton’s notes, prefixed to the Ballad of Charity, he (Rowley) was 
 born at Norton Malreward, near Bristol, educated at the Convent of 
 St. Kenna, at Keynsham, and died at Westbury; but these facts being 
 unsupported by other authentic proofs, can only carry such weight with 
 the reader as he may feel disposed to give tliem.”f 
 
 There are several facts stated in relation to this doubtful personage, 
 which I have been much puzzled to reconcile. It matters little where he 
 was born, but his subsequent career is very important; because, if true, 
 as reported, it is somewhat extraordinary that more attention has not 
 been paid to it by those who have engaged in the Chattertonian con¬ 
 troversy. In some manuscripts possessed by Mr. Barrett, he is said to 
 have been educated at the Convent of the Carmelites, at Bristol; yet 
 Chatterton himself says he was schooled at that of the Black Canons 
 
 * Weever’s Funeral Monuments, p. 221. 
 t Poems, &c., by Thomas Rowley. 
 
512 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL, 
 
 of St. Kenna, at Keynsham. In a note prefixed to the poem intituled 
 the “ Battle of Hastings," it is said to have been translated by “ Thomas 
 Rowlie, parish preeste of St. John’s, in the City of Bristol, in the year 
 1465;” the former statement, however, is not authenticated (as Dean 
 Mills says) by the Worcester register; and as to the latter, Bristol was 
 not a city at the date mentioned. This, however, is of little conse¬ 
 quence to our argument. With Rowley, it is said, were educated by the 
 Carmelites Robert and William Canynges,* to whom he tells us “He 
 was fadre confessor; ” whereas we know that John Carpenter, Bishop 
 of Worcester, held that important office in relation to the latter 
 Canynges, and as to the former, we nowhere find, on authority, that 
 such a man ever existed. Rowley says that “ Master William offered 
 me a canon’s place in Westbury College, which gladly had I accepted 
 but my pains (probably arising from the infirmities of age) made me 
 stay at home.” And where was his home ? Why he tells us that 
 “after this mischance I lived in a house by the tower (in Bristol), which 
 has not been repaired since Robert Consull of Gloucester repayrd the 
 castle and wall.” His dwelling was, then, close to Bristol Castle. 
 Subsequently he removed to “ his house on the hyll (where) the ayer 
 was mickle keen. It was a fine house (which he took) on a repaying 
 lease for 99 years, and therein he lyvd; ” that is to say, on Kingsdown— 
 both his residences being distant from his cure of St. John’s. Chatterton 
 says that Rowley died at Westbury; if so, he after all ended his life 
 with the regulars ; yet he could not accept a canon’s place, when offered, 
 because of his pains ! His was a singularly chequered life ; for, born 
 in an obscure village, he was educated either by the White Friars or 
 Black Canons, no matter which—they were regulars; he then relin¬ 
 quished conventual life for that of the parish priest, and gave up the 
 regulars to become a secular; then again he doffed the habit and 
 occupation of a secular, and assumed that of a regular, to die in the 
 Benedictine College at Westbury! Much stronger faith is required to 
 believe all this than many other things which Chatterton has stated 
 about Rowley! 
 
 Rowley is said to have outlived his friend and patron, William 
 Canynges, yet the latter takes no notice of him in his will. All the 
 
 * See my “ Memorials of the Canynges' Family,” &c., p. 63. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 513 
 
 disputants on one side, in the Rowley controversy, utterly deny, I 
 believe, the existence of any such person ; and William Wyrcestre, who 
 lived in Bristol at the time assigned to Rowley, makes no mention of 
 him, though he noted down in his itinerary every person and 
 circumstance worth recording in relation to the old town. “ Chatterton’s 
 anecdotes concerning the birth, education, and death of Rowley, must 
 rest upon his own authority, for want of more authentic evidence, and 
 carry such a degree of credit as the reader may be inclined to allow 
 them.” * “ Had such a poet as Rowley existed in the fifteenth century, 
 
 he would have been idolized by his age, he would have been 
 complimented by contemporary writers, and his works would have been 
 multiplied by numerous manuscripts, which would have now been 
 remaining in our libraries. He would have been printed by Caxton, 
 who diligently searched after all the poetry of his times, and would have 
 descended in repeated editions to posterity. His life would have been 
 written by Bale, who mentions obscure authors, now deservedly 
 forgotten : and by the classical Leland, he would have been un¬ 
 doubtedly recorded as the great and rare scholar, who understood Greek 
 in the reign of Edward IV. That his collection of poems should subsist 
 in one copy only, and that unseen, unknown, nor ever once transcribed, 
 for so long a period, is incredible. That such a prodigy should have 
 been suppressed for three hundred years, is inconsistent with the 
 common equity and the common curiosity of mankind, and with that 
 notice which distinguished merit so naturally demands. Excellence 
 must struggle into observation. Beauty cannot be long concealed. A 
 meteor attracts every eye.” t 
 
 WILLIAM GROCYN was born here in 1442, but neither the 
 particular locality in the old town, nor the time of the year in which 
 that event took place, is recorded; nor is any mention made of his 
 parentage. He was, however, doubtless of respectable descent, for we 
 find him, at an early age, sent to Winchester School, where he 
 commenced his education for the Church. Like many of his literary 
 predecessors he was a secular ecclesiastic, although there was a good 
 
 * Dean Milles, Rowley Poems, p. 364. 
 
 + An Inquiry into the authenticity of the Rowley Poems, by Thomas 
 Warton, p. 101. 
 
514 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 sprinkling of laymen who devoted themselves to the same honourable 
 pursuit. “ When but a youth he became a most excellent poet. Take 
 one instance of many. A pleasant maid (probably his mistress, 
 however he must be so understood) in a love frolick pelted him with a 
 snow-ball, whereupon he extempore (Bale cent. 9, nuna 5, and Pits, 
 1520,) made this Latin Tetrastick:— 
 
 A snoiv-ball while at me did Julia throw, 
 
 Who would suppose it ? Fire was in that snow, 
 
 Julia alone could quench my hot desire, 
 
 But not with snow, or ice, but equal fire." * 
 
 From Winchester School he was elected, in 1467, to New College, 
 Oxford; the wardens and fellows of which, in consequence of his 
 superior attainments, presented him, in 1479, to the rectory of Newton- 
 Longville, in Buckinghamshire; but the society of Magdalen College 
 having made him their divinity reader about the year 1483, he was 
 induced to fix his residence almost entirely at Oxford. This was soon 
 after the accession of Richard III. to the throne; who, visiting that 
 city, was so pleased with the learning and ability with which Grocyn 
 took part in a disputation held in his presence, that he is said to have 
 graciously rewarded him. The nature of this reward, however, is not 
 mentioned ; but we find our scholar, two years afterwards, a prebend of 
 Lincoln. At this time the Greek language was very little known in 
 England, and Grocyn, who was already acquainted with the rudiments 
 of it from Cornelio ViteUi, an Italian, resolved to visit Italy for the 
 purpose of obtaining a more perfect knowledge of Greek, which he ac¬ 
 cordingly did, and studied for some time under those two eminent 
 scholars, Demetrius Chalcondyles and Angelo Politian. In 1491 he 
 returned to England, and settled at Exeter College, Oxford, where he 
 took the degree of B.D., and commenced teaching his newly-acquired 
 tongue ; but a great outcry was soon raised against it, and it was some 
 years before he was able to overcome the force of prejudice which had 
 taken possession of the minds of the Oxford students. It was not 
 until about the year 1519 that he could venture to deliver his lectures 
 in Greek at his college, when, ignorant of the value of the language 
 
 Fuller’s Worthies. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 515 
 
 they repudiated, the young scholars divided themselves into two factions, 
 distinguished by the appellation of Greeks and Trojans, and a most 
 violent opposition was raised against Grocyn and his new language. 
 The two parties thus raised up in the university exercised towards each 
 other the most bitter feelings of animosity, and even proceeded to open 
 hostilities. 
 
 The position in which Grocyn was found when the great 
 Erasmus came to Oxford, was that of the first public professor of the 
 Greek language in that university. Of his great abilities, learning, and 
 integrity, the latter speaks in the highest terms of commendation ; and 
 it is evident that between these two celebrated men a most sincere and 
 endearing friendship existed. Grocyn persevered in teaching the lan¬ 
 guage of which he obtained a perfect mastery, and reckoned among his 
 pupils the learned Erasmus himself, and the amiable Sir Thomas More, 
 who introduced him to Archbishop Warkam, by whom he was presented 
 to the rectory of Aldington, in the county of Kent. About the year 
 1510 Grocyn resigned his living of Newton-Longville, having been 
 appointed, in 1500, to the mastership of All Saints’ College, at Maidstone. 
 At this time Grocyn was an eminently learned man, and although he 
 still resided chiefly at Oxford, he enjoyed, during the intervals of 
 leisure from the duties of his calling, much of the society of his friend 
 Erasmus, at Maidstone, who often mentions him in his writings as a 
 man profound and erudite. 
 
 In 1518 Grocyn was struck with palsy, which affliction appears to 
 have greatly impaired his faculties ; and gradually becoming more and 
 more a prey to disease, he sunk beneath its ravages in the following 
 year, dying at Maidstone, in 1519, at the age of 80 ; in the choir of the 
 collegiate church at which place he was buried, near the remains of 
 Archbishop Courtney, its founder, and those of John Wotton, the first 
 warden of the college over which Grocyn had presided. 
 
 The preferments which this great man enjoyed were, besides the 
 mastership of the college, the prebend of South Searle in the Cathedral 
 of Lincoln; the rectory of Depden, which he gave up in 1493; as he 
 did also that of Shepperton, in Middlesex, in 1513; and the vicarage of 
 St. Lawrence, Jewry, London, in 1517. He is also said to have 
 succeeded Cuthbert Tonstall, in the Church of East Peckham, in Kent, 
 on the latter becoming bishop of London ; yet he died comparatively 
 
516 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 poor, -which seems to have been occasioned through his great generosity; 
 to gratify which noble trait in his character he even pawned his plate 
 to Doctor Young, who, dying before Grocyn could redeem it, generously 
 returned it to its owner by will, without exacting either principal or 
 interest. 
 
 Grocyn seems to have written very sparingly with a view to 
 publication. A Latin epistle of his to Aldus Manutius is prefixed to 
 Linacre’s translation of “ Proclus de Sphaera,” printed at Venice, in 
 1449. Besides this epistle, which Erasmus calls a very elaborate and 
 acute one, there is nothing extant of Grocyn’s, who appears to have had 
 too much delicacy of feeling for authorship, for his Dutch friend tells 
 us “ he was of so nice a taste, that he had rather write nothing than 
 write ill.” Other writings of Grocyn’s are, however, mentioned by 
 various authors, as “Tracts against the host by John Wycliffe;” 
 “Letters to Erasmus and Others;” “ Grammatica; ” “Vulgarity of 
 Children ;” “ Epigrammata; ” “ Not a in Tarentium;” and “Isagogicum 
 quoddam; ” but none of these appear to have been printed. 
 
 JOHN HOOPER, a prelate of the Church of England, and a 
 Protestant martyr in the reign of Queen Mary, was a Bristol Carmelite, 
 but born in Somersetshire about the year 1495. He was a student and 
 graduate in the University of Oxford, after the study of the sciences, 
 and took his first degree in 1518. It seems probable that he was but 
 a few years connected with the White Friars, from whom he seceded; 
 but whether from disgust of their manners and principles does not 
 appear. He subsequently read the works of the German reformers, and 
 studied with them the Sacred Scriptures, ultimately embracing the 
 Protestant doctrines, which he preached with great ability and zeal, the 
 churches being crowded to hear him. In 1550 he was appointed 
 Bishop of Gloucester, and on the deprivation of Heath, Bishop of 
 Worcester, in 1552, he was presented with that see in commendam with 
 the former, by King Edward VI. He suffered much after the accession 
 of Queen Mary on account of his Protestantism, and was at length 
 burnt at the stake with the utmost barbarity, the wood which consumed 
 him being green and a long time kindling. After the fire was lighted 
 he endured the utmost tortures for three quarters of an hour, his lower 
 extremities being slowly consumed before there was sufficient fire to 
 
HISTOEY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 517 
 
 affect the vitals. He was burnt at Gloucester, February 9th, 1555, in 
 the sixtieth year of his age. 
 
 Bishop Hooper was the author of “ A Ueclaracion of Christe and of 
 his Offyce ”—“ An Answer vnto my Lord of Wyn Chester’s booke, 
 intytlyd, A Detection of the Deuyls Sophistrye, wherwith he robbith 
 the vnlernyd people of the trew byleef in the moost blessyd Sacrament 
 of the Aulter”—“A Lesson of the Incarnation of Christ, that he took 
 his humanitye in and of the blessyd Virgine”—“A Declaration of the 
 Ten Holy Comaundementes of Almiglitye God, collectyd oute of the 
 Scripture Canonicall”—“ Funerall Sermon”—“An Ouersighte and 
 Deliberacion vppon the holy prophet Jonas; made and vttered before 
 the King’s Maiestie, and his most honourable Councell in the Lent last 
 past (1550) Comprehended in seuen Sermons”—“A Godly Confession 
 and Protestacion of the Christian Faytli; wherein is declared what a 
 Christian manne is bound to believe of God, his King, his neibour, and 
 hymselfe ”—“ Godly and most necessary Annotations in ye xiij chapyter 
 to the Romaynes ”—“ Homilie to bee reade in the time of Pestilence, 
 and a most present remedie for the same”—“ Certain Sentences, written 
 in Prison”—“An Exposition vpon the 23d Psalme of David, full of 
 frutefull and comfortable doctrine, written to the Cytie of London. 
 Whereunto is annexed, an Apologye against such as reported that he 
 cursed Queen Mary”—“An Apologye made by the Reverende Father 
 and constante Martyr of Chryste, John Hooper, Ac., againste the 
 vntrue and sclaunderous reporte, that he should be a maintainer and 
 encovager of suclie as cursed the Quenes highnes that then was, Queene 
 Marye, Ac”—“ Certeine comfortable expositions of the constant Martyr 
 of Christ, M. John Hooper, Bishop of Gloucester and Worcester ; written 
 in the time of his tribulation and imprisonment, upon the xxiii. lxii. Ixxiii 
 and lxxviii Psalmes of the Prophet David ”—“ A godlie and profitable 
 Treatise ; containing a Declaration of Christe and his Office ”—“ Twelve 
 Lectures on the Creede, and a briefe and cleare Confession of the 
 Christian Faith; conteining 100 Articles, according to the order of the 
 Creede.” 
 
 “JOHN FOWLER was born in Bristol, bred a printer by his 
 occupation, but so learned a man, that (if the character given him by 
 one of his own persuasion be true) he may pass for our English Robert 
 or Henry Stephens, being skilful in Latin and Greek, and a good poet, 
 
518 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 orator, and divine. He wrote an abridgment of Thomas his Summes, 
 the translation of Asorius into English, &c. Being a zealous papist he 
 could not comport with the Keformation, but conveyed himself and his 
 press over to Antwerp, where lie was signally serviceable to the Catholic 
 cause in printing their pamphlets, which were sent over and sold in 
 England. He died at Namurch, 1579, and lies there buried in the Church 
 of St. John the Evangelist.” * 
 
 Besides some pamphlets which were distributed in England, Fowler 
 printed—A Treatise entitled “ Beware of Mr. Jewel; by John Rastel, 
 M.A., and Student in Divinitie—A Beioindre to Mr. Jewel’s Replie, by 
 perusing whereof, the discrete and diligent Reader may easily see the 
 Answer to parte of his Insolent Chalenge iustified, and his Obiections 
 against the Masse; whereat the Priest sometime receiueth the Holy 
 Mysteries without presant companie to receiue with him, for that cause 
 by Luther’s Schoole called Priuate Masse, clearly confuted. By Thomas 
 Harding, D.D.—Testimonies for the real Presence of Christes Body 
 and Blood, &c. Robert Pointz—A Treatise of the Images of Christ and 
 of his Saints, by Nicholas Sander—A Breife Shew of False Wares, 
 packt together, by John Rastel—De Summo Pontifice Christi in Terris 
 Yicario, eiusque Officio et Potestate: autore Reginando Polo—A briefe 
 Treatise of Diurse Sure and Plaine Wayes to finde out the Truthe, in 
 this doubtful and dangerous time of Heresie, Ac., by Richard Bristow— 
 A Treatise of Schisme, by Gregory Martin—An Oration against the 
 Unlawful Insurrections of the Protestants, by Peter Farrin, and a 
 Dialogue of Comfort against Tribulation, by Sir Thomas More.” He 
 also reduced into a Compendium, the Summa Theologiae of Thomas 
 Aquinas, under the title of Loca Communia Theologica—and wrote 
 Additiones in Chronica Genebrandi—A Psalter for Catholics, which 
 was answered by Samson Dean, of Christ Church, Oxford—also, 
 Epigrams, and other Verses. 
 
 MARY RAMSEY was the eldest daughter of William Dale, a 
 Bristol merchant, in which town she was born, but at what period is not 
 recorded. Her father served the office of sheriff in 1518; after which 
 date nothing is known of the male branch of the family, which probably 
 soon afterwards became extinct. In after years she became the second 
 
 Fuller’s Worthies. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 519 
 
 wife of Sir Thomas Ramsey, who was Lord Mayor of London in 1577, 
 at whose death she was left a very considerable estate. She founded 
 two Fellowships and Scholarships in Peter House, Cambridge, and she 
 proposed to settle upon the establishment, lands of the yearly value of 
 £500, provided it was henceforth called the College of Peter and Mary, 
 which being objected to, the design was abandoned, and the House lost 
 the further aid of a good benefactress. She died in 1596, bequeathing 
 £1450 to Queen Elizabeth’s Hospital and the poor of this city, as well 
 as founding an almshouse in London, which is still called by her name. 
 
 WILLIAM WARFORD was a native of this city, where he received 
 his elementary education, and gave great promise for the future. 
 Accordingly he was sent to Oxford, and admitted into Trinity College. 
 A few years subsequently, however, he became a convert to the Catholic 
 faith, and went to Rome, to the English College there, where he studied 
 Theology. He was soon afterwards ordained a priest, and exercised 
 his preaching abilities in England for the conversion of others to the 
 creed of his adoption. At length he returned to Rome, and was 
 admitted to the Society of Jesus. He was subsequently sent to 
 Vallisoles, in Spain, and acted as Principal of the English College there 
 until his death, which is said to have occurred about the year 1608. 
 He was the author of “ Catechismum Anglice,” and “ Historias 
 sanctorum transtulit ex Ribadinera, &c.”* 
 
 JAMES ALBAN GIBBES is said by Mr. Barrett t to have been of 
 Bristol, and the son of “ William Gibbes, Doctor of Physic, a native of 
 Bristol, his family residing in the parish of St. Alary Redcliff, and 
 having great property there without Temple Gate. He was physician 
 to Queen Henrietta Maria.” By a reference, however, to a volume of 
 poems by James Alban Gibbes, which he commences with a dedication 
 in Latin to Pope Clement IX., signed by the author, with his life 
 epitomised, by Caroli Cartharii, Consistoria Advocati Roma, we read 
 as follows:—• 
 
 “In the island of Great Britain, which we call England, a city stands 
 out pre-eminent, which having received the name of Troy at its 
 foundation, and having been made a Roman colony, was at length 
 
 Pitseus, p. 859. 
 
 t Hist, of Bristol, p. 651. 
 
520 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 called London. Under its sky William Ghibbesius and Mary Stonora, 
 the one (William Gibbes) a native of Bristol, the other of Oxford, the 
 parents of our memorable author, made their habitation: but being 
 banished on account of religion by King James, they at length changed 
 their own country for that of France. James Alban Ghibbesius, 
 therefore, I present to you, an Englishman by stock, but a Frenchman 
 by birth: who, when born into the world, was called James in the holy 
 water of baptism, but Alban, in honour of the first English martyr, at 
 the sacred rite of christening. Being invited about his ninth year by his 
 parents, he made a journey to England, whither they themselves having 
 also set out from exile, and having been restored to their country after 
 eleven years, had returned a little before. Having travelled over 
 Belgium, Spain, Germany, and Italy, in each separate place he obtained 
 the honour which literature bestows, and the friendship of renowned 
 and illustrious men, and ‘saw the manners and cities of many.’ At 
 length he thought that the course of virtue and glory with his foot, his 
 steps with his mind, if, indeed, he could stay his mind, should be fixed 
 at Borne, in this light, I say, of the whole world, and capital of all 
 nations, the theatre, as it were, of talent. Urban VIII., the pontiff of 
 immortal memory, reigned, at the expiration of whose last year 
 Ghibbesius arrived at the city, being twenty-eight years old, where 
 continually (if a year and ten months be excepted, in which, being 
 invited by Francis, Duke of Modena, at a great price, to instruct his 
 son Almericus, he was absent from Borne: on account of ill-health, 
 however, he was not able to keep himself from returning), he lived 
 under the patronage and in the train of Bernardin Spada, a Cardinal, 
 and a great lover of literature, up to the time of the Cardinal’s death, 
 when he gained the protection of Justinian, and still enjoys it. 
 Moreover, he experienced the bounty of Alexander VII., the Pope, a 
 man most inclined towards the fine arts, at whose decree, on the death 
 of Henry Chisellius, a man of high renown, a professor of polite 
 literature at the seat of Boman literature for thirty-five years, Ghibbesius 
 was exalted to the vacant chair in 1657.” After some further remarks 
 on the great merit of the poet, and the honours he received, the 
 account closes as follows:— 
 
 “Also may be mentioned the favour of that most wise prince, 
 Clement IX., the supreme pontiff, who was greatly attached to our 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 521 
 
 poet, and was his former patron; to whose presence being admitted, 
 and to a kiss of his sacred foot, did not disdain, in remarkable words, 
 to compliment him very courteously; from whose more than imperial 
 mind, and almost incredible favour towards all literary men, there is 
 nothing so great or noble which he may not almost of a right expect.” 
 
 From the above account it is clear that the father and mother of 
 James Alban Gibbes had resided in France two years before he was born 
 in that country, and that he never saw England until nine years 
 afterwards, which fact at once decides that he was not “of Bristol,” as 
 stated by Mr. Barrett. 
 
 “WILLIAM CHILD, a native of Bristol, was educated in music 
 under Elway Bevin, organist of the cathedral of that city.* In the 
 year 1G31, being then of Christ Church college, Oxford, he took his 
 degree of bachelor in that university; and in 163G was appointed one 
 of the organists of the chapel of St. George, at Windsor, in the room of 
 Dr. John Mundy, and soon after one of the organists of the royal 
 chapel at Whitehall. After the restoration he was appointed to the 
 office of chanter of the King’s chapel, and became of the private 
 music to Charles II. In 1663 he obtained licence to proceed Doctor 
 in his faculty, and on the thirteenth day of July in the same year, 
 completed his degree at an act celebrated in St. Mary’s church, Oxon. 
 Dr. Child died in the year 1696, having attained the age of ninety 
 years. 
 
 “ He composed many services and anthems, none of which appear to 
 have been printed, except a few in Dr. Boyce’s Cathedral Music, and 
 some others. 
 
 “ The memory of Dr. Child is celebrated for an act of beneficence 
 that was hardly to be expected from one in his station of life. It 
 seems that he was so ill paid for his services at Windsor, that a long 
 arrear of his salary had incurred, which he could not get discharged. 
 After many fruitless applications to the dean and chapter, he told them 
 that if they would pay him the sum in arrear he would new pave the 
 choir of their chapel for them. They paid him his money, and the 
 
 * “Elway Bevin, a disciple of Tallis, a gentleman extraordinary of the 
 royal chapel in 1605, and organist of the cathedral church of Bristol,” was 
 also a writer on music of great eminence, as well as a composer. 
 
 o o 
 
522 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 doctor performed Ms promise, neither they nor the knights companions 
 of the most noble order of the garter interposing to prevent it, or 
 signifying the least inclination to share with a servant and dependant of 
 theirs in the honour of so munificent an act. 
 
 “He lies interred in the chapel of St. George at Windsor, with the 
 following inscription on his gravestone:— 
 
 “Here lies the body of William Child, doctor in music, and one of the 
 organists of the chapel royal at Whitehall, and of his majesty’s free chapel at 
 Windsor. He was born in Bristol, and died here on the 23d of March, 1696-7, 
 in the 91st year of his age. He paved the body of the choir. 
 
 “ Go, happy soul, and in the seats above 
 Sing endless hymns of thy great Maker’s love. 
 How fit in heavenly songs to bear thy part, 
 Before well practic’d in the sacred art; 
 
 Whilst hearing us, sometimes the choire divine. 
 Will sure descend, and in our consort join; 
 
 So much the musick, thou to us hast given, 
 
 Has made our earth to represent their heaven.” * 
 
 WILLIAM HEYWOOD “was a Native of tlie City of Bristol, 
 became successively Scholar, and Fellow of St. John’s College in 
 Oxford; after that, Chaplain to Archbishop Laud, as also to his 
 Majesty, and about the Year 1636, I).I)., and Yicar of St. Giles’s, in 
 the Fields, London. On the 28th of Sept., 1638, he had a Prebend in 
 the collegiate church of Westminster conferred on him; but soon after 
 falling under the Displeasure of the Party, he was Sequestred from his 
 Living, on Articles preferred against him to the Parliament, by his 
 ParisMoners, according to the Mode of the Times; and was the very 
 First Person that I meet with Dispatched by the Committee for Plundered 
 Ministers; who made their Keport (which was agreed unto by the 
 House,) Jan. 25, 164§. He was also Imprisoned in the Compter, in 
 Ely House, in the Ships, Forced to fly, and his Wife and Children 
 Turned out of doors: By which means he was Keduced to great Want; 
 insomuch that he was forced to keep a private School in Wiltshire, under, 
 
 Abridged from Hawkins’s Hist, of Music, vol. iv., pp. 415, 416. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 523 
 
 and in the Name of his Son. But at last, living to the Restoration, he 
 was Repossess’d of his Preferments, and died in July, 1663, leaving 
 behind him the Character of an Excellent Tutor, a General Scholar, 
 and a Meek Man in Temper and Conversation.”* 
 
 “Dr. WILLIAM THOMAS, Bishop of Worcester, was the son of 
 Mr. John Thomas, a linendraper of Bristol, who lived in a house of 
 his own on Bristol bridge, where his son was born on the 2d of 
 February, 1613, and baptized at St. Nicholas church the Friday 
 following. He was bred at the public school at Carmarthen, went to 
 St. John’s college, Oxford, in his 16th year, 1629, from whence he went 
 to Jesus college, where he took, 1632, his Batchelor of Arts degree, 
 and was chosen the principal fellow and tutor of his college. In 1638 
 he was ordained priest, and appointed vicar of Penbryn iu Cardigan¬ 
 shire, and afterwards to Laugharne. He was deprived of liis living by 
 the parliament committee in 1644, from which time to the Restoration 
 he endured great hardships, being a sufferer to the amount of above 
 £1500, and obliged to keep a little private school for the support of 
 his family. At the Restoration he had his living again, and was 
 promoted to the deanry of Worcester November 25, 1665, and in 1667 
 was promoted to the see of St. David, which he held with the deanry 
 of Worcester. After being Bishop of St. David’s six years greatly 
 loved and respected by all, he was translated to the see of Worcester in 
 the room of Bishop Fleetwood, and came thither in August, 1683, 
 where he endeavoured to amend the morals of the people, restore the 
 duties of his church by obliging the prebendaries some to be always 
 resident, and by great hospitality and charity recommended himself to 
 his function. He refused to disperse the king’s declaration, and 
 signified to all his clergy his dislike of it; yet he refused taking the 
 oaths to King William, and was preparing to leave his palace, when on 
 the 25th of June he piously resigned his spirit into the hands of God, 
 in the 76th year of his age; the whole estate he left behind him 
 amounting to not more than £800, which he left to charity.” f 
 
 JOHN LEWIS, a learned and laborious divine, was born at Bristol, 
 
 * Walker’s Sufferings of the Clergy, p. 91. 
 
 t Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, pp. 053, 654 
 
 o O 2 
 
524 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 where his father was a wine-cooper, August 29th, 1G75. He was 
 educated at the Grammar School at Wimborne, iu Dorsetshire, and 
 subsequently entered himself as a native of Bristol, at Exeter College, 
 Oxford, where he took his degrees. Having been ordained, in 1698, 
 by Compton, Bishop of London, he officiated for a short time as curate 
 to the Bev. Mr. Russell, rector of St. John’s. Wapping. In 1699 Lord 
 Chancellor Somers gave him the rectory of Acris, in Kent, and in 1705 
 he was appointed minister of Margate. In the following year he 
 resigned Acris on being presented, by Archbishop Tennison, to the 
 rectory of Saltwood, in the same county, with the chapelry of Hythe 
 annexed, together with the rectory of Eastbridge. He was collated to 
 the vicarage of Minster, in the isle of Thanet, in 1708, when he 
 resigned Saltwood and Hythe; and lastly, in 1719, Archbishop 
 Wake appointed him master of Eastbridge Hospital, in Canterbury. 
 Mr. Lewis resided at Margate from 1/05 until his death, which took 
 place January 16th, 1/46-7. He was buried in the chancel of Minster 
 Church. He was the author of the following works:—The Church 
 Catechism explained, by Question and Answer.—Short Defence of 
 Infant Baptism.—Companion for the Afflicted, whether in Mind, Body, 
 or Estate.—Presbjlers not always an authoritative part of Provincial 
 Synods.—Apologetical Vindications of the Present Bishops.—Apology 
 for the Clergy of England, against a Book entitled, The Rights of the 
 Christian Church asserted, &c.—The Poor Vicar’s Plea against his 
 Glebe being assessed to the Church.—Guide to Young Communicants.— 
 Vindication of the Bishop of Norwich.—The Agreement of the 
 Lutherian Churches with the Church of England; with an Answer to 
 some Exceptions to it.—Two Letters in Defence of the English Liturgy 
 and Reformation.—Bishop Feme’s Church of England man’s Reasons 
 for not making the Decisions of Ecclesiastical Synods the Rule of his 
 Faith.—An Exposition of the xxxiv. Article of Religion.—The Life 
 and Sufferings of John Wickliffe, D.D.—Letter of thanks to the Earl 
 of Nottingham.—The Case of observing such Fasts and Festivals as 
 are appointed by the King’s Authority considered.—The History and 
 Antiquities, Ecclesiastical and Civil, of the Isle of Thanet, in Kent.— 
 Specimen of Errors in the Second Volume of Mr. Collier’s Ecclesiastical 
 History; being a Vindication of Burnet’s History of the Reformation.— 
 History and Antiquities of the Abbey Church of Faversham, iu Kent; 
 
HISTORY OR BRISTOL. 
 
 525 
 
 of the adjoining Priory of Davington; and Maison-dieu of Ospringe, 
 and Parish of Bocton, Subtus le Bleyne; to which is added A Collection 
 of Papers relating to the Abbey, Ac.—The New Testament, translated 
 out of the Latin Vulgate by John Wickliffe; to which is prefixed, An 
 History of the Translators of the Bible into English, both M.S. and in 
 print; also the most remarkable editions, &c.—The Life of Mayster 
 Wyllham Caxton, of the Weald of Kent, the first Printer of England; 
 in which is given the Bise and Progress of the Art of Pryntyng in 
 England during his time, till 1493.-—-A brief History of the Bise and 
 Progress of Anabaptism in England; to which is prefixed, Some 
 Account of Dr. John Wicliffe, with a Defence of him from the false 
 Charge of his denying Infant Baptism.—A Dissertation on the 
 Antiquity and Use of Seals of England.—Vindication of the Ancient 
 Britons, Ac., from being Anabaptists; with a Letter of M. Bucer to 
 Bishop Hooper, on Ceremonies.—Defence of the Communion Office and 
 Catechism of the Church of England, from the Charge of favouring 
 Transubstantiation.—The Life of Beynold Pecocke, Bishop of St. 
 Asaph and Chichester.—A brief Discovery of some of the Arts of the 
 Popish Protestant Missionaries in England.—The History and 
 Antiquities of Bochester, Lund. 1623, 8vo., has been ascribed to him;— 
 and, A Dissertation on the Antiquities of the two ancient ports of 
 Bichborougli and Sandwich, by the Isle of Thanet, Kent. 
 
 “ SIB WILLIAM DBAPEB, knight of the bath, was the son of 
 an officer of the customs in this city, and received the rudiments of a 
 classical education at the cathedral Grammar-school, which was then 
 under the superintendance of the Bev. Mr. Bryant. He was next 
 removed to Eton, and afterwards studied at King’s college, Cambridge. 
 He chose the army for his profession, and in 1761, acted at Bellisle as 
 a brigadier. In the following year he was sent to India, and the 
 military reputation which he acquired in those scenes of daring enter- 
 prize, entitles him to rank with the most famous of Indian warriors, 
 Clive and Lawrence. In 1763 he commanded the troops who conquered 
 Manilla, which was saved from plunder by the promise of a ransom that 
 was never paid. Sir William first appeared as an able writer, in his 
 clear refutation of the objections of the Spanish court to fulfil its 
 engagements in regard to that ransom. It is well known that he after- 
 
526 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 wards engaged in a controversy with the mysterious but formidable 
 Junius,* in defence of the Marquis of Granby. To this defence Sir 
 William seems to have been prompted by private friendship rather than 
 by political feelings. As he was foiled, he was no doubt mortified, but 
 he must be allowed to have displayed considerable talents, and his 
 motive is highly honourable to the amiableness of his character. 
 
 “ The services of Sir W. Draper in India were rewarded with the 
 order of knighthood, and with the command of the 16th regiment of 
 foot, which he resigned to Col. Gisborne, for his half pay of £200 
 Irish. This transaction furnished Junius with many a sarcasm. In 
 1799 he was appointed Lieut. Governor of Minorca. That the military 
 skill which he displayed in India highly qualified him for this appoint¬ 
 ment is unquestionable; but it is equally certain that the appointment 
 terminated unhappily for his country. Sir William died at Bath, on 
 the 8th of January, 1787, and was buried in the abbey church; in the 
 south aisle of which an elegant tablet, with a latin inscription, is 
 dedicated to his memory.” + 
 
 “ Mrs. MARY ROBINSON, the English Sappho, as she has been 
 not inaptly styled, was born near the cathedral, College Green. Her 
 maiden name was Darby: on her mother’s side, particularly, she was of 
 a family the most respectable—the Seys, of Boverton, in Glamorganshire, 
 to whom the celebrated Locke was a relative. She received the 
 rudiments of her education under the sisters of the amiable and well- 
 known Miss Hannah More. A wild, benevolent, but with his means, 
 an impracticable scheme of establishing a whale-fishery on the coast of 
 Labrador, and of civilizing the Esquimeaux Indians, took Mr. Darby, 
 then an opulent Bristol merchant, to America; and by that step 
 destroyed the future happiness of his family, who removed to London 
 on the ruin of their affairs. At the age of fifteen, with every attraction 
 and every virtue that could adorn and dignify her character, Miss 
 Darby was married to a worthless and extravagant man, of the name 
 of Robinson, an attorney. This man knew not how to estimate the 
 
 * In the year 1859 the late Jelinger Cookson Symons, of Gloucester, Esq. 
 Barrister at Law, published a small work to prove that William Burke, 
 Recorder of Bristol in 1783, was the author of Junius. 
 
 + Evans’s Hist, of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 393. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 527 
 
 talents or the virtues of his wife ; and he left her, exposed to every 
 temptation to which a young, lovely, accomplished, but poor and 
 destitute female is subject in the centre of a fashionable and flattering 
 circle of society. Under the tuition of Mr. Garrick, Mrs. Robinson 
 prepared for the stage, as the only means of supporting herself. It was 
 in this dangerous ‘profession’ that she attracted the favourable notice 
 of the most polite, ‘ and best bred man in Europe,’ now exalted to the 
 highest honours, next to majesty itself, that this country can bestow. 
 The allurements of royalty, and of royalty in such a person ; the 
 infidelity, extravagance, and consequent embarrassments of the man to 
 whom she had a right to look for protection, with a beloved infant, 
 which its unnatural father seemed neither fit, willing, nor able to 
 support, all conspired to weaken the virtuous resolutions of a heart 
 that had successfully resisted a thousand temptations, but little inferior 
 to those it had now to encounter. After several months’ incessant and 
 daily application from her royal admirer, Mrs. Robinson consented to 
 forsake her profession, and cast herself on the faith, the honour, and 
 protection of a man, whose various attractions, but few of those who, 
 with boasting pretentions to superior fortitude, were lavish in their 
 censures, would have resisted. 
 
 “ Mrs. Robinson did not long continue under the immediate pro¬ 
 tection of the prince. A separation took place, when, by the generous 
 interference of that most enlightened orator, and distinguished patriot, 
 Mr. Fox, an annuity of £500 per annum, with ,£200 per annum for 
 her daughter, to commence on the decease of Mrs. Robinson, was agreed 
 upon. A formal separation had previously taken place between her 
 and her profligate husband; but another unfortunate attachment towards 
 a gallant colonel, it is said, was the means of rendering her future days 
 still more unhappy. Her income, though augmented by an incessant 
 attention to literary pursuits, proved insufficient to support splendid 
 appearances. We cannot narrate every important action of her life, for 
 all her concerns were important. By travelling asleep, during the night, 
 in a carriage, with the windows open, to serve the interests of her friend, 
 the colonel, she laid the foundation of a complaint, which progressively 
 deprived her of the use of her limbs, and she was, ever after, carried to 
 and from the carriage, and from one room to another. She afterwards 
 went abroad, for the benefit of her health, and remained from home five 
 
528 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 years. On lier return, which was in 1788, she devoted herself to 
 literary pursuits, and continued her labours, with unremitting attention, 
 till within a very short time of her death, which took place on the 26th 
 of December, 1800; and thus ended the life of one of the most accom¬ 
 plished and beautiful women this or any other country ever produced. 
 Of her genius, her talents, her many personal and mental charms, the 
 numerous virtues of her warm and generous heart, all will be enamoured; 
 and her name will be recorded in the literary annals of our country, on 
 the same page with many who are an honour to the place of their birth, 
 and who have never given a pang to their friends, by any action that 
 might sully their fame, or detract from the respect due to their talents. 
 Her principal works amount to about twenty, in prose and verse; with 
 few exceptions, they are replete with whatever can charm the fancy, 
 improve the taste, refine the morals, and interest the feelings, of every 
 correct and generous mind.” * 
 
 Mrs. Robinson wrote a volume of Poems, published in 1775:— 
 “ Elegiac Verses to a Young Lady on the Death of her Brother—Two 
 volumes of Poems in 1791—Vancenza; or, the Dangers of Credulity; 
 a Romance—A Monody to the Memory of Sir Joshua Reynolds, late 
 President of the Royal Academy, &c.—A Monody to the Memory of 
 the Queen of France ;—An Ode to the Harp of the late accomplished and 
 amiable Louisa Han way;—Sight; the Cavern of Woe; and Solitude; 
 three Poems ;—Modern Manners; a Satire, in two Cantos;—The Widow; 
 or, a Picture of Modern Times; a Hovel, in 2 vols;—Angelina; a Novel, 
 in 3 vols ;—The Sicilian Lover; a Tragedy, in five Acts;—A Pamphlet 
 in vindication of the Queen of France;—Sappho and Phaon; in a Series 
 of Legitimate Sonnets; with Thoughts on Political Subjects, and 
 Anecdotes of the Grecian Poetess;—A Pamphlet, entitled, Thoughts on 
 the Condition of Women; and the Injustice of Mental Subordination;— 
 Hubert de Sevrac; a Romance, in 3 vols.—Walsiugham; a Novel, in 
 4 vols;—The False Friend; a Novel, in 4 vols;—The Natural Daughter; 
 with Portraits of the Ludenhead Family, in 2 vols;—Lyrical Tales— 
 Picture of Palermo—Poetical Works, in 4 vols.; and her life written by 
 herself. 
 
 Mrs. Robinson’s daughter wrote—The Shrine of Bertha; a Novel, in 
 
 Abridged from Nightingale’s Description of Somersetshire. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 529 
 
 2 vols.; and The Wild Wreath. She also collected and published the 
 Poetical Works of her Mother, in 3 volumes. 
 
 Mrs. ANN YEARSLEY, the well-known poetical milkwoman, 
 was a native of this city. She was born in the year 1757, and was 
 married, when very young, to an honest, sober man, but of a turn of 
 mind totally different from her own. She had a family of seven 
 children, who, together with her mother and herself, were in very 
 indigent circumstances, when the Earl of Bristol, providentially 
 hearing of her situation and great poetical genius, contributed to her 
 relief. Her mother died, but she was recommended to the notice of 
 Mrs. Hannah More, who solicited for her the protection of Mrs. 
 Montagu, in a prefatory letter prefixed to her poems, which were 
 published in quarto, in 1785; the great success of which raised the 
 author from the most distressed misery to a decent and comfortable 
 situation. Two years after this she published a second collection of 
 her poems, and afterwards a poem on the “Inhumanity of the Slave 
 Trade,” “Stanzas of Woe,” “Earl Godwin, an historical play, performed 
 at Bristol,” and “ The Royal Captives,” a novel, in four volumes. In 
 1796 she also published a volume of poems, entitled the “Rural Lyre,” 
 dedicated to the Earl of Bristol, Lord Bishop of Derry, to whom she 
 expresses sincere acknowledgements for peculiar favours received from 
 this benevolent character. The earl had repeatedly visited her, and 
 not only contributed to her assistance by adding to the subscription list 
 of her different writings the names of many of his friends, but 
 encouraged her to persevere, and enabled her to divide her domestic 
 cares with the pleasures of meditation. After, however, meeting with 
 great encouragement, at all hands, in her literary undertakings, her 
 popularity was much injured by an unfortunate dispute with her 
 original patroness, which was carried on for some time with 
 great bitterness. Her poems, like those of all unlettered poets, abound 
 in imagery, metaphor, and personification, but breathe the genuine 
 spirit of poetry. For some time after retiring from the business by 
 which her name is associated, Mrs. Yearsley kept a circulating library 
 at the Colonnade, Hotwells, and died at Melksham, Wiltshire, in the 
 year 1806. 
 
 Mrs. Yearsley “is said to have behaved most ungratefully to her 
 humane and energetic patroness, Miss H. More. Inflexible moral 
 
530 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 honesty, stern uncomplaining patience, that silently endured the 
 bitterest evils of want, are recorded by the pen of that celebrated lady 
 in the anecdotes she formerly gave of this muse-born wonder. Her 
 writings breathe a gloomy and jealous dignity of spirit. Great 
 delicacy was required in the manner of conferring obligations on a 
 mind so tempered. Miss More’s letter to Mrs. Montague struck me 
 with an air of superciliousness towards the being she patronized; and 
 the pride of genius in adversity revolted. So, in a similar situation, 
 would surely Samuel Johnson have spurned the hand, that after it had 
 procured him the bounty of others, sought to dictate to him as to its 
 use; and that resentment, which in her is universally execrated, would, 
 coming down to us now as a record of his emerging talents, have been 
 generally excused, and probably, with whatever little reason, admired. 
 I should not wonder if this sudden reverse of public esteem should 
 send this kindred spirit of the unfortunate Chatterton’s to attend his 
 manes in the dreary path of suicide.” * 
 
 “ Happily the apprehension expressed in the last sentence of this 
 extract was entirely unfounded. That genuine dignity of character, 
 which enabled Mrs. Yearsley to drink the cup of poverty even to its 
 very dregs, without one obtrusive murmur, accompanied her in every 
 situation of her chequered life, enabled her to soothe its various ills 
 with the resources of genius, and finally to breathe her last sigh in 
 peace in the bosom of her family. ‘The object upon -which the gods 
 look with admiration,’ says an ancient philosopher, ‘is a great mind 
 struggling with adversity.’ ” + 
 
 RICHARD REYNOLDS, the greatest of Bristol’s great philan¬ 
 thropists,—a man pre-eminently entitled to be so designated—was a 
 member of the Society of Friends, and born in Corn Street in this city, 
 November 1st, 1735, O.S. He was the only son of Richard and Jane 
 Reynolds, whose predecessors probably joined this sect at its commence¬ 
 ment, as the marriage-certificate of Michael, the father of the first 
 mentioned Richard Reynolds, surnamed the “ Honest,” is dated in the 
 year 1704, and is signed by his father Michael as a witness, who may, 
 
 * Letters of Anna Seward, vol. i., p. 121. Appendix LXXX. 
 
 + Rev. John Evans. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 531 
 
 therefore, be supposed to have been one of the early converts to the 
 preaching of George Fox, in the middle of the seventeenth century. 
 
 Young Reynolds was early sent to school to a Friend at Pickwick, in 
 Wiltshire, named Thomas Bennet, with whom he remained until 
 fourteen years of age, when he was removed and apprenticed to 
 William Fry, grocer in Castle Street in this city. On the expiration of 
 this engagement, he went on business into Shropshire, and settled at 
 Coalbrook Dale, where he married Hannah, the only child of Abraham 
 Darby, and became a partner in the iron and coal works at Ketley, about 
 five miles from Coalbrook Dale, where he went to reside in 1757. His 
 wife, however, died May 24th, 1762, and in the following year he left 
 Ketley to reside at Coalbrook Dale, in consequence of arrangements 
 rendered needful by the death also of his father-in-law. Here Providence 
 seems to have sanctioned an accumulation of wealth, which was one day 
 to be distributed in ample gifts to the poor and needy. As the profits 
 of these extensive works increased, so increased the disposition of the 
 principal proprietor to share with his fellow-creatures the bounty which 
 he himself enjoyed. 
 
 On the 1st of December, 1763, he married, secondly, Rebecca, 
 daughter of Dr. William Gulson, of Coventry, and his engagement with 
 the Coalbrook Dale Company terminating, by the sons of his late 
 father-in-law coming of age and assuming the direction of their own 
 affairs, he left Coalbrook Dale in 1768, and returned to Ketley, with 
 the satisfaction of having left the Dale Works in a prosperous state. 
 Here he lived many years, carrying on an extensive business in an 
 enlightened and comprehensive spirit, with undeviating integrity and 
 industry, until, having, in the year 1803, suffered from severe domestic 
 affliction by the loss of three beloved members of his family, he made 
 preparations for leaving Shropshire, which he did in April, 1804, and 
 removed to Bristol, having taken a house in St. James’s Square. In 
 1810 he had a painful and dangerous illness, from which he never 
 recovered his wonted strength, and in 1816, becoming enfeebled, his 
 medical attendants advised his removal to Cheltenham, where he arrived 
 on the 7th of August. After lingering until the 10th of September 
 following, he quietly, and almost imperceptibly, expired. 
 
 At his unostentatious funeral, which took place at Bristol, the most 
 marked, profound, and general testimonies of respect were spontaneously 
 
532 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 offered to his memory. 500 boys from the Church schools of St. 
 James’s and St. Paul’s, formed in two columns, extended from each side 
 to the good man’s late dwelling, across St. James’s Square. On the 
 appearance of the coffin the boys stood uncovered. The streets were 
 thronged with the poor. The resident clergy, and Dissenting ministers 
 of different persuasions, the gentlemen of the committees of various 
 charitable societies, and other of the leading citizens of Bristol, and a 
 numerous body of the Society of Friends, followed the procession of 
 the family and relatives from the house to the Friends’ Meeting House, 
 Rosemary Street, where he was buried. 
 
 So great was the public curiosity excited on this occasion, and such 
 the eagerness manifested by the poor, who had lost their best friend, to 
 pay the last respect to his remains, that not only the spacious burial- 
 ground was filled with spectators and mourners, but the very walls and 
 tops of houses surrounding the area were covered in a remarkable 
 manner. And it is but justice to add, that the behaviour of this vast 
 concourse of people was in the highest degree decent, orderly, and 
 respectful; the poor, at the same time, considered it a favour to be 
 permitted, in their turn, to approach the grave of their departed friend, 
 and to drop the silent tear, as a mark of their regard for a man whose 
 life had been spent in benefitting others.* Perhaps there never was so 
 affecting a scene before witnessed in Bristol. 
 
 “At a General Meeting of the Inhabitants of this City, convened by 
 public advertisement, for the purpose of forming a Charitable 
 Institution to perpetuate the Memory of the late Richard Reynolds— 
 The Right Worshipful John Haythorne, Esq., Mayor, in the Chair;” 
 after several speakers had addressed the Meeting (held at the Guildhall, 
 October 2nd, 181G), the Rev. William Thorp said, “Never surely were 
 the inhabitants of Bristol convened upon a more solemn or a more 
 affecting occasion than the present—to render a grateful tribute of 
 respect to one of the best of men, and to perpetuate the memory of a 
 philanthropist, of singular and transcendant excellence. Thousands 
 can testify that he was an ornament of our nature, an honour to our 
 city, now the glory of the society to which he belonged, and a blessing 
 to the empire and the world. When the eye saw him, it blessed him; 
 
 Rathbone’s Letters of Richard Reynolds. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 533 
 
 ■when the ear heard him, it bear him witness; he was eyes to the blind, 
 and feet to the lame; the cause which he knew not, he searched out; he 
 made the widow’s heart to sing fur joy; and the blessing of the outcast 
 orphan, ready to perish, came upon him. He is now gone to that 
 country from whose bourn no traveller returns; and while Bristol, with 
 her widows and her orphans, are weeping over his ashes, the whole 
 
 nation has reason to lament his departure.We adore that 
 
 kind and indulgent Providence, which spared his valuable life for so 
 many years, and thus permitted him to mature those plans which he 
 had projected for the relief of misery ages after his decease. We 
 congratulate our fellow-citizens on the honour they have done to 
 themselves, by assembling on this day to embalm his memory with 
 their tears, to catch with his falling mantle the sacred flame that 
 glowed with such fervour in his bosom, and to do what within them 
 lies, to give immortality to a name so dear and venerable. 
 
 “The benevolence of Bichard Reynolds was of the highest order. It 
 was liberal, diffusive, universal. Not narrowed by party prejudice, nor 
 bounded by the limits of party connections, it embraced the Family of 
 Man; yea the whole circle of living beings, endowed with a capacity of 
 pleasure or of pain. In its contemplation of the vast, however, it did 
 not overlook the minute; in its comprehension of the whole, it did not, 
 like the modern philosophy, neglect the parts of which that whole is 
 
 composed.It was purified, strengthened, and animated by 
 
 Christian principle, was steady, uniform, and persevering. Neither 
 ingratitude, nor imposture, nor opposition, nor even the frost of age 
 could chill its ardours, or relax its exertions. It was active and 
 industrious. His eloquence was not that of words, but of deeds. He 
 said little, but he did much. He left others to define benevolence; 
 he studied the practice of it. . . . Like his beloved Master, 
 
 whose spirit he had imbibed, and whose example he closely copied, he 
 went about continually doing good. To furnish employment for the 
 healthy and the strong; to supply the wants of the really indigent and 
 necessitous; to ease the aching heart of the father who hears the cries 
 of a numerous family demanding bread, when he has none to give; to 
 assuage the sorrows of poverty, overtaken by sickness or overwhelmed 
 with misfortune; to smooth the furrowed cheek, and make the winter 
 of age wear the aspect of spring; to act the part of a father to helpless 
 
534 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 orphans, on whom no parent of their own ever smiled; to rescue the 
 vicious from guilt, and infamy, and ruin; and during the season of 
 reformation afford a shelter from the fury of the storm; to relieve the 
 distress, and yet spare the blushes of those who have known better 
 days, by administering that bounty, which they in the time of their 
 prosperity were ready to administer to others— these were the employ¬ 
 ments of Richard Reynolds— these the objects of his beneficence —these 
 were the offices of mercy in which he delighted! His heart told him 
 what to do; his conscience, as the Vicegerent of Heaven, reminded him 
 of the claims of moral obligation, and insisted that it must be done. 
 His head devised the means and arranged the plan of action; and his 
 hands, obedient to the dictates of his heart, and the mandates of 
 conscience, were ever ready to execute the plans which his head had 
 formed. Thus his whole existence was consecrated to the cause of 
 benevolence! If we love the modesty which concealed the hand that 
 bestowed the princely donation, we revere the courage which 
 occasionally stepped forward to avow himself the donor, when his 
 design was to stimulate others to follow his example. His whole 
 conduct was marked by the most consummate wisdom, and left us at a 
 loss whether to admire most the benevolence of his heart or the 
 powers of his understanding; the deeds of mercy which he performed, 
 or the manner in which he performed them.” 
 
 At the public meeting where the above speech was delivered, the 
 Reynolds’ Commemoration Society was instituted. “ It was the 
 society’s intention (observed Mr. Councillor Smith), to continue relief to 
 those objects of Mr. Reynolds’ bounty, who were in a great, measure 
 dependent upon him for support at the time of his death, to assist the 
 other charities already instituted in the city, which might at any time 
 stand in need of temporary assistance; but more particularly at all 
 times to succour that Establishment which was founded by himself, 
 and denominated the Samaritan society.” The unostentatious 
 Commemoration Society annually fulfils the great object of its founders, 
 after the manner of the benevolent man in remembrance of whom it was 
 instituted, with all the modest disinterestedness for which he was so 
 remarkable, and without reference to sect, party, or politics. 
 
 In this large city Mr. Reynolds found ample scope for the exercise of 
 his benevolent desire to promote the happiness and lessen the sufferings 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 535 
 
 of bis fellow-creatures. He took a lively interest in the various public 
 charities. Besides being the founder of the Samaritan Society, he gave 
 his warm and liberal support to others, particularly the Strangers’ 
 Friend; Misericordia; the Orpham Asylum, Hook's Mills; the Infirmary, 
 and the Alms-Houses. To augment the fund for the payment of a 
 weekly sum to the inmates of the latter he gave <£2,000, and £4,000 
 to the Trinity Alms Houses. 
 
 The numerous committees on which he acted brought under his 
 notice and consideration the fluctuation to which institutions entirely 
 dependent upon annual subscriptions were liable; with him, to become 
 aware of an evil was to excite the wish and the endeavour to remove 
 it, and in 1808 he placed in the hands of trustees the sum of £10,500, 
 which was by them invested in lands in Monmouthshire, the income 
 arising from the rents of these estates, after contingent expenses were 
 paid, to be distributed between seven of the charitable institutions in 
 Bristol, named in the deed of trust, in such manner and proportion, 
 either to one alone, or between any, as should at the time appear 
 expedient to the trustees. An addition to the Infirmary being greatly 
 wanted, he devoted' much of his time to that object, also subscribing 
 £2,GOO. To this may be added, besides his annual subscription, 
 donations of £1,2G0 to the Strangers’ Friend, £900 to the Misericordia, 
 £500 to the Refuge, the same to the Orphan Asylum, and to the Bible 
 Society £900. Of several other smaller amounts, one only, from its 
 purpose, need be mentioned—that of £300 to Temple parish, towards 
 providing a better supply of water for the poor. It was, for many 
 years, his habit to employ others to act for him in London and elsewhere, 
 in dispensing such sums as he wished to devote to charitable purposes, 
 in every case with a scrupulous care that his name should not be 
 mentioned. Unwilling to be known as the giver of large sums, he 
 frequently gave his name with his subscription, and forwarded a further 
 and larger contribution anonymously, as in the instance of the distress 
 in Germany, when he privately added £500 to the sum given with his 
 name. To one party in London he remitted £20,000 during the 
 distress in 1795. 
 
 He had four almoners constantly employed in Bristol, who brought 
 their accounts to him every week, which contained the names of each 
 person or family who had been relieved, the sums given, and the 
 
536 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 circumstances. He paid the debts of persons confined for debt in 
 prison; in short, to attempt anything like accuracy in the amount of 
 his benefactions would be vain; none but himself, and He whose eyes 
 are in every place, knew how much he disbursed. He gave five 
 hundred guineas to one charity, and a thousand to another—here and 
 there the same repeated under the modest name of a “ A Friend ,” and 
 various other disguised signatures; and it is believed that ten thousand 
 a year scarcely sufficed to meet his gifts in charity, for there appeared 
 neither limit nor bound to his benevolence, as he had correspondents in 
 various parts of the United Kingdom, who sought for cases of distress 
 in their respective neighbourhoods, and recommended them to hi3 
 assistance; but that assistance was never given carelessly or slothfully. 
 It appears to be known that during his valuable life he bestowed in 
 acts of charity upwards of Two Hundred Thousand Pounds, besides 
 those sums of which no human eye was cognizant! * 
 
 THOMAS EDWARD BOWDICH, the enterprising African traveller, 
 and author, was born in Bristol, in the month of June, 1793. He 
 received the rudiments of his education at the Grammar School, from 
 whence he was removed to a celebrated classical academy at Corsham, 
 in Wiltshire, and ultimately to Oxford. Having a dislike to commercial 
 life, “ the bias of his mind inclined him to those studies, and to cultivate 
 those tastes and acquirements which shed so bright a lustre on his 
 subsequent path. From the trammels by which his genius was 
 encumbered, he speedily disengaged himself, and having a near relation 
 in a high official post in the Gold Coast of Africa, he obtained 
 permission to join him on that station. It was there that the germ of 
 the spirit of enterprise within him took a deeper root, and an embassy 
 being at this period in contemplation, to conciliate the king of Ashantee, 
 and to propitiate an extension of commerce, Mr. Bowdich solicited an 
 appointment, and with some difficulty (owing to the circumstance of his 
 being married) obtained it. Never was intrepidity more required, or 
 nobly exhibited, than on the conducting of this mission; the whole 
 proceedings have been detailed by Mr. Bowdich with talent and ability, 
 only equalled by the well-directed zeal, and the incomparable prudence 
 
 Rathbone’s Letters and Memoir. A Sketch of his Life, &c. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 537 
 
 ■which distinguished his services on this interesting occasion. His 
 volume • on the Mission to Ashantee will constitute an imperishable 
 monument of intelligence, ardour, and integrity. In proof of the 
 absence of all selfishness in the composition of this gifted and faithful 
 Envoy, it deserves to be recorded, that having once been detained as an 
 hostage by those who were not over scrupulous in their means of 
 acquiring an advantage, he requested those whose interests he repre¬ 
 sented, not to permit the consideration of his safety or his life, to 
 interfere with those objects for which the negociation was contending. 
 
 “ His mission having succeeded, he returned to Europe, and here 
 we must pause for a moment to lament that an unhappy difference with 
 the African Company seemed for an instant to throw a gloom over the 
 prospects of this able traveller, and to threaten the further discoveries 
 of this undaunted spirit. In justice to his memory it must be observed 
 that his detection and exposure of the abuses of this Association has 
 since led to its dissolution. The treatment he experienced roused for 
 a moment a spirit of indignation, but this was speedily subdued by the 
 applause of men of real science. With the first talents of his own 
 country, and with the most gifted character of France, he was on terms 
 of the strictest intimacy, and in Paris it was that he prepared himself, 
 by an unparalleled devotion to study, for the great work which now 
 occupied his mind. It seemed as though he was contemplating the 
 noblest revenge, indeed the only revenge of which his generous nature 
 was capable, that of proving, by new, and, if possible, by more vigorous 
 efforts, that the traducers of his fame were wrong in their estimate of 
 his resources, and mistaken in their calculations of the elasticity of his 
 mind. They might depress, but they could not crush. Having 
 completed his preparations, he departed on his second journey, and 
 though solicited to accept the support of the French Government, he 
 declined the offer, and went forth, unpatronised, to the labour which he 
 loved,—to advance the dignity of science, and to promote the happiness 
 of man; to enrich by new discoveries the triumphs of geographical 
 research ; to explore countries yet untrodden by European foot, and 
 haply there to sow the seeds of that civilisation which should abolish 
 the worship of Idols, and bring the African Savage to the worship of 
 the true God. But He, whose dispensations it becomes us not to 
 question, much less to dispute, has ordained it otherwise, and the first 
 
538 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 intelligence of him is from his widowed partner. By unceasing exposure 
 in making a survey of the River Gambia, he contracted a fever which 
 was increased by his constant practice of taking nightly observations, 
 and he has perished a martyr to his love of science, in the 31st year 
 of his age. 
 
 “ Of Mr. Bowdich it may be truly said, that he was a Christian, a 
 scholar, and a gentleman, and to each of these characters may be super- 
 added the epithet ‘ accomplished.’ In his public capacity he was 
 peculiarly qualified for the labours assigned him; ardent as discreet, 
 intrepid as humane. His fine natural powers were heightened by every 
 acquirement. He was a member of many learned Societies at home 
 and abroad. His published works are the “ Mission to Ashantee;” “ An 
 Analysis of the Natural Classification of the Mammalia;” “An 
 Introduction to the Ornithology of Cuvier;” “ Elements of Conchology;” 
 “A Mathematical Investigation, with Formulae for calculating Lunar 
 Eclipses ; ” &c., &c. 
 
 “Mrs. Bowdich w r as the companion of his travels, the sharer of all 
 his perils, nor less the ardent participator of all his hopes, and in her 
 affectionate arms he breathed his last. Herself endowed with every 
 accomplishment that could render her the worthy associate of such a 
 spirit, she entered with enthusiasm into all his views, and assisted with 
 her talents many of the most scientific of his operations. Nor is there 
 a living pen better qualified than hers to do justice to his memoiy. To 
 her may be safely committed the details of the progress of 'an enquiry 
 so fatally interrupted, and which, if it be suspended until equal talents, 
 combined with equal intrepidity, be found to undertake it, seems 
 almost to human judgment incapable of restoration. The desolation of 
 nature, and the barbarism of man, presenting but the least of the 
 impediments in the path of courage, and where science, unrefreshed by 
 sympathy and unaided by co-operation, must pursue her solitary 
 researches, looking only for a distant and uncertain recompense in the 
 records of posterity.” * 
 
 SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE, President of the Royal Academy, 
 was born at the house No, 6, Redcross Street, in this city, April 13th, 
 
 Gentleman’s Magazine. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 539 
 
 1769; and at an early age gave indications of more than ordinary 
 genius. Indeed there are on record very few instances of one so young 
 displaying a genius for painting, and so far maturing it as did young 
 Lawrence; for many of his drawings, executed at the age of eight 
 years, exhibit, strongly, indications of that freedom, grace, and poetic 
 character, which distinguished his mature productions. At ten he 
 commenced historical compositions of the highest class, in which walk 
 of art he gave evidence of a power of invention and design, and of 
 talent far beyond likeness painting or of copying a landscape. For some 
 years, up to this period, his father had kept the Bear Inn, at Devizes, 
 but now his reputation was so far established that he removed to Bath, 
 where he soon became an object of notoriety among the numerous 
 persons of rank and distinction who then frequented that fashionable 
 place. When twelve years old his painting-room was the resort of the 
 rich, the gay, the connoisseur, and the real or assumed patron of art; and 
 the price of his productions, which at first were a guinea each, soon 
 reached a much greater sum than was ever paid to so young an artist. 
 At this time he was unacquainted with artists, having lived aloof from 
 their society, and was indebted wholly to nature for any progress he 
 had made as a painter. 
 
 In 1787 he established himself in London, and was admitted a 
 student of the Royal Academy, where he was received, with peculiar 
 kindness, by Sir Joshua Reynolds; and as he became known his 
 reputation increased, and he was soon an object of patronage among 
 the noble and the wealthy. At the death of Sir Joshua, in 1792, he 
 was unanimously elected to succeed him as painter to the Dilettanti 
 Society; and the king also appointed him the successor of Sir Joshua 
 as his portrait-painter in ordinary. With the royal patronage that of 
 others increased, until the occupations of the painter became incessant. 
 His works were subjects of general celebrity, and every year he 
 increased in popularity; when, by the death of Hoppner, an artist of 
 much merit, he was left without a rival. On the demise of Mr. 
 Benjaiiiin West, the venerable president of the Royal Academy, 
 Sir Thomas was at once selected as the person most worthy to succeed 
 him, the king conferring on him a gold chain and medal as a mark of 
 his approbation. He died January 7 th, 1830, and was buried in 
 St. Paul’s Cathedral. 
 
 p p 2 
 
540 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 “Sir Thomas Lawrence was an example of that happy combination 
 of the artist and the gentleman, which is so favourable to the high 
 position he attained both in Art and in life. As an artist he was 
 studious and indefatigable; as a man, self-possessed, amiable, courteous, 
 and yielding. His education must have been very slender, but his 
 conversation betrayed no marks of it, nor did he in the little he was 
 called upon to do as an orator and a writer, appear to make any 
 attempt to shine. A temper of gentleness and moderation distinguished 
 him in all things. In his very trying position as the President of the 
 Royal Academy, no man ever passed through the ordeal with so little 
 excitement, either as regards himself or others. Amiably supple, 
 Lawrence was the most favourable example possible of a man of the 
 world.” * 
 
 HANNAH MORE, to whose memory the schools in the parish of 
 St. Philip and Jacob were erected,! was born at Stapleton, a parish 
 adjoining to that in which the schools are situated, but in the county of 
 Gloucester, and baptized there February 17th, 1744. Her father, Jacob 
 More, who had been a domestic in the service of Norborne Berkeley, 
 Esq., of Stoke House, in the neighbourhood, and had married his 
 fellow-servant, Hannah's mother, was, by his master’s interest, appointed 
 to the mastership of the charity school at the Fishponds, with a salary 
 of £25 a-year, for the instruction of twenty poor boys and ten girls, 
 where all his own children, five daughters and a son, were born, and 
 received their education. He subsequently removed to Bristol, where, 
 at Stoney Hill, he carried on the business of a school, and his daughters 
 opened one for day scholars on their own account, in Trinity Street. 
 Here the subject of these remarks began to exercise her talent for 
 poetry, and to supply the deficiencies of her education by the culti¬ 
 vation of good natural abilities; and becoming known to many of the 
 neighbouring gentry, she was enabled, with her sisters, to open a 
 boarding school for young ladies, in Park Street, by means of a 
 subscription set on foot for that purpose among the charitable people 
 of this wealthy city. 
 
 In this improving situation of their affairs, the five sisters, according 
 to their several abilities, contributed to the general interest. The 
 
 * E. V. Rippingille in the Art Journal, September, 1860. 
 
 + Ante, p. 209. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 541 
 
 scholars multiplied in a few years, and some small publication of minor 
 poetry tended to advertise the school. In 1773 the first work 
 avowedly by Hannah More herself, made its appearance, although 
 written when the authoress was but eighteen years of age. This was 
 entitled, “ The Search after Happiness, a pastoral drama.” “ The in¬ 
 flexible Captive, a Tragedy,” appeared next, in the following year ; and 
 immediately afterwards, in the same year, she published “ Sir Eldred 
 of the Bower, and the Bleeding Rock, two Poetical Talcs.” Her next 
 production was an “ Ode to Dragon, Mr. Garrick’s house dog,” which 
 was followed by her tragedy of “ Percy,” in 1778; and in 1779, her last 
 tragedy, “ The Fatal Falsehood.” Soon after this she changed her 
 views of theatrical entertainments, and “ did not consider the stage, 
 in its present state, as becoming the appearance or countenance of a 
 Christian,” as she herself writes; she therefore resigned her pen in its 
 favour, to other writers less scrupulous. Her subsequent works, which 
 are all of a moral or religious character, are numerous, and in a collected 
 form comprise eleven volumes octavo. By her entire writings she is said 
 to have realised upwards of £30,000. 
 
 About the year 1793 she retired from the school in Park Street, 
 which had proved eminently successful, having for many years ranked 
 foremost among female establishments in the West of England, and 
 took up her residence at Blagdon, where she devoted herself to pursuits 
 both of a literary and religious character, dedicating much of her time 
 to the establishing and rearing schools for the poor in that district. 
 She subsequently removed to Barley Wood, in the parish of Wrington, 
 from whence, being confined to the room through indisposition for 
 many years, she resolved to remove to Clifton, which she did in the 
 year 1828. Here, from the natural decay of extreme old age, she died, 
 September 7th, 1833; leaving bequests, for charitable purposes, 
 amounting to upwards of £10,000. Her sisters had all died before 
 her, she herself was waiting to follow. After leaving Barley Wood her 
 powers of body and mind failed her, but not so rapidly as might have 
 been expected from a constitution which had never been strong, and 
 was then undermined by sickness, added to the infirmity of age. Her 
 disposition was cheerful while consciousness had existence, for she was 
 brought, by successive stages of decline, to such a state of helplessness 
 that her mind almost failed her for a year before her death. She was 
 
542 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 interred beside the remains of her sisters, in Wriugton churchyard, and 
 near the grave of the illustrious John Locke, the philosopher. 
 
 CHARLES WESLEY, for many years organist to Kings George 
 III. and IV., was born in this city, December 11th, 1757. He was the 
 son of the Rev. Charles Wesley, and nephew to the Rev. John Wesley, 
 the founder of the Methodists. Before he was three years of age he is 
 said to have manifested a great love for music, and when but six 
 years old he was placed under regular instruction, practising the works 
 of Corelli, Scarlatti, and Handel, with whose compositions he became 
 so great a proficient, that by the time he had reached his twelfth year 
 it was believed that no person could excel him in the performance of 
 them. Handel, however, was his favourite writer, whose music, we are 
 told, he was continually humming on his death-bed, and working his 
 fingers on the bed-clothes as if still performing his masterly productions. 
 For many years he was organist at Surrey Chapel, London, where the 
 Rev. Rowland Hill was the minister; but towards the close of his life 
 his duties were transferred to the old church at Marylebone. His 
 disposition is described as most amiable, and his Christian character 
 unexceptionable. He is said to have died with perfect resignation to 
 the will of God, May 23rd, 1834. 
 
 REV. JAMES DALLAWAY was born in the parish of St. Philip 
 and Jacob, February 20th, 1703. His early education was at the 
 Grammar School at Cirencester; subsequently at Trinity College, 
 Oxford, where he entered a foundation scholar ; but addicting himself 
 while here to writing poetry tinged with satire, lost him his election of 
 Fellow. Having taken his degree of M.A. December 3rd, 1784, he 
 left the University, and in the neighbourhood of Stroud served a curacy 
 until his removal to Gloucester, where, from 1785 to 1796, he was 
 engaged in editing Bigland’s Collections for Gloucestershire. 
 
 Mr. Dallaway was apppointed chaplain and physician to the British 
 Embassy at the Porte, having first taken the degree of Med. B. at 
 Oxford, December 10th, 1794, to qualify himself for its duties. In 1799 
 he was presented, by the Duke of Norfolk, to the rectory of South 
 Stoke, Sussex; which, on his Grace procuring him the vicarage and 
 sinecure rectory of Slynfold, in the patronage of the see of Chichester, 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 543 
 
 he resigned. He also held the rectory of Llanmaes, in Glamorganshire, 
 given him by the Marquis of Bute, which, however, he exchanged in 
 1801 for the vicarage of Letherhead, Surrey, holding it, with Slynfold, 
 until his death. He also obtained, in 1811, a prebendal stall in 
 Chichester Cathedral, which he exchanged in 1816 for that of Ferring, 
 but this he resigned in 1826, on being succeeded by the new occupant 
 in the editorship of the History of Western Sussex. 
 
 This gentleman, who is better known as an antiquary than a Divine, 
 except in the way of bartering for livings, died at Letherhead, June 
 6th, 1834, where he was buried. His first publication was “Letters 
 of the late Dr. Bundle, Bishop of Derry,” Ac., 2 vols. 8vo., 1789. He 
 was elected a Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries the same year; and 
 published in 1792, “ Inquiries into the origin and Progress of Heraldry 
 in England, with observations on Armorial Ensigns.” This work he 
 dedicated to the Duke of Norfolk, Earl Marshal, from which circum¬ 
 stance, and a similar compliment to the Marquis of Bute, he was 
 indebted for all his future success in the Church. lie next produced 
 “ Constantinople, ancient and modern, with excursions to the shores 
 and islands of the Archipelago, and to the Troad, 1797.” On the 1st 
 of January, in the same year, he was appointed secretary to .the Earl 
 Marshal, by which office he became connected with, though not a 
 member of, the Corporation of the College of Arms. By the subsequent 
 elections of succeeding Earls Marshal he held the office until his death. 
 
 In 1800 Air. Dallaway published “Anecdotes of the Arts in 
 England, or comparative remarks on Architecture, Sculpture, and 
 Painting, chiefly illustrated by Specimens at Oxford.” In 1803 he 
 edited “ The Letters and other Works of Lady Mary Wortley Montague, 
 from her original MSS., with Memoirs of her Life.” In 1806 appeared 
 “ Observations on English Architecture, military, ecclesiastical, and 
 civil,” &c. In 1816 he sent out a work entitled, “Of Statuary and 
 Sculpture among the Ancients, with some account of specimens 
 preserved in England.” In 1821 he privately printed two letters 
 descriptive of the Vicar’s Garden, at Letherhead. Tn 1823 he 
 communicated to the Society of Antiquaries, “ Observations on the first 
 Common Seal used by the Burgesses of Bristol; ” having, besides all 
 this, been engaged, in 1811, by the Duke of Norfolk, in editing the 
 History of the three Western Rapes of Sussex; and as early as 1792, 
 
544 
 
 HISTORY Of BRISTOL. 
 
 in writing the Introduction to Naylor’s Collection of Coats of Arms 
 borne by the Nobility and Gentry of the County of Gloucester. In 
 1824 he published “William Wyrcestre Redi virus;” “Notices of 
 Ancient Church Architecture in the Fifteenth Century, particularly in 
 Bristol,” Ac., which, with other papers, were subsequently brought out 
 at Bristol, under the title of “ Antiquities of Bristow in the Middle 
 Centuries, including the Topography of William Wyrcestre, and the life 
 of William Canynge.” In 182G he superintended the publication of a 
 finely embellished edition of Walpole’s Anecdotes of Painting, including 
 Virtue’s Memoirs of the English Painters and Engravers. Mr. 
 Dallaway’s last work was an enlarged and corrected edition of his 
 “ Architecture in England.” Besides the labours above enumerated, he 
 communicated sundry papers to the Retrospective Review, the 
 Gentleman’s Magazine, and the Archaeologia; but after all, it has been 
 said that “However accomplished in his acquaintance with art, and 
 refined in his taste Mr. Dallaway may have been, it cannot be concealed 
 that he was by no means calculated for either a biographer or topo¬ 
 graphical historian ; and both this work (Painters and Engravers) and 
 his History of Sussex abound with marks of haste, carelessness, and 
 inaccuracy.” * 
 
 REV. JOHN FOSTER, an eminent Baptist minister, connected 
 for many years with Bristol and its neighbourhood, was a native 
 of fhe county of York, but became a student, in due course, at the 
 Baptist College in this city, successively under Drs. Evans and Ryland; 
 and, at the expiration of the usual time, settled at Downend. Being, 
 however, fitted rather for public writing, by the peculiar character of 
 his mind, than for the regular exercise of the office of a pastor, he 
 retired from the pulpit, after an occupancy of many years, to devote the 
 rest of his life to literary pursuits; residing about twenty years at 
 Stapleton, near Bristol, and oidy preaching occasionally. At this 
 pleasant village he died, October 15th, 1843; aged 73. 
 
 “ The well-known character of his various Essay's, instinct as they 
 are with an energy of feeling and surpassing vigour of conception, such 
 as at once make the reader feel himself listening to a spirit of pre- 
 
 Gentleman's Magazine. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 545 
 
 eminent powers, makes it unnecessary for us to attempt any lengthened 
 portraiture of his massive intellect. Few writers in the whole range of 
 literature possess in an equal degree the power to touch and set in 
 motion the springs of serious reflection. A closer inspection of his 
 mind convinced those who were admitted to the rare privilege of 
 personal intercourse with him, that those really masterly productions, 
 though much elaborated, were not exhausting efforts, but rather 
 natural specimens of the thoughts and sentiments which habitually 
 dwelt within him. They testify that with a mind profoundly meditative, 
 deeply imbued with ‘the powers of the world to come,’ and ardently, 
 even to impatience, desirous of the advancement of mankind in freedom, 
 truth, and piety, he united vast stores of knowledge on a great variety 
 of subjects, and an exquisite perception and appreciation of whatever 
 was sublime or beautiful, whether in thought, nature, or art. The 
 same strong principle of benevolence which has tinctured his writings 
 with so vehement a hatred of all that tends to make men vicious and 
 miserable, communicated to his conversation and demeanour a kindness, 
 and even gentleness, which could not fail to win for him the love as 
 well as veneration of all who knew him. His piety towards God, and 
 charity towards men, were as deep as they were unostentatious. He 
 was an unaffectedly great and good man.” * 
 
 “He paints metaphysics, and has the happy art of arraying what in 
 other hands would appear cold and comfortless abstractions in the 
 warmest colours of fancy. Without quitting his argument in pursuit 
 of ornament or imagery, his imagination becomes the perfect handmaid 
 of his reason, ready at every moment to spread her canvas, and present 
 her pencil. But what affords us the deepest satisfaction is to find such 
 talents enlisted on the side of true Christianity; nor can we forbear 
 indulging a benevolent triumph on the accession to the cause of 
 evangelical piety of powers which its most distinguishing opponents 
 would be proud to possess.” f 
 
 SIR CHARLES ABRAHAM ELTON, Baronet, was born in 
 Bristol, October 31st, 1778. He was the only son of the Rev. Sir 
 Abraham Elton, the fifth baronet; his mother being Elizabeth, the 
 
 Bristol Mirror. 
 
 t Rev. Robert Hall. 
 
546 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 eldest daughter of Sir John Durbin, Knt., and an alderman of this city. 
 He was educated at Eton; and leaving school at fifteen years of age, 
 entered the 48th Foot with a commission, rising ultimately to a 
 captaincy in the same regiment, with a character for energy and great 
 efficiency; he afterwards became colonel of the Somerset Militia. 
 
 He began his poetical career in 1810, by a translation of “Hesiod,” 
 which was followed by “ Tales of Romance, with other Poems.” “ The 
 Brothers, a Monody; and other Poems,” appeared in 1822, and had its 
 origin in a severe domestic bereavement,—his two elder brothers being 
 drowned while bathing at Weston-super-Mare, in 1819. His most 
 important work, however, was his “ Specimens of the Classic Poets, in 
 a chronological series from Homer to Tryphiodorus: translated into 
 English verse, 1814.” He was also the author of a “ History of the 
 Roman Emperors,” and of “ Second Thoughts on the Person of Christ.” 
 
 He was a frank, open-hearted, and benevolent man; retiring in his 
 habits, liberal in politics, a firm supporter of Whig principles, but 
 generous to his opponents. He died at Bath, June 1st, 1853, in his 
 75th year, and his remains were interred in Clevedon Church, Somerset. 
 
 JOSEPH COTTLE. There are few incidents in the life of this 
 gentleman of any particular public interest; for he has left upon 
 record no account of himself, or made us at all acquainted with his 
 younger days, nor even of the place of his birth. We first hear him 
 telling his readers that “It is not necessary to inform them of his 
 having been a bookseller in Bristol from the year 1791 to 1798, 
 from the age of 21 to 28,”* which business he appears to have 
 relinquished in the autumn of the latter year, a few months after 
 publishing the Lyrical Ballads of Coleridge. Mr. Cottle, however, will 
 “ be remembered in the history of English Literature for the useful 
 friendship which he extended to Southey and Coleridge when both 
 were young and unknown. Southey has commemorated him for the 
 ‘romantic’ offer which he made him for his first epic of fifty guineas 
 and fifty copies for his subscribers. Here was a young and inexperienced 
 author finding a bookseller as liberal and inexperienced as himself. 
 There were more Cottles than one. We suspect there were three— 
 
 Early Recollections of S. T. Coleridge, vol. i., p. 1. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 547 
 
 Amos, John, and Joseph. Amos has been hitched into verse both by- 
 Byron and by Canning. 
 
 “ Oh, Amos Cottle ! Phoebus, what a name, 
 
 To fill the speaking trump of future fame ! 
 
 —occurs as a couplet in the ‘English Bards and Scotch Reviewers,’ 
 while in the Antijacobin we remember— 
 
 “ And Cottle, not he that Alfred made famous, 
 
 But Joseph of Bristol, the brother of Amos. 
 
 All three wrote verse—we wish we could say, poetry. Amos, like 
 Blackmore, dabbled in epics—Joseph, like Sternhold and Hopkins, 
 took to translating the Psalms into English verse—and John was guilty 
 of a poem called ‘Malvern Hills.’ Nor did Joseph, ‘the brother of 
 Amos,’ confine his literary labours to verse alone. His ‘Recollections 
 of Coleridge and Southey’ contain many curious and well-authenticated 
 particulars, which any future biographer of our Poets will be glad to 
 make use of. It is by his volume of ‘ Recollections,’ rather than by 
 his poetry, that Joseph Cottle will be heard of hereafter.” Mr. Cottle 
 died at Firfield House, Knowle, near this city, June 7th, 1853, in the 
 84th year of his age. 
 
 With these remarks on Joseph Cottle, I close my account of eminent 
 individuals connected with Bristol history, though but an imperfect 
 catalogue. It has been my endeavour, however, “ neither to clothe 
 the subject (of which I have treated), with undeserved applause, nor 
 unmerited censure, but to present an exact portraiture which ought 
 scrupulously to be aimed at by every impartial writer.” * 
 
 Cottle’s Early Recollections, vol. ii., p. 135. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 

APPENDIX. 
 
 APPENDIX I.—Page 19. 
 
 At the dissolution of religious houses this chapel suffered, in common with 
 other similar structures, from the hands of the spoiler. Having been surrendered 
 to the king, it was rented as a warehouse, until it was destroyed by fire in 
 1643. In 1646, February l"th, at ten o’clock at night, another fire broke out 
 in the house of Mr. Edwards, apothecary, when all the houses on both sides of 
 the thoroughfare, between the chapel and the Gate of St. Nicholas, were burned 
 down. Three years afterwards Walter Stevens, linen-draper, had the basement 
 story of the priest’s residence, belonging to the chapel, granted to him for the 
 purpose of erecting thereon a house of business, which subsequently became 
 known as the chapel house. 
 
 APPENDIX II.— Page 19. 
 
 “ The year 1239-40 marks a very great degree of opulence and spirit. The 
 quay was till now confined to a very short space, ships could load and unload 
 only where the present Bridge Street stands, that is, on the bank of the Avon 
 between the mouth of the river Froom and what is now St. Peter’s Hospital; 
 which space lying immediately under the church of St. Mary gave to that 
 church the name which it still bears, St Mary-le-Porl, usually St. Mary-port. 
 The small extent of this port, and its inconvenience also (for the bank of the 
 Avon was steep, and the bottom stony), naturally induced the merchants to 
 seek a larger, safer, and more convenient quay; all which improvements they 
 saw to be attainable by digging a deep trench across St. Augustine’s marsh, as 
 a new bed for the Froom; the eastern side of which would then form a safe and 
 extensive quay. This marsh however belonged to the abbey of St. Augustine, 
 part of the original grant of Robert Fitzharding, probably parcel of the manor 
 of Billeswick. It extended, under the name of St. Augustine's Marsh, from the 
 mouth of the Froom to the end of the Abbot’s Park (now College Street) and of 
 Canon’s Marsh: and the north-eastern part of it, of which the townsmen wished 
 to be possessed, and where they had already an ancient right to walk to and 
 fro at their pleasure, consisted of one large field, called Chanter's Close, which 
 extended from the river Froom to the hill on which St. Augustine’s chinches, &c., 
 are built. This valuable and extensive piece of ground the Abbot and convent 
 
552 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 sold, to the Mayor and commonalty, who thereupon undertook and executed 
 that great trench which forms the present quay. ” * 
 
 APPENDIX III.— Page 20. 
 
 Very little is known of this Harding; so little, indeed, that scarcely any 
 information respecting him, upon which we can rely, has been handed down to 
 us. He does not appear to have been at all engaged in military affairs, nor to 
 have risen to any importance in Bristol until after the Norman Conquest. Mr. 
 Seyer asserts that he was a lawyer or advocate, and that he was the son of 
 Ednoth the Staffer, or Master of the Horse to Edward the Confessor and King 
 Harold, who, in the defence of the latter monarch, lost his life. We find 
 Harding serving the office of Chief Magistrate of Bristol in the reign of William 
 the Conqueror, at which time he had amassed great wealth, and become 
 afterwards a person of considerable eminence. This is proved indisputably by 
 the reference his sons and grandsons always make to his name, styling themselves 
 in their charters AiA-Harding, which style was never adopted, unless where 
 the father’s name might bring honour to the son. Harding settled himself in 
 Baldwin Street, where he died, November 6th, 1115. + This is all we know of 
 the first personage of consequence who is ascertained to have resided in the old 
 town; but whence he was, or what he was before coming here, are questions 
 undetermined. Certain it is that various opinions obtain upon the subject, but 
 if any reliance can be placed on the inscription over the Abbey Gateway, 
 College Green, the royal parentage of Harding is unquestionable, for he is there 
 called the son of a (or the) King of Denmark. 
 
 APPENDIX IV.— Page 25. 
 
 “This year (1498) one Sebastian Cabota, a Genoese’s son, (others say a 
 Venetian,) born at Bristow, professing himself to be expert in knowledge of the 
 circuit of the world,” &c., is a passage quoted by Mr. Barrett, J from Fabian’s 
 Chronicle; from which the reader may believe, if he pleases, that Sebastian 
 Cabot was a Bristolian; but as Mr. Barrett unwittingly contradicts this 
 statement on the same page, by asserting from “Peter Martyr (that) Cabot 
 (was) a Venetian horn," he (the reader) can, if preferred, refuse to do so. Now 
 as Peter Martyr says, “Cabot is my friend (see Barrett, p. 174), whom I use 
 familiarly, and delight to have sometimes keep me company in my own house,” 
 he is more likely to be correct, from his intimate personal knowledge of the 
 man, in his statement—that Cabot was “a Venetian horn ”—than those writers 
 are, who, without such personal acquaintance, and speaking of him only at 
 
 * Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 14. 
 + Memoirs of Bristol, vol. i., p. 291. 
 
 J Hist, of Bristol, p. 173. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 55 3 
 
 second-hand, claim Bristol as his birth-place. Further on in the same page 
 Mr. Barrett says, that Martyr’s account of Cabot’s voyage, “being given by 
 his friend and intimate associate, who might have it from Cabot’s own mouth, it 
 is most likely to be true and genuine;” if so, why, I would ask, should not 
 Martyr’s statement, that Cabot was “a Venetian horn," which also he in all 
 probability “ had from Cabot’s own mouth,” be entitled to the same amount 
 of credit? In the second edition of “ The Famovs Historie of The Indies. . . . 
 Comprised in sundry Decads. Set forth first by Mr. Hackluyt, and now 
 published by L. M. Gent., London, 1G28,” I read as follows, at fol. 125:— 
 “ These North seas haue bin searched by one Sebastian Cabot, a Venetian borne, 
 whom being yet but in manner an infant, his parents caryed with them into 
 Englande, having occasion to resort thither for trade of marchandize, as is the 
 manner of the Venetians, to leaue no parte of the worlde vrisearched to obtayne 
 rychesse.” 
 
 In addition to all this, the municipality of Venice erected a marble bust of 
 Sebastian Cabot in their Council Room, in the old palace of the Doges, in 
 November, 1858, and why, if he was not “a Venetian born?' 1 ' 
 
 APPENDIX V.— Page 28. 
 
 Robert, Earl of Gloucester, was born, it is said, at Caen in Normandy, about 
 the year 1090. When about twenty years of age he married Mabile, daughter 
 and heiress of Robert Fitzhamon, to whom that city had surrendered in the 
 reign of Henry I., and who was made by the king, in reward for his services, 
 its constable or governor. By his marriage, therefore, with the heiress of this 
 noble, the Earl of Gloucester became, in virtue thereof, his successor as governor 
 of his native place. He was the greatest military chief of his age. The 
 distracted state of the country during the reign of Stephen, caused him to be 
 perpetually engaged in the civil commotions of the time, on behalf of his half- 
 sister, the Empress Maud. To his castle at Bristol he conducted the King a 
 prisoner, after the Battle of Lincoln, February 2nd, 1141, where he was kept 
 in close custody, but Robert himself having been captured at Winchester, in 
 September of the same year, an exchange of prisoners took place, and both the 
 monarch and the earl were set at liberty. In 1143, the latter utterly routed 
 Stephen’s army at Wilton, and he subsequently succeeded in conquering a very 
 large portion of the kingdom. He died at Gloucester, October 31st, 1147, in the 
 fifty-seventh year of his age, and was buried, by his own direction, in the priory 
 chapel of St. James, at Bristol.* 
 
 This Earl of Gloucester was a great patron of literature. To him Geoffrey of 
 Monmouth dedicated his famous British History, in which he speaks of the earl 
 “as critically acquainted with the Latin language;” and extols him as an 
 “accomplished scholar and philosopher, (and one who) made it a peculiar part 
 
 Q Q 
 
 Leland’s Itin., vol. vii., p. 85. 
 
554 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 of his glory to pay attention to literature—(to) esteem those learned persons 
 ■worthy of his notice, whom either the envy of fame, or the slenderness of their 
 fortune rendered obscure. Literary men, therefore (he continues), experience in 
 you manners suitable to them; for you look upon them kindly, so as to put them 
 beyond the apprehension of ill-liumour, you admit them pleasantly, you dismiss 
 them munificently.” 
 
 APPENDIX XL—Page 29. 
 
 From this description of the priory and its precincts, it evidently extended 
 much beyond “ the existing Whitson Court, westward; ” and as a garden, great 
 gate-house, and other members of a flourishing monastic establishment, are 
 distinctly mentioned as lying westward of the present buildings, it is not unlikely 
 that it extended as far on that side as to the lane which now leads from Lower 
 Maudlin Street to Lewin’s Mead, and, probably, that is the lane referred to in 
 the text as “leading out of the great court to the west part of the gate,” &c. 
 It is worthy of note that the neighbourhood is still called the “Black Friars,” 
 as if to perpetuate the name of the former owners of the property. The lane 
 just referred to would seem to indicate the boundary line which separated the 
 domain of the Benedictine or Black Friars, from that of their neighbours, the 
 Franciscan or Grey Friars; and an interesting discovery, which I made in 1851, 
 would seem to corroborate this opinion. This discovery was, that an old house 
 at the foot of the steps in this lane was a middle age erection, and of the 
 Decorated style of English architecture, but somewhat mutilated to suit modem 
 notions of propriety. It exhibited good window-frames, in the style mentioned, 
 with tracery much mutilated, and a roof describing an arch, with some of the 
 oak ribs, with which it was once divided into squares, still remaining. This 
 building was probably a small chapel belonging to the priory of St. James, and 
 erected about the middle of the fourteenth century. The position of the burial 
 ground attached to it is still pointed out, and there is a tradition on the spot 
 that a subterranean passage once existed, leading from this chapel to the priory, 
 but as a similar tale is related of many other monastic houses, and with little 
 truth, it is most likely this statement, too, is without foundation. 
 
 APPENDIX Vn .—Page 33. 
 
 “ Shortly after his election, Swalo, the Papal legate, held a council at Bristol, 
 wherein he received, on behalf of King Henry the Third, the fealty of such 
 prelates and nobles who were present, and pronounced sentence of excommuni¬ 
 cation against those who were opposed to him. This council was probably held 
 within the walls of the Abbey; and there is little doubt that the conventual 
 buildings afforded accommodation for many of the ecclesiastics who were 
 assembled.”* 
 
 Britton’s Bristol Cathedral, p. 8. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 555 
 
 APPENDIX VIII.— Page 34. 
 
 “ This enterprize of making a new key, and of constructing a stone bridge 
 across the Avon, and joining to Bristol Redcliffe side, (which though before a 
 part of the city yet belonging to the honour of Gloucester, was under a separate 
 government till the charter of Henry 3d.) was undertaken about the same time, 
 and formed together one grand complete scheme, which made such amazing 
 alterations, was attended with such beneficial consequences to the community, 
 that it ought justly to be signalised apart as a peculiar era, from whence to date 
 the rise of those great improvements that followed; advancing, with a rapid 
 progress, the honour, riches, and commercial interests of this city: which, by 
 the virtue and industry of its citizens, has rose to its present grandeur and 
 dignity in the nation; and that alone reflects greater honour on Bristol than any 
 thing that we have said or can say in its praise for its antiquity, the only thing 
 many places, more extolled in chronicles or old histories, have now left to boast 
 of; whilst this, like a well-cultivated spot, : has been continually flourishing with 
 renewed vigour, extending its commerce to the most distant regions, enlarging 
 its antient bounds by additional buildings and magnificent public structures, and 
 has thus merited its antient Saxon name Brightstowe, i.e., an illustrious city, by 
 becoming yearly more and more illustrious.” * 
 
 APPENDIX IX.— Page 48. 
 
 In the year 1731 this elegant room was barbarously mutilated by the intro¬ 
 duction of four common sash windows as a matter of modern convenience; the 
 walls and beautiful ornamental carving of the structure having been wretchedly 
 broken through for the purpose of admitting them. But these unsightly 
 innovations were removed immediately after the memorable riots in October, 
 1831, and the boarded floor which had concealed the raised stone seats from view 
 for ages, was taken away, and this glorious room now appears before us in all 
 its pristine beauty. 
 
 On taking up the floor, several stone coffins were discovered, containing the 
 mouldering remains of some of the inmates of the abbey. But the most 
 interesting antiquarian object brought to light was a very ancient piece of 
 sculpture, supposed to be eight hundred years old, representing the Redeemer 
 releasing our first parents, and the whole human family in them, from the jaws 
 of hell. Unfortunately it is not quite perfect; it is, however, as a work of 
 ancient art, emblematical of human redemption, deserving the attention of the 
 antiquary, and being placed in a conspicuous situation in the muniment room, 
 is always accessible on application to the subsacrist of the cathedral. Its age is, 
 probably, a little overstated. 
 
 Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. G7. See also Appendix II. 
 
 Q Q 2 
 
556 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 APPENDIX X.—Page 63. 
 
 It is not known whether or not John Foster was a native of Bristol, although 
 it is probable that Richard Foster, who was bailiff in 1429, sheriff in 1433, and 
 mayor in 1436, 1446, and 1447, was his father. We are equally ignorant of the 
 early part of his history, for we know nothing of him previous to the year 1462, 
 when he was one of the bailiffs of the town; sheriff in 1474, and mayor in 1481. 
 In 1489 he served in Parliament for Bristol, after which time his name occurs no 
 more in our civic annals. His will is dated August 6th, 1492, between which 
 date and the 17th of the same month he must have died, for on that day an 
 inventory of his goods was taken. He left a son, Richard, and a daughter, 
 Agnes, both of whom were married, and their names, together with those of 
 the two sons of the former, Robert and Richard Foster, are mentioned in the 
 document referred to. 
 
 John Foster lived in Small Street, at that time a very notable part of Bristol; 
 here he resided when he determined on founding his almshouse, and here he 
 died. His will is in substance as follows:—He first “ recommends his soul to 
 Almighty God his Maker and Redeemer, to Our Lady the Virgin Mary, and to 
 all Saints; his body to be buried beside the altar of the Holy Trinity, within 
 the parish church of Saint Werburgh Virgin, of Bristowe, in a tomb, recently 
 made by him, and edified at his owm expense.” He then bequeaths towards the 
 reparation of the body of the said church, ten pounds. To Richard Woode, 
 parson of the said church, in recompense of all tithes and offerings by him 
 forgotten or negligently withdrawn, forty shillings. To the cathedral church 
 of Saint Marie of Worcester, three shillings and fourpence. To the four orders 
 of Friars of every house, ten shillings each, w’hich maketh[forty shillings; all or 
 the greater part to be present, of the said houses, in helping in divine service, 
 both at his burial and his month’s mind. He gives four pounds to be distributed, 
 at the discretion of his executors, at his funeral and month’s mind, in bread to 
 the poor to pray for his soul, and six shillings and eight pence in like manner to 
 the poor prisoners in Newgate. His executors were to find a priest to sing in 
 the chapel of his Almshouse, above described, said to be in Stepe Street, for 
 bis soul and for the souls of Elizabeth his late wife, their fathers, mothers, and 
 benefactors, and especially for the soul of James Venables, paying the priest 
 annually four pounds, and also to pay weekly, for forty years after his death, 
 unto the poor people dwelling in thirteen chambers in his Almshouse, two 
 shillings and two-pence, which was for every chamber two-pence weekly. 
 His Feoffees of his lands, &c., in Cam, Slimbridge, Coslyngton, and Arlingham, 
 in the county of Gloucester, should make unto Richard Foster and Catherine 
 his wife, a lawful estate for their lives and their issues, and in default of issue, 
 that they should sell the same, and the money arising from the same to be 
 disposed in purchasing the king’s licence to be made to his said executors, to 
 found in the said chapel a perpetual chantry of one priest to sing for the 
 souls aforesaid, and also in purchasing in fee simple an estate in the ground 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 557 
 
 whereupon the said Almshouse was built, and in discharging of all rents issuing 
 out of the said Almshouse and chapel. To the said Richard Foster he gives 
 100 marks in plate, and 100 marks in salt, and the furniture belonging to the 
 hall, chamber, and kitchen of his house in which he then dwelt, situate in Small 
 Street, his son and his heirs to occupy the said house for the term which he had 
 to come in the same, they keeping the same in repair; and in case his son 
 should die without issue, the said house to be sold, and the proceeds to be 
 distributed for his soul and the souls before mentioned, in works of piety and 
 charity. To Agnes, his daughter, wife unto William Weston, merchant, for her 
 life and the life of her said husband he gives a house in Corn Street, in which 
 they dwelt, to keep the same in repair and to pay annually towards the 
 reparation of the aforesaid Almshouse and chapel, ten shillings; the reversion 
 of the house to be sold, and the proceeds to be divided into three equal parts, 
 two of which should be applied towards the maintenance of the said Almshouse, 
 and the remaining third part should be applied towards the profit of the church 
 of Saint Werburgh. Also to the said Agnes his daughter he gives forty pounds 
 in plate and forty pounds in salt. To Robert and Richard, sons of the aforesaid 
 Richard Foster, such a sum of money in goods as his executors shall think 
 convenient. To John Walshe (of Oldston or Olveston, Gloucestershire), Esq., a 
 silver salt seller and cover half gilt. To John Esterfield, merchant, a house in 
 Small Street, in which Edward Dawes, merchant, lived; also a garden in Saint 
 Leonard’s Lane, which the said Esterfield occupied. To Robert Bolpon his 
 scarlet gown with the fur, a silver cup, and five pounds in money. To William 
 Adams, his servant, five pounds in money, a silver cup and cloth for a gown of 
 violet colour. The residue of his property, after the payment of his debts, he 
 gave to his executors Walshe and Esterfield, and for their trouble a silver cup 
 and twenty pounds in money to each. 
 
 On the 17th of August, 1492, immediately after the death of John Foster, an 
 inventory of his goods was taken by Arthur Kernes, appraiser to the Archbishop 
 of Canterbury. His house consisted of a hall, parlour, buttery, kitchen, one 
 chief or best chamber, and two others, with three cellars. In the hall and 
 other ordinary apartments were warlike weapons—spears, poleaxes, gleves, &c.; 
 fourteen green cushions, a table supported by tressels, a branch of laton tin, 
 with five candlesticks. In his bedroom was a spruce coffer, with three smaller 
 ones, a carpet, a bedstead, feather bed and bolster, and a green coverlet. 
 
 His plate consisted of two silver gilt salts and covers, weighing CO oz.; a 
 spice dish, 26 oz.; three silver dishes, 123 oz.; three flat pieces, 06 oz.; a small 
 Hat cup and two covers, 10 oz.; a goblet and a powder pere, 10 oz.; eight bowls, 
 gilt, with a gilt cover, 223 oz.; six bowls, gilt, with two gilt covers, 143 oz.; 
 two dozen spoons, with lions at the end, 29 oz.; two basins and ewers, part 
 silver, gilt, 13G oz.; two salts, with a cover, part gilt, 35 oz.; a salt and cover, 
 partly gilt, 24 oz.; a standing cup, with its cover, 21 oz.; two standing cups, 
 with their covers, gilt, GO oz.; two small flat pieces of silver, 33 oz.; two 
 standing pieces of silver, 25 oz.; in all 1030 ounces of plate, which was valued 
 
558 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 from three s hillin gs and three pence to three shillings and seven pence per 
 ounce. 
 
 His clothing consisted of two worsted doublets, two scarlet gowns, two violet 
 gowns furred, a black gown, a black cloak, a hat and tippet of velvet; these 
 articles comprised, of course, only that portion of his wardrobe which were 
 used by him on particular occasions, and not as parts of his ordinary attire, 
 excepting, perhaps, the black cloak and hat. There was £375 in specie in his 
 house, and this, added to the value of his effects, amounted altogether to 
 £S00 10s. 4cl. 
 
 Such was the residence of John Foster, a merchant of Bristol in the fifteenth 
 century, and such were its contents and their value at the time of his death. His 
 house could not have been so large as those inhabited by other merchants who 
 lived in the same street, the remains of which we can still examine; nor was 
 his furniture, &c., by any means costly. As John Foster, at the date of his 
 death, is said to have had in his three cellars in Small Street, two hundred tons 
 of salt, valued at thirteen shillings and four pence per ton, his dwelling was 
 evidently connected with his business; and it is not improbable that in it the 
 chief of his commercial pursuits were transacted. We hear nothing of his 
 relation to maritime commerce, and it is probable, therefore, that he did not 
 rank with men of first class importance as merchants in Bristol. The cost of 
 such a house as Foster’s is presumed to have been, may be arrived at, with 
 some degree of accuracy, by a knowledge we have of the price paid for such a 
 building about the time at which he lived; it being agreed “ to make well, 
 workmanly, and surely, with good timber, a house in High Street, (in this 
 city,) with floors, windows, partitions, &c.,—the said house having a shop, a 
 hall above the shop, with an oriel window; a chamber above the hall with an 
 oriel window, and another chamber above that,” &c., &c.; for all of which the 
 contractor was to receive six pounds thirteen shillings and fourpence! and so 
 particular was the specification for this house drawn out, that even the quantity 
 of nails to be used in the building is mentioned. The rent of such a structure 
 was fixed at ten marks, eleven shillings and fourpence per annum, a sum equal 
 to one hundred pounds present money. We may also form some idea of the 
 value of Foster’s stock of clothing, by stating that a mantle for an ordinary 
 person cost about three pounds ten shillings, modern currency; and that a ring 
 for the finger of a burgess was frequently worth ten pounds; their wives, too, 
 arrayed themselves in silk and “ syndon,” which not unfrequently cost from 
 forty to fifty shillings a yard! 
 
 APPENDIX XI .—Page 73. 
 
 The Civic High Cross owes its removal, in 1733, to a silversmith named John 
 Vaughan, who resided in the old building at the corner of High Street and Wine 
 Street, for many years known as the Castle Bank. The plea set up by Vaughan 
 for its removal was that it endangered his premises; and he offered to swear 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 559 
 
 that whenever the wind blew strong, so great was the hazard to them through 
 the shaking of the Cross, and the probability of its fall, that he considered 
 himself and his shop, with its precious contents, were threatened with 
 destruction, in case it should some day be thrown down by a sudden gust of 
 wind. Vaughan’s complaint, together with the obstruction the cross itself 
 caused to traliic, operated with the authorities, and it was at once removed, and 
 deposited in the vaults of the Guildhall as a thing of no value ! There it lay 
 utterly neglected, until by the voluntary contributions of a few gentlemen 
 residing in the neighbourhood of College Green, headed by Mr. Alderman 
 Price, leave having been obtained for its removal from its place of temporary 
 interment in the municipal cellars, it was re-erected in the centre of that 
 fashionable promenade, midway between the north entrance to the cathedral 
 and the opposite church of the Gaunts. Here, however, it was soon found to 
 be in the way of the idle loungers who frequented that quarter of the city, and 
 a person named Champion having obtained subscriptions sufficient to take it 
 down, the Cross was again removed, and was, by the Dean and Chapter thrown 
 aside in an obscure corner of the cathedral; and as no suitable spot could be 
 found in Bristol whereon to place it, it was given away to a stranger as stated in 
 the text ! The following letter which relates to the transaction may not be 
 uninteresting:— 
 
 “ Sir, 
 
 The Dean of Bristol is so obliging as to write me word I may send 
 for the Cross directly. I have therefore ordered my servant, Faugoin, to send 
 out two waggons from Stourhead on Monday morning. I suppose they will be 
 three days in and out; and if it is the Dean and Mr. Tyndall’s opinion it should 
 go all at once, as you think there is six loads of it from the point you marked in 
 the print sent me, for the legs are not worth fetching, I beg of you to hire four 
 more waggons to accompany mine, and to be so kind to see it safely and carefully 
 packed and well bedded with hay or straw, and to let one of your men to come 
 with it, to see it unloaded; and I make no doubt you will insist on careful 
 drivers; and as I shall be at Stourhead the end of November or beginning of 
 December, wish it may be convenient to you to come over, and let me see you 
 and consult with you how to repair and put it up, and what base or support will 
 be required to it; in all which I must request your assistance, which will much 
 oblige, 
 
 Sir, 
 
 Your very humble Servant, 
 
 Henry Hoare. 
 
 London, Fleet Street, Oct. 2, 1764. 
 
 To Mr. Paty, Sculptor, Bristol. ” * 
 
 At the Civic High Cross, William, Lord Scrope, Earl of Wiltshire, and 
 Treasurer of England, Sir John Busbv, and Sir William Greene, ministers of 
 Richard II., were beheaded, without trial, by order of the Duke of Lancaster. 
 
 Evans’s Chronological Outline, p. 2S1. 
 
56 0 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 APPENDIX XII .—Page 81. 
 
 There is an error on this monument in the names of the two first martyrs 
 there mentioned. Mr. Seyer, who perpetually quotes the dubious Manuscript 
 Calendars relating to Bristol, says * that one of them contains the following 
 notices:—“ 1555. On the 17th of October, one William Shepton (alias Shapman, 
 alias Shapen) a weaver, was burnt for religion.” Another Calendar (he con¬ 
 tinues) is thus:—“ 1556. This year two men, one a weaver, the other a cobler, 
 were burnt at St. Michael’s Hill for religion. And (it is added) a sheerman was 
 burnt for denying the sacrament of the altar to be the very body and blood of 
 Christ really and substantially,” Does he then mean to say there were three? 
 He then cites a third of these mischievous Calendars, in which the name of 
 Edward Sharpe occurs, and this, I have no doubt, has caused the error referred 
 to; for there is no mention whatever of such a person having suffered martyrdom 
 in Bristol, by any writer deserving the name of an authority. Fox records only 
 the following four sufferers:— 
 
 “ The eighth day of August was brought William Sarton, Weaver of Bristow, 
 before one Dalby, Chancellor of Bristow, and by him committed to Prison and 
 also condemned, for holding that the Sacrament was a sign of an holy thing; 
 also he denied that the Flesh and Blood of Christ is there after their words of 
 Consecration: he was burned the eighteenth of September, Anno 1556, and as 
 he went to the fire, he sung Psalms. The Sheriff, John Griffith, had prepared 
 Green-wood to burn him; but one Master John Pikes, pitying the man, caused 
 divers to go with him to Ridland, half a mile off, who brought good store of 
 Helme-sheaves, which indeed made good dispatch with little pain, in com¬ 
 parison to that he should have suffered with the Green-wood. In the mean 
 space, wildest they went for the sheaves, the said Sarton made many good 
 exhortations to the People, and after died constantly and patiently with great 
 joyfulness.” 
 
 “ Richard Sharp, Weaver, of Bristow, was brought the ninth day of March, 
 Anno. 1556, before Master Dalby, Chancellor of the Town or City of Bristow, 
 and after examination concerning the Sacrament of the Altar, was perswaded 
 by the said Dalby and others to recant, and the twenty nineth of the same 
 Month was enjoyned to make his recantation before the Parishioners in his 
 Parish Church. Which when he had done, he felt in his Conscience such a 
 tormenting Hell, that he was not able quietly to work in his occupation, but 
 decayed and changed both in colour and liking of his Body. Who shortly after 
 upon Sunday came into his Parish Church, called Temple, and after high Mass, 
 came to the Quire Door, and said with a loud voice; Neighbours, bear me 
 record that yonder idol (and pointing to the Altar) is the greatest and most 
 abominable that ever was; and I am sorry that ever I denyed my Lord God. 
 Then the Constables were commanded to apprehend him, but none stepped 
 
 Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 234. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 5G1 
 
 forth, but suffered him to go out of the Church. After, by night, he was 
 apprehended and was carried to Newgate, and shortly after was brought before 
 the Lord Chancellor, denying the Sacrament of the Altar to be the Body and 
 Blood of Christ, and said it was an Idol, and therefore was condemned to be 
 burned by the said Dalby. He was burnt the seventh of May, 1557, and died 
 godly, patiently, and constantly, confessing the Articles of our Faith.” 
 
 “ The Thursday in the night before Easter, Anno 1557, came one Mr. David 
 Herris, Alderman, and John Stone, to the House of one Thomas Hale, a Shoe¬ 
 maker of Bristow, and caused him to rise out of his Bed, and brought him forth 
 to his door. To whom the said Thomas Hale said, You have sought my Blood 
 these two years, and now much good do you with it. Who being committed to 
 the Watchmen, was carried to Newgate the twenty-fourth of April, the year 
 aforesaid, was brought before Mr. Dalby the Chancellor, committed by him to 
 Prison, and after by him condemned to be burnt, for saying the Sacrament of 
 the Altar to be an Idol. He was burnt the seventh of May with the foresaid 
 Richard Sharp, and godly, patiently, and constantly imbraeed the Fire with 
 his arms. ” 
 
 “Richard Sharp and Thomas Hale were burned both together in one fire, 
 and bound back to back.” 
 
 “Thomas Benion, a Weaver, at the Commandment of the Commissioners, 
 was brought by a Constable, the thirteenth day of August, Anno 1557, before 
 Master Dalby, Chancellor of Bristow, who committed him to Prison for saying 
 there was nothing but Bread in the Sacrament, as they used it. Wherefore, 
 the twentieth day of the said August he was condemned to be burnt by the 
 said Dalby, for denying 5 of their Sacraments, and affirming two, that is, the 
 Sacrament of the Body and Blood of Christ, and the Sacrament of Baptism. 
 He was burnt the 27 of the said month and year, and died godly, constantly, 
 and patiently, with confessing the Articles of our Christian faith.” * 
 
 APPENDIX XIII .—Page 84. 
 
 Bishop Thornborough was embroiled in dissentions with the Corporation of 
 Bristol and with others of his diocesans. During the years 160G-7 he never 
 visited the city. In 1C06 “the Mayor, John Barber, with the rest of the 
 Councill, took a lease of the Dean and Chapter, for to have so much room in 
 the Cathedrall or Colledge Church as to build a fair Gallery, for the Majestrates 
 to sitt in to hear sermon; the which was built this year, at the costs of the 
 Mayor and Councill. It stood upon pillars, right against the pulpitt; all the 
 fore-part being of joyner’s work, curiously wrought; wherein was three seats, 
 placed by the middle pillar, reserved for the Mayor, Dean, and Councill of this 
 city, and if occasion were, for the King, or any nobleman that should come 
 
 * Fox’s Acts and Monuments, vol. iii., pp. 749, 750, 855. 
 
 R R 
 
562 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 into this city. Anil upon the top of the seat was the King’s arms, guilded and 
 painted. Under which gallery there was seates placed in like order, for the 
 Majestrates’ wives.” The Bishop, on visiting the Cathedral, in 1608, caused 
 the gallery “ to be immediately pulled down; when the citizens, indignant at 
 this assumption of power, represented the case to the King, who appointed 
 commissioners to examine whether ‘ the Gallery made the Church look like a 
 play-house,’ as reported.” “An answer being sent by the Commissioners to 
 his Majestie of the contrary, he caused the Bishop to set the gallery in its 
 former place, at his own cost; which built it two or three foot above the ground, 
 and set the pulpit on the lower pillar next the Clock-house. But the King 
 hereing of, when the Bishop came to London, he was to his great disgrace 
 checked by the King; so that he abode at Dorchester, it being a part of his 
 bishopprick belonging to Bristol, and would not come to Bristol for shame and 
 disgrace. Also this year the Bishop would have forced the Mayor and all the 
 worshipful Aldermen to come to sermon to the Colledge, as they used to do on 
 every Sabbath and festival-day, and therefore would not suffer any bell to ring 
 to sermon in the city; but the Mayor prevented him of his purpose, and sent to 
 the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, who gave him authority that now they 
 might have as many sermons in the City as they will and where the Mayor will 
 appoint it, and did not go to the Colledge for many years together, but went to 
 Redcliffe Chinch for to hear sermons on festival-days.”* 
 
 APPENDIX XIV.—Page 85. 
 
 Bishop Westfield “was born in the Parish of St. Mary’s, in the City of 
 Ely, Educated at Jesus College in Cambridge, and was successively Scholar and 
 Fellow of that House. Afterwards he became Bector of Hornsey, near London, 
 Hector of St. Bartholomew the Great, in that City, and Archdeacon of St. 
 Alban’s, November 14, 1631, by the Collation of the Bishop of London. In 
 1641, he was advanced to this See (Bristol), and allowed to keep the 
 Archdeaconry. He accepted of the Bishoprick in the worst of Times, as 
 hoping to do some Service to the Church, tho’ he had Refus’d the Offer of it 
 which was made him above 20 Years before. In the Beginning of the Rebellion 
 he was Abused in the Streets, sequestred from St. Bartholomew, and forced to 
 fly. He died June 25, 1644, which tho’ it was before the Actual Dissolution of 
 the Cathedrals, yet had the Members of very many of them Suffered much at 
 that time; And this Excellent Bishop, having been one of them, I make no 
 Scruple to set him down as a Sufferer in this See because tho’ he was not 
 Formally dispossest of his Bishoprick, yet he was so (for some time at least) in 
 effect: For it appears that the Profits of his Bishoprick were, for some time, 
 unjustly detained from him ; and when he came to make his Will, it ran thus : 
 As for my Worldly Goods, which (as the/fimes now are) I know not well where 
 
 Bristol Memorialist, pp. 190, 191. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 503 
 
 they be, or what they are; I give and bequeath, &c. In so much that he 
 ordered this, as one part of his Epitaph (which he composed himself before 
 his Death) 
 
 “Senio & Moerore confectus.” 
 
 (He died in old age and sorrow.) 
 
 “He was a Person of such an unexceptionable Character, that when the Rebel 
 Committee ordered the Profits of his Bishoprick to be Restored, and gave him 
 a Pass to go to Bristol, they added in the Latter Part of it, That he was a 
 Person of Great Learning and Meiit. And indeed he was such an Excellent 
 Preacher, that Bishop King said, he was born an Orator. Jle was also a 
 Person of such admirable Modesty, that it is said, he never ascended the 
 Pulpit (even after he had been almost 50 Years a Preacher) but he Trembled : 
 And being Once to Preach before the King (Charles I.) at Oxford, he Fainted 
 quite away; when that Excellent Prince was contented patiently to wait till he 
 had Recovered himself, and then had from him a Sermon which abundantly 
 Rewarded such a Royal and Christian Condescension. To which let me add, 
 that another Line of his Epitaph (composed, as is before said, by himself) was 
 this, 
 
 “ Episcoporum Inlimus, Peccatorum Primus.” * 
 
 (Least of the Bishops, First of Sinners.) 
 
 APPENDIX XV.— Page 86. 
 
 “ThomasHowell, D.D., Canon of Windsor, Rector of St. Stephen’s, Walbrook, 
 and West Horsley, in Surrey, was Born in Caermarthenshire, Educated at 
 Jesus College in Oxford, of which he became successively Scholar and Fellow: 
 after that, he was made Chaplain to King Charles the First, and Obtained the 
 Preferments above-named: That of St. Stephen’s particularly, April 30, 1G35. 
 In the Beginning of the Troubles he was first Persecuted from the Living last- 
 mentioned, and then Sequester’d for his Absence, saith Mr. Lloyd; which 
 though a most unjust, was however no Uncommon Practice in those days; after 
 that he was driven by Persecution out of West Horsley: Whereupon his Majesty 
 Nominated him to this Bishoprick (Bristol); in which he met with Barbarous 
 Usage from the Hands of the Rebels. His Palace, which was then covered 
 with Lead, they uncased, and sold the Lead; so that he was Exposed to the 
 Weather by Day and by Night. His Lady they knew to be then in Child-Bed, 
 in which condition it Rained freely upon her. After many other Indignities, 
 they Pulled and Hailed him violently out of the Palace, of which they made a 
 Mault-House, and a Mill; for there they Ground, as well as Made, great 
 quantities of Mault for several Years, as is well Remembred by many yet 
 Living in Bristol. And suitably to this, a Gentleman (who gives me this 
 
 * Walker’s Sufferings of the Clergy, part ii., p. 3. 
 
 R R 2 
 
564 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Information) thinks he hath heard, that they intended to put up a Furnace for 
 Brewing, at the East-End of the Choire, in the Place of the Altar. In a word, 
 their Usage towards him was such, that he did not long survive their Cruelty; 
 but being a Person of a mild and tender Spirit, died soon after. He was 
 accounted, saithWood, a Meek Man, and a Good Preacher, and had in his 
 younger days been a very Painful one. Lloyd adds, That he was a Person of 
 great Clearness, Candor, Solidness, Sweetness, and Eloquence; That he had an 
 Insight into State-Affairs, as well as the more peculiar concerns of his own 
 Function; That though he found Few Well Affected in his Diocese at his 
 coming thither, yet he left few HI Affected in it at his Death; and That he was 
 so well Beloved at Bristol, that ’tis said, after his Decease (which happened in 
 1646), the City took upon them the Care of his Children’s Education, in 
 Gratitude to the Memory of their most Worthy Father.” * 
 
 APPENDIX XVI .—Page 93. 
 
 At a public meeting convened by the mayor, Odiarne Coates Lane, Esq., 
 and held at the Guildhall, March 22nd, 1861, a report was read, which stated 
 that “ In July, 1S59, an appeal was made by the Dean and Chapter of Bristol 
 to the public generally, and more especially to the diocese, city, and neighbour¬ 
 hood of Bristol, to assist them in improving the Cathedral, and enlarging the 
 area appropriated to worshippers. The Dean and Chapter headed the 
 subscription with £1,300 from their own body, and in order to assist them in 
 their work of restoration, a committee of laymen was formed in December, 
 1S59.” This committee then proceed to report on the works that had been 
 accomplished, and were now in progress in the Cathedral, and state that “The 
 primary object with the Dean and Chapter was to afford increased accomodation 
 to the large numbers frequenting the services of the Cathedral. This purpose 
 has been effected by taking down the organ screen, arranging the stalls at the 
 eastern end of the choir, and placing the organ at the north side. Had the 
 Dean and Chapter been content simply to effect this alteration, it might have 
 been accomplished at comparatively small expense; but as soon as the walls 
 were stripped of the woodwork, and partially freed from the whitewash which 
 had for many years disfigured the interior of the edifice, so beautiful a structure 
 was disclosed to their view, they did not hesitate to have the whole of the 
 piers, columns, carvings, and walls divested of their unsightly covering, and the 
 stone work thoroughly repaired and cleansed, and this duty they undertook in 
 the confident assurance that the public would give them the necessary aid in 
 restoring to the city a Cathedral worthy of its ancient renown and of its 
 present wealth. To the excellent taste and judgment by which this has been 
 accomplished, every one who has had recent opportunity of visiting the 
 Cathedral can testify. The area formerly devoted to worshippers, was, as must 
 
 Walker’s Sufferings of the Clergy, part ii., p. 3. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 565 
 
 be remembered, extremely confined, barely affording adequate accommodation 
 for 300 persons; whilst, as re-arranged, it will easily contain at least 1000 
 persons, and the frequenter of the Cathedral cannot fail to be struck by the 
 change, from a dingy whitewashed edifice, to a light, beautiful, and harmonious 
 structure, as perfect as when it was completed by the masterly hand of its 
 original architect. In addition to the fund provided for the general works 
 thus undertaken by the Dean and Chapter, several individuals have given 
 special subscriptions for particular objects, namely, for the improvement and 
 enlargement of the organ, for placing Purbeck marble shafts to the pillars in 
 the chancel, and balustrading round the triforium, and for the erection of a 
 screen at the west end of the choir. The entire expense, including these 
 additional works, will, in round figures, amount to £4,600, and the subscriptions 
 already received, including the before-mentioned contribution of the Dean and 
 Chapter, and a further sum of £250 given by them towards the organ fund, 
 amount to £3,327. Thus it will be seen that a further sum of £1,273 at the 
 least must be raised.” The report then proceeds to express a hope “ that the 
 subscriptions of the public will not stop at this limit, but that as the result of 
 the appeal, a sufficient sum will be raised to justify the Dean and Chapter in 
 restoring the elder lady chapel aud transept, and in carrying out improvements 
 at the west end of the Cathedral, by providing an entrance for the public, and 
 by giving to that portion of the church, which is now very unsightly, and 
 scarcely safe, the character of finished permanence. ” The report further states 
 that it is also desirable to improve the exterior of the Cathedral by ‘ * lowering 
 the road,” the cost of which “would not exceed £650,” which expense the 
 Dean and Chapter have expressed their readiness to aid “by a liberal 
 contribution. ” 
 
 It is to be regretted that the old incongruous organ case of the time of 
 Charles I., and of no style whatever, is permitted to disfigure the otherwise 
 commendable restoration of this edifice, under the plea of, I believe, a want of 
 funds ; but whilst it is proposed to solicit additional subscriptions to enable the 
 Dean and Chapter to “carry out improvements at the west end of the 
 Cathedral,” “lower the road,” &c., it surely would have been far more 
 judicious to complete the interior restoration first, by adding an organ case in 
 unison with the architecture of the building, rather than to perpetuate what to 
 every man of taste must be exceedingly offensive. The Dean and Chapter 
 might then congratulate themselves upon having succeeded as far as at first 
 intended, “ in restoring to the city a Cathedral worthy of its ancient renown, 
 and of its present wealth.” With a cobbled restoration, however, they cannot 
 say in future reports, that “To the excellent taste and judgment by which 
 this (their renovation) has been accomplished, every one who has had recent 
 opportunities of visiting the Cathedral can testify,” and is satisfied. 
 
 APPENDIX XVII .—Page 110. 
 
 For this note see Appendix XIV., p. 85. 
 
566 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 APPENDIX XVIII.—Pape 112. 
 
 During the memorable riots of October, 1831, “The Bishop behaved manfully; 
 the mob were masters of the city, and one of the minor canons waited upon him 
 before the hour of service, and represented to him the propriety of postponing it. 
 
 ‘ My young friend,’ said the Bishop with great good nature, laying his hand upon 
 his shoulder as he spake, ‘ these are times in which it is necessary not to shrink 
 from danger. Our duty- is to be at our post. ’ The service accordingly was 
 performed as usual, and he himself preached. Before evening closed, his palace 
 was burnt to the ground, and the loss which he sustained (besides that of his 
 papers) is estimated at £10,000.” * 
 
 APPENDIX XIX .—Page 130. 
 
 “ His name is peculiarly dear to piety and sacred literature. His edition of 
 the Hebrew Bible, divested of the massoretic points, which have so long dis¬ 
 figured the sacred text, will be a lasting monument of critical ability and learned 
 investigation, as well as highly honourable to the literary character of his native 
 country. He was bom at Stadscombe, in the parish of Plimstoek, Devonshire, 
 of which his father was the minister, in the year 1717. Soon after his birth his 
 father removed to Plymouth, where he initiated his son in the rudiments of a 
 grammatical education, and afterwards sent him to the public grammar school 
 in that town. Young Forster made a rapid progress both under the instructions 
 of his father, and in the seminary into which he was transplanted, of which he 
 became head scholar before he was thirteen years old. In 1733-4 he was 
 removed to Eton, and at the same time entered at Pembroke College, Oxford. 
 His time was chielly spent at College, in a close application to his studies, by 
 which he deservedly acquired a high character for very considerable erudition, 
 and great critical acumen, possessing a knowledge of the Latin, Greek, and 
 Hebrew languages, equal to that of any man of his time. His earliest friend 
 was Dr. Seeker, then Bishop of Oxford, by whom he was introduced to Dr. 
 Butler, at that time Bishop of Bristol, to whom he became private chaplain. 
 Dr. Butler at his death left him a legacy of £200, and appointed him executor 
 to his will. In the year 1745 he was promoted to a prebendal stall in the 
 cathedral of Bristol; and before the expiration of the same year was presented 
 by Archbishop Seeker to the valuable vicarage of Rochdale, in Lancashire. 
 He was elected a fellow of the Royal Society in 1755, made one of the chaplains 
 to his Majesty in 1756, and appointed preacher at the Rolls’ chapel in 1757. 
 In the year last-mentioned he married a lady of great merit (Mrs. Balls, a 
 widow), and possessed of a considerable fortune; on which occasion he fixed his 
 residence in Craig’s-court, Westminster. He died in that situation, after a short 
 illness, before the end of 1757, in the 41st year of his age. In 1749 he published 
 
 Southey’s Life and Correspondence, vol. vi., p. 167. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 567 
 
 ‘A Dissertation upon the account supposed to have been given of Jesus Christ 
 by Josephus,’ being an attempt to shew that this celebrated passage, some slight 
 corrections only excepted, may reasonably be esteemed genuine. This pro¬ 
 duction is allowed to be ingenious by Mr. Bryant, who has undertaken to defend 
 the passage as it stands; and by bishop Warburton it is pronounced the best 
 piece of criticism which the age has produced.”* 
 
 APPENDIX XX .—Page 139. 
 
 Richard Towgood, B.D. “This Excellent Person was Born near Brueton in 
 Somersetshire, and Educated at Oriel College in Oxford. He was sometime 
 Master of the School in the College-Green at Bristol, and thence removed to the 
 Viearidge of All-Saints: After that he had the Grant of this Prebend; but the 
 Confusions permitted him not to be Actually Installed until the Restoration. 
 He was Sequestered from his Viearidge of St. Nicholas (in Bristol), for his 
 Loyalty and Firm Adherence to the Royal Cause, Feb. 20tli, 1645, by the 
 standing Committee in that City. The Order for his Sequestration was in these 
 Words: For his great Disaffection to the Parliament of England and their 
 Proceedings, which in his Printing, Preaching and Praying, he hath Expressed; 
 as by Examination and Oath is proved against him. Nor were they content to 
 Dispossess him of his Living only, but several times committed him to Prison 
 also. Once more particularly his Confinement was more than usually severe, 
 there being above Fifty Prisoners in the same Room, Fettered in Couples like 
 so many Dogs, and forced to discharge the Necessities of Nature all in a Corner 
 of the same dismal Apartment. Nor did their Malice stop even here; for he 
 was Condemned to be shot to Death; and it was not without some Difficulty that 
 the Order for it was Reversed. At another time, when he was Imprisoned in 
 the Castle of Bristol, his Sentence was, To Remain there Without Fire or Light, 
 or the Allowance of any Friend to Visit him. And to Compleat his Sufferings, 
 All these Hardships, and many more, were Inflicted on him by those veiy 
 Persons who not long before had frequently made large Protestations of 
 extraordinary Love and Kindness to him. When he Obtained his Liberty, he 
 Retired to Wotton-Underedge, in Gloucestershire, and there, after several Years 
 silence, at the Perswasion of Arcli-Bishop Usher, Re-assumed the Exercise of 
 his Ministerial Office; which he continued at King’s-Wood Chappel in that 
 Parish; sometime after which he was Presented to the Living of Tortworth in 
 the same Comity, where he continued till the Restoration; and then, being 
 earnestly Invited by a Letter from the Parishioners of St. Nicholas, subscribed 
 by above One Hundred Hands, he was content to Re-possess himself of that 
 Living, without seeking for any other Preferment; though he could never Boast 
 afterwards of a suitable Return from his Parishioners. At the same time also 
 he was Confirmed in his Prebend, and in 1667, was made Dean of this Church, 
 
 Evans’s Hist, of Bristol, vol. ii., pp. 138, 140. 
 
568 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 on the Promotion of Dr. Glemham to the See of St. Asaph, being then Chaplain 
 to King Charles II., in which Capacity he had also served his Royal Father. 
 On the Death of Dr. Ironside in 1671, he had a Tender made him of the 
 Bishoprick; but he Refused it, and Died April the 21st, 1683, in the 89th Year 
 of his Age; having been Sixty Years a Preacher in Bristol. He was a very 
 Learned Person, generally Esteemed both for That, and his Extraordinary 
 Piety. He had also a good Memory, and great solidity and strength of 
 Judgment; and Recommended the Doctrine which he Preached, as well by the 
 Admirable Example of a Holy and Religious Life, as by Learned and Cogent 
 Arguments.” * 
 
 APPENDIX XXI.— Page 158. 
 
 “ The relations of a woman named Smith, having heard nothing of her for 
 upwards of a year, were induced to make enquiries respecting her in Bristol, 
 whither she had gone to reside. Finding that she had died suddenly upwards 
 of twelve months before, and that the persons, at whose house she had lodged, 
 could give no satisfactory account of her death, nor of the property of which 
 she was known to have been possessed, a suspicion arose, strengthened by the 
 character of the parties, that she had been unfairly dealt with. Under these 
 circumstances, the disinterment of the body was determined upon. This was 
 accordingly done; the body was opened, the intestinal viscera taken out, their 
 condition examined, and a portion of their contents analyzed. In consequence 
 of the discovery of arsenic in the stomach, the investigation proceeded. The 
 purchase of arsenic by the accused, the persons by whom it might have been 
 obtained for her, the druggist from whom it was bought, were next inquired 
 into. Then the circumstances preceding the deceased’s illness, the nature of 
 her food and medicine, the hand from which she received it, and the servants 
 who waited upon her, were ascertained: and finally, the amount of the 
 deceased’s property, the circumstances of the accused before and after the 
 death, and the inducements to commit, and increase of wealth, &c., likely to 
 follow such a murder, were taken into consideration. 
 
 “ The enquiry therefore related to the establishment of four points.—1. The 
 identification of the body. 2. The cause of death. 3. (Assuming it to have 
 been by poison), the person administering the poison. 4. Whether the poison 
 was wilfully administered. 
 
 “The first point was proved by the undertaker who supplied the coffin—by 
 the carpenter who screwed it down—by the sexton, who can tell from appear¬ 
 ances that the grave has never been disturbed—by the nephew of the deceased, 
 and by two of her fellow-lodgers, who speak to the height of her figure, colour 
 of her hair, and marks upon her stockings. 
 
 “ The second point was also proved, by the evidence of Dr. Riley, and Dr. 
 Symonds, physicians, and by Mr. Kelson, surgeon, who recognize effects upon 
 
 Walker’s Sufferings of the Clergy, part. ii., p. 4-5. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 569 
 
 the viscera, which might have been produced by arsenic—by Mr. Herapath, who 
 analysed a small portion of the contents of the stomach, and discovered five 
 grains of sulphuret of arsenic—and again, by the medical men, who stated the 
 quantity present to be sufficient to cause death. 
 
 “To establish the third point, it was proved that an individual had bought 
 sulphuret of arsenic of a druggist who was in evidence, and that Mrs. Wade, 
 the lodging-house keeper, alone administered food to the deceased. This third 
 point was not proved; the arsenic not having been traced from the druggist’s 
 shop into Mrs. Wade’s hands. 
 
 “Upon the last point it was shewn—that Mrs. Wade had cautioned the 
 servant not to taste food after the deceased—that she was singularly anxious, 
 against her apparent interest, to detain the deceased in her lodgings—that the 
 deceased had received £S00 before her death—that the Wades became suddenly 
 rich after that event—and that therefore there were inducements to commit, 
 and appearances likely to follow the commission of such a murder. 
 
 “ Upon these considerations, which were very clearly stated by the coroner, 
 the jury returned a verdict of ‘ Wilful Murder' against Mrs. Burdock, formerly 
 Wade.”* 
 
 Mary Ann Burdock was tried at the Bristol General Assize, April 10th, 11th, 
 and 13th, 1835, and being found guilty of the above crime, that of poisoning 
 Mrs. Clara Ann Smith, was executed at Bristol on Wednesday, April 15th, two 
 days afterwards. 
 
 There are two other appalling murders connected with this parish which may 
 be here mentioned. The first was that of Sir John Dineley Goodere, Bart., by 
 his brother, Captain Samuel Goodere, Matthew Mahoney, and Charles White, 
 committed on board His Majesty’s Ship, the “Ruby,” man-of-war, then lying 
 in King-road. The murderers assembled at the “ White Hart,” an ale-house 
 near the foot of College Green, way-laid and seized their victim in open day, 
 and conveyed him by water to the ship, where they murdered him by 
 strangulation, January 19th, 1740-1. Of this barbarous crime the perpetrators 
 were found guilty, and executed at St. Michael’s Hill gallows, on Wednesday, 
 the 15tli of April following, confessing the fact. 
 
 The next murder referred to was that of Mrs. Frances Ruscombe and her 
 maid-servant, Mary Champncss, otherwise Sweet, which was committed 
 September 28th, 1764. This revolting crime, too, was perpetrated in open day, 
 “ whilst the people in numbers were passing and repassing the door behind 
 which were the bodies, and that within a few yards of the cathedral and during 
 divine service; and yet, from that moment even to this, the whole matter was, 
 and is involved in total darkness, and so will now probably remain to the Day 
 of Judgment.” + The authors of this foul deed have never been discovered. 
 
 West of England Journal, 1835-6, p. 32. 
 t Curiosities of Bristol, p. 78. 
 
570 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 A List of Persons Executed in Bristol since Captain Goodere, in 1741, already 
 mentioned. 
 
 NAME. 
 
 
 WHEN EXECUTED. 
 
 Samuel Goodere i 
 
 1 Murdering Sir John Dineley 
 
 | March 30, 1741 
 
 Matthew Mahoney / 
 
 > Goodere, Bart., brother to the 
 
 Charles White 
 
 ) first criminal 
 
 ( 
 
 Jane Williams 
 
 Murdering her Child 
 
 April 30, 1741 
 
 William Nicholas (a boy) 
 
 Poisoning his Mistress 
 
 April 23, 1748 
 
 Jones and Jackson 
 
 Highway Robbery 
 
 April 23, 1752 
 
 -Scudamore 
 
 Returning from Transportation 
 
 April 23, 1752 
 
 Arnold and Critchley 
 
 Nameless Offence 
 
 May 7, 1753 
 
 -Hobbs 
 
 Murder 
 
 August 24, 1758 
 
 Win. Delan Sheppard 
 
 Nameless Offence 
 
 May 24, 1761 
 
 Patrick Ward 
 
 Shooting the Warner 
 
 October 16, 1761 
 
 William Dawson 
 
 Robbery 
 
 April 16, 1764 
 
 - Slack 
 
 Horse Stealing 
 
 April 16, 1768 
 
 John Faulkner (Drummer) 
 
 Shot on Brandon Hill 
 
 December 10,1771 
 
 Jonathan Brittan 
 
 Forgery 
 
 May 15, 1772 
 
 Isaac Dannett 
 
 Forgery 
 
 April 2, 1774 
 
 Daniel Haynes 
 
 Housebreaking 
 
 Sept. 22, 1775 
 
 Thomas Crewys 
 
 Forgery 
 
 May 15, 1778 
 
 B. Loveday and J. Burke 
 
 Nameless Offence 
 
 October 12, 1781 
 
 Shenkin Protheroe 
 
 Gibbetted on Durdham Down 
 
 March 31, 1783 
 
 George Game 
 
 Hung on Bedminster Down 
 
 March 31, 1783 
 
 William Shuttler 
 
 Housebreaking 
 
 May 23, 1783 
 
 Wm. Williams alias Motley Forgery 
 
 May 23, 1783 
 
 -Randall 
 
 Hung at Totterdown 
 
 May 23, 17S4 
 
 John Collins 
 
 Murder 
 
 April 8, 1785 
 
 Abrose Cook 
 
 Robbery 
 
 October 6, 1786 
 
 Edward Macnamara 
 
 Forgery 
 
 May 7, 1790 
 
 William Hungerford 
 
 Housebreaking 
 
 July 9, 1790 
 
 Robert Hamblington 
 
 Housebreaking 
 
 May 3, 1793 
 
 Benjamin Smith 
 
 Forgery 
 
 April 24, 1795 
 
 Powell, Duggan, and Baber Forgery 
 
 April 26, 1799 
 
 R. Haynes alias Dick Boy Shooting at the Officers 
 
 April 25, 1S00 
 
 Robert Maynard 
 
 Housebreaking 
 
 May 1, 1801 
 
 Duncan McLachlin 
 
 Forgery 
 
 May 1, 1801 
 
 Capt. W. Howie 
 
 Sinking a Vessel 
 
 May 8, 1801 
 
 Maria Davis 
 
 Charlotte Bobbett 
 
 | Murdering Davis’s Child 
 
 | April 2, 1802 
 
 William Badger 
 
 Forgery 
 
 April 30, 1802 
 
 Jesse Minnett 
 
 Horse Stealing 
 
 April 22, 1803 
 
 Hugh M’Quire 
 
 Forging a Seaman’s Order 
 
 April 22, 1803 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 571 
 
 Joseph Tyso 
 William Carter 
 John Horwood 
 Richard Millard 
 William Walker 
 William Clark 
 Thomas Gregory 
 Joseph Kayes 
 Christopher Davis 
 Mary Ann Burdock 
 Sarah Harriet Thomas 
 
 Forgery 
 
 Forgery 
 
 Murder 
 
 Forgery 
 
 Housebreaking 
 
 April 26, 1805 
 April 26, 1816 
 April 13, 1821 
 May 2, 1828 
 April 29, 1831 
 
 A Rioting and Burning the Gaol, 
 ( Bridewell, Bishops’ Palace, 
 
 f Mansion House, and several 
 J houses in Queen Square, &c. 
 Murder by Poison 
 Murder 
 
 J January 27, 1832 
 
 April 15, 1835 
 April 20, 1849 
 
 APPENDIX XXU.-Paye 158. 
 
 “ Of all the marvellous facts which we hear of in this age of wonders, there 
 is, perhaps, nothing more truly fitted to awaken astonishment than the Institu¬ 
 tion for Orphans, founded in 1835, just twenty-five years ago, by the Rev. 
 George Muller.” * 
 
 “On the summit of one of those numerous hills which diversify and adorn 
 the environs of the ancient city of Bristol, stand what are called ‘The New 
 Orphan Houses of Ashley Down. ’ This world-renowned Institution consists of 
 three large buildings, erected for the special use of destitute Orphans by Mr. 
 Muller, one of which is as yet in an unfinished state. Externally considered, 
 they are by no means distinguished for architectural beauty or display, but 
 appear rather to have been erected with a view to economy, utility, and 
 convenience. They are plain, substantial, and well-designed buildings; those 
 already occupied stand rather near together, almost at right angles to each other; 
 the other, as yet unfinished, lies on the other side of the road, almost opposite. 
 
 “ There are at present seven hundred Orphans, without either father or mother, 
 supported and educated in the two first-mentioned houses. The other building 
 is intended for the accommodation of four hundred and fifty more; and will bo 
 opened, it is expected, next year (1862); so that the Institution at present 
 contemplates the feeding, clothing, and education of eleven hundred and fifty 
 Orphans, from the earliest age of infancy till they are tit for active life. Mr. 
 Midler’s care extends to putting out the boys also, as apprentices to some useful 
 trade, when arrived at their fourteenth or fifteenth year. The girls are brought 
 up to housework and nursing, and are placed out to service when about eighteen 
 or nineteen years of age. 
 
 “ Such is a brief sketch of this marvellous Institution, which a local news¬ 
 paper lately styled with truth, ‘ The Bristol Miracle. ’ Since its commencement 
 just a quarter of a century ago, the enormous sum of one hundred and thirty-three 
 
 * Mr. Muller was bom near Halberstadt, in Prussia, in the year 1805. 
 
 s s 2 
 
572 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 thousand Jive hundred and twenty-eight pounds, except a small balance, has been 
 expended upon these 1150 Orphans. The current expenses for the seven 
 hundred Orphans now in the houses, amounted, during the past twelve months, 
 to between severe and eight thousand pounds! And Mr. Miilltr estimates that in 
 another year the annual expenses of the Institution will be twelve or thirteen 
 thousand pounds! 
 
 ‘ ‘ And now comes the miraculous part of this work. Whence come the funds 
 which provide these vast sums? What source furnished the £36,000 which the 
 two buildings already inhabited cost ? Who furnished the £24,000 already 
 expended on, or in Mr. Muller’s hands for the completion of, the third building ? 
 Who furnished the Jive thousand, six thousand, and severe thousand pounds which 
 have been expended on the Orphans during the past three years? Whence, we 
 ask, are the funds of this great Institution derived ? Are there large endowments 
 in land or house property, bequeathed by will, or otherwise given for the 
 support of these Orphan Houses, as in the case of the Universities, and many 
 other old Institutions? or, is the Institution under the distinguished patronage 
 of a number of royal and titled personages ? or is there a large wealthy board 
 of directors—supported by a good list of annual subscribers, who guarantee the 
 maintenance of this noble charity ? 
 
 ‘ ‘ In reply to these natural inquiries, we have to inform the reader that there 
 are no endowments—there are no royal or titled patrons of the Institution— 
 there is no board of directors—no committee of management—no list of annual 
 subscribers. It is carried on by the same individual who originated it. He is, 
 moreover, a poor man, being entirely without any property of his own—and 
 even without any income, except what is voluntaiily contributed for his support. 
 The only means Mr. Muller employs to obtain funds is to entreat the God of the 
 orphan to dispose men to furnish him with money. He never, for a quarter of 
 a century, has been known to appeal to the public, in the usual manner, for 
 support, nor has he ever asked a single individual to help him! What is 
 perhaps still more extraordinary, he never incurs debts. From the very first, it 
 has been a fixed and invariable principle with him, never to take credit for 
 anything. 
 
 ‘ ‘ Such is the mode in which the Institution is carried on ; and by the good 
 hand of God upon him, Mr. Muller has just concluded the twenty-fifth year of 
 its existence. Instead of experiencing any deficiency, any falling off, the funds 
 have every year improved; and last May he had some thousands in hand for 
 the requirements of the ensuing year. 
 
 “ Now it must be granted that all this is very strange—very novel—very 
 startling. An Institution for destitute orphans exists—and has existed for 
 about a quarter of a century, the expenses of which are already upwards of 
 seven thousand a-year; and yet this Institution possesses no endowments—no 
 fixed income—and no subscribers! The only source of support being the 
 free-w ill contributions of those whose hearts God touches! Surely, here is 
 something for even worldly men to wonder at, in an age when all sorts of 
 wonders seem to abound. 
 
UISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 573 
 
 “ To tlie Christian reader there is room for something more than wonder. 
 He is called upon—as he contemplates this work of mercy—to adore the 
 faithfulness of God in thus condescending to hear the prayers of His servant, 
 and His goodness in upholding him so long under the varied trials and 
 difficulties which he has experienced. Nor will he fail at the same time to 
 offer up earnest supplication, that Mr. Midler may still be helped, and be blessed 
 yet more abundantly in his labours of faith and love. 
 
 “ It may be interesting to know that ample provision has been made by Mr. 
 Muller—so far as is practicable—for the future continuance of the Orphan 
 Houses. The whole of the property is vested in the hands of Trustees, and 
 enrolled in Chancery. The deed contains, we believe, minute directions as to 
 what course should be followed by the Trustees in the event of Mr. M idler’s 
 decease. It is well known that Franke’s Institution for Orphan’s in Germany * 
 was carried on, after his death, by his pious son-in-law; and have been con¬ 
 tinued to the present day—a period of more than 150 years. Why may we not 
 hope for a similar blessing to attend the Institution on Ashley Down. ” + 
 
 APPENDIX XXI.— Page 109. 
 
 [The numbers XXI and XXII are accidentally repeated, which, however, will occasion little 
 difficulty to the reader, as the number of the page cannot fail to direct him to a correct under¬ 
 standing of the subject.] 
 
 “ St. Michael’s Church is a specimen of the barbarous combination of Grecian 
 and Gothic architecture by which modern taste has been distinguished. Its 
 exterior is particularly plain, and the windows are in the Gothic or pointed 
 style; the interior is Grecian architecture tastefully ornamented; but the effect 
 of a Gothic window seen through Grecian columns would be ridiculous, if the 
 sanctity of the place did not inspire a better feeling. To procure variety, the 
 sashes which separate the entrance from the body of the church have circular 
 heads. It is surely time that these barbarisms should be universally exploded. 
 Since every species of architecture has its distant characteristics, and to 
 confound them thus in the same building, manifests as gross ignorance as to 
 confound Corinthian with Doric, or Ionic with Composite. 
 
 APPENDIX XXII.— Page 169. 
 
 Mr. Seyer was a native of Bristol, where for many years he was distinguished 
 for his literary attainments and his advancement of learning. He was entered 
 
 * For an account of this Institution, see “Pietas Hallensis: Or a publick 
 Demonstration of the Footsteps of a Divine Being yet in the World: in an 
 Historical Narration of the Orphan House, And other charitable Institutions 
 at Glaucha near Hall in Saxony, By Augustus Hermannus Franck,” in the 
 City Library. 
 
 t Tayler’s Ashley Down; or, Living Faith in a Living God. Memorials of 
 the New Orphan Houses, &c., pp. 3-7, and Preface. 
 
 J Evans’s Hist, of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 235. 
 
574 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 as a scholar of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, in 1774, and graduated B.A., 
 1778, and M.A., 1781. On leaving college he fixed his residence at Bristol, 
 and in the Boyal Fort, St. Michael’s Hill, for many years he conducted a large 
 school, from whence some of the sons of the citizens, as well as many belonging 
 to families in the West of England, were instructed. In 1810 he retired from 
 the academy he had so long and successfully conducted, into private life, with 
 such a competent reward for his labours as enabled him to spend the residue of 
 his days in the pursuits in which he most delighted—classical literature, 
 together with the antiquities, laws, and constitution of his country generally; 
 and the history, institutions, and municipal government of his native city. 
 The only church preferment he enjoyed was the small living of Horfield, to 
 which he was presented, in 1813, by Bishop Mansel, and subsequently to the 
 rectory of Felton; but he resigned the former on the decline of his health, in 
 1S2S, and died, after a very long illness, August 25th, 1831. 
 
 In 1812 Mr. Seyer published, in a quarto volume, “ The Charters and Letters 
 Patent granted by the Kings and Queens of England to the town and city of 
 Bristol, newly translated, and accompanied by the original Latin,” in the 
 preface of which he first announced an “intended History of Bristol,” the 
 publication of which he commenced, in the year 1821, with the first part of a 
 first volume of what he entitled, “Memoirs, Historical and Topographical, of 
 Bristol and its Neighbourhood, from the earliest period down to the present 
 time. ” This portion of his intended history he completed in three more parts, 
 making two thick quarto volumes, illustrated with numerous plates; it is, 
 however, as much a chronological work relating to English historical matters 
 generally, as it now appears, as it is a history and topography of Bristol in 
 particular; two more volumes, it is believed, being contemplated by Mr. Seyer, 
 to make it what its title implies, a “History of Bristol;” which seems to have 
 been relinquished on account of the expence of bringing out publications of this 
 kind, and a fear again to incur the risk and anxiety he had already encountered 
 in the undertaking. 
 
 Mr. Seyer was the author also of a popular Latin Grammar, which has gone 
 through several editions. He translated likewise into English verse the Latin 
 Poem of Vida, on Chess; and in 1808 he published “Latinum Redivivum; or, a 
 treatise on the modem use of the Latin language, and the prevalence of the 
 French; to which is added a specimen of the Latin language, accommodated to 
 modern use.” He also published, by request of the Mayor and Corporation of 
 Bristol, an Assize Sermon, preached before Sir Robert Gifford, the Recorder. 
 His other literary productions are, a Treatise on the Syntax of the Latin Verb ; 
 Principles of Christianity, often reprinted; and Clerical Non-residence. “He 
 was one of the original members of the Bristol Library Society, and for thirty 
 years was annually elected its Vice-President. As a member of a well-known 
 club of literary gentlemen, who for many years during the winter months 
 assembled by the sound of the mail horn at the Bush Tavern, he is not yet 
 forgotten. He was noted for the originality and extensiveness of his information 
 
HISTOEY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 5 75 
 
 and the clearness and acuteness which he exhibited upon every subject which 
 came under discussion. In his character there was a high-toned independence 
 of mind, an upright demeanour, and a sincere attachment to his profession.”* 
 Mr. Seyer was buried at Shirehampton. 
 
 APPENDIX XXIII.— Page 170. 
 
 “ I want your assistance in a business in which I am sure it will interest you 
 to give it. A youth of Bristol, by name William Eoberts, died of consumption 
 about two years ago, at the age of nineteen. He was employed in a bank, 
 and his salary, £70 a-year (I believe), was materially useful in assisting towards 
 the support of his father and mother, and a grandmother, and one only sister. 
 The family had known better days, (but) one calamity following another, has 
 reduced them very greatly. Yet still there remains that feeling which, if I 
 call it pride, it is only for want of a better word to express something noble in 
 its nature. William was a youth of great genius, and a few days before liis 
 death he bequeathed his poems in trust to his two intimate friends to be 
 published for the benefit of his sister, that being all he had to bequeath, and 
 his passionate desire (like that of Chatterton) was to provide for her. You 
 must remember that at that time he did not foresee the subsequent distresses of 
 his father and mother. These friends were a young physician of the name of 
 Hogg, settled somewhere near London, and James, a banker of Birmingham, 
 an acquaintance of mine James lias arranged the poems and letters of the 
 poor fellow for the press, and will draw up a biographical memoir. He has 
 consulted me upon the subject, and the plain statement which I have here made 
 of the circumstances has interested me very deeply. My opinion is that great 
 things might have been done by William Eoberts; that every one will 
 acknowledge this ; but that his Eemains will not obtain a general sale. Though 
 he is most exemplary in all his duties, and, as far as I can discover, absolutely 
 without a spot or blemish upon his character, and a regular and sincere 
 churchman, there is nothing of that kind of piety in his writings to which the 
 Eemains are mostly indebted for their popularity.” This, it was said, would 
 hinder the sale. 
 
 “ My hope is that such a sum may be raised as will be sufficient to place 
 Eliza Eoberts in a situation respectably to support herself and her parents. I 
 do not yet know what extent the publication will run to, but as soon as this is 
 settled, I will beg you to beg subscriptions. This whole accoimt is written with 
 such a cautious fear of saying too much, that I fear I have said too little, and 
 may unwittingly have led you to think slightingly of what poor William 
 Eoberts has left behind him. If I have done this I have done wrong, for 
 certainly he was a youth of great genius and most uncommon promise, which 
 it is my firm belief, founded upon the purity of his life and principles and the 
 
 Annual Biography. 
 
576 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 rectitude of his feelings, that he would amply have fulfilled, if it had not 
 pleased God to remove him so early from this sphere of existence.” * 
 
 APPENDIX XXIV.— Page 199. 
 
 “ Mother Pugsley’s Well-field, in the S.E. portion of which stood Priors’ Hill 
 Fort, is associated with the most delightful portion of many a Bristolian’s 
 existence; hut we believe that few are acquainted with the history of the lady 
 from whom it derived the name. That and other surrounding land was the 
 property of a young man, recently married (before the Civil War broke out), 
 named Pugsley, who held a command under Prince Rupert during the siege (of 
 Bristol in 1645). He received his death by a shot fired from the redoubt on 
 Montpelier, and fell in or near a ditch where now stands a wall, the boundary 
 of the gardens on the declivity of Nine-tree-Hill, a continuation of the same 
 field in its descent towards Stokes’-Croft. After the surrender of the city, he 
 was buried with military honours, beneath the turf stained with his blood. A 
 monumental tablet in the former wall marked the spot. His widow, a young 
 and beautiful woman, resisted every importunity to change her forlorn condition; 
 wearing mourning habiliments till the day of her death, which was not until 
 she had passed eighty years of age. We find the manner of her funeral thus 
 recorded, in a M.S. originally the property of a contemporary family of the 
 Society of Friends, named Farnham, who resided in Castle Street:— 
 
 “ ‘ 1700, August 4th, an old woman of the name of-Pugsley died, and 
 
 desired to be buried in the following manner : to be wound up in her wedding- 
 sheet, having on her wedding-shift also, and be carried on a bier to the field 
 adjoining unto the ground commonly called the Nine Trees (by reason of such a 
 number of elms there planted), and two maids should go before the corpse with 
 herbs, and strew them as they went; and that the bells of St. Nicholas church 
 should ring as her body was carried under the gate. And she further ordered 
 that a fiddler should play before the corpse. All which was punctually 
 performed, to the a dmir ation and in the view of at least ten thousand spectators. 
 She had no coffin.’ 
 
 “Elsewhere we learn that ‘ Gammer Pugsley’ bequeathed money for a six¬ 
 penny loaf and a ninepenny loaf at Easter, and a twopenny loaf on Twelfth Day, 
 to each of the sixteen women inhabiting St. Nicholas’ Almshouse, 
 
 “About twenty-eight years since, the then proprietor of the field, Mr. 
 Thomas Edwards Freeman, sold it to some building speculators, who dug clay, 
 erected a brick-kiln (now, 1824, used as a cow-house), and sunk the foundation 
 of several houses, part of the plan of an immense crescent; but three years of 
 possession failing to produce also completion of the contract, occupation was 
 resumed, and the turf restored to its original verdure. 
 
 Life and Correspondence of Robert Southey, vol. iii., p. 279. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 577 
 
 “ It is in contemplation to rail in the spring as formerly, enlarge the basins, 
 and. render the water more available for the use of the inhabitants of Kingsdown 
 in dry seasons. By crowning the fountain with a rustic dome, which should 
 bear on its brow an inscription 
 
 To ever-blooming Connubial Affection, 
 
 Dame Pugsley’s troubled Spirit of the Spring might be appeased, and the 
 verdant scene of thousands of happy hours of childhood would become still more 
 interesting to the matured spectator.” * 
 
 Since the above was written, “Mother rugsley’s Field” has been covered 
 with buildings, and the spring of water referred to, which for about two 
 centuries was daily visited by persons afflicted with diseased eyes, is inclosed 
 in 'the garden of “ Spring Villa,” and is no longer accessible to the public. 
 “ Tradition tells us that she (Dame Pugsley) spent much of her life at the 
 fountain, and when there came those whose disorders needed the healing virtues 
 of the water, she was there like a ministering angel to assist or advise them. 
 It is said, too, that she was extremely fond of children, and very large was the 
 juvenile circle who regarded her with special kindliness. And many a one in 
 after life could tell some little incident which gave them pleasure, some gift of 
 sweatmeats, or some fond embrace, or some loving words. And it is these 
 characteristics of the good woman more perhaps than anything else, that made 
 the spring so famous; for it was not the people of Bristol alone that believed in 
 the healing virtues of the magic ‘ eye water,’ but many who came great 
 distances declared that they derived great benefit from its use.” + Dame 
 Pugsley died August 4th, 1700. 
 
 “A few weeks since (October, 1835), some labourers employed in cutting a 
 new road, in what is called ‘Mother Pugsley’s Field,’ directly opposite to the 
 north wing of the last house in Somerset Street, discovered a considerable 
 number of leaden bullets, slugs, and tobacco-pipe bowls. The bullets were 
 of twelve to the pound, some flattened, having been fired, and others unused. 
 The bowls belonged to a kind of pipe called, from its resemblance to the head 
 and bill of that bird, the ‘ woodcock’s-head pipe.’ The bowls are small, thick, 
 and globular; and round their margin is a narrow milled ring. The shanks have 
 been broken off close, but their axis has more nearly coincided with the axis of 
 the bowl than is now usual. 
 
 “ The size of the balls, fashion of the pipes, quantity of both, and the place 
 in which they were found, may be considered as establishing the site of the 
 ‘Prior’s Hill Redoubt’ beyond dispute.” J This redoubt was the scene of many 
 fierce skirmishes, and after having been battered from the adjacent hill 
 (Montpelier) by Fairfax and Cromwell in person, was finally taken by storm, 
 
 * Evans’s Chronological Outline, pp. 201-2. 
 t Curiosities of Bristol, p. 9. 
 
 J West of England Journal, p. 158. 
 
 T T 
 
578 
 
 ' HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 after holding out with great obstinacy for nearly three hours, playing fiercely 
 with round and case shot, from four pieces of cannon, for two hours after the line 
 was entered. 
 
 APPENDIX XXV.— Page 204. 
 
 It is very uncertain who this man was, and the same doubt seems to relate 
 to J. Kemys, founder of the other chantry in this church before mentioned. 
 11 Roger Kemys, a lunatick, held a tenement (in St. George’s), called Girdelars, 
 21. E. 4.”—“ He died seized of Oldbury (a tithing in the parish of Thombury), 
 21. E. 4. Hugh Kemys and John Kemys levied a fine of the manor of Oldbury 
 to William George, and William Overton, 4. E. G.” In the south aisle of 
 Frampton Cotterell Church are memorials to the memory of several of the 
 Kemys family, with their arms—Vert, on a chevron, argent, three pheons 
 heads’ sable.* 
 
 APPENDIX XXVI.— Page 216. 
 
 John Esterfield was one of the executors to the will of John Foster. + He 
 was a man of integrity and virtue; not so his colleague in the trust, John 
 Walshe, who, about twelve years after Foster’s death, unknown to Esterfield, 
 sold the lands in Gloucestershire, which were left for the support of his 
 almshouse, and appropriated the proceeds to his own benefit. On discovering 
 the misconduct of Walshe, Esterfield, to his honour, made good the defalcation 
 out of his own estate, so that the charity, in the end, lost nothing by the 
 dishonesty of the former. 
 
 Porter’s friend and executor was bailiff of Bristol in 1471, sheriff in 1482, 
 mayor in 1487 and 1494, and member of Parliament in 1485 and 1487. He 
 was twice married, but only the first name of his wives is known; and by 
 them he had three sons, namely, John, a clergyman, Henry, and a second 
 John. When mayor in 1487, he, with the sheriffs and bailiffs, was summoned 
 before the king, when they conveyed to London with them two Irishmen of 
 Waterford, whom they had imprisoned for bringing counterfeit money into 
 England. 
 
 John Esterfield was buried in St. Peter’s Church, beneath a large flat stone, 
 in which was inserted a brass, which has disappeared; on this were figures of 
 himself and his two wives, and an inscription in Latin, setting forth that 
 ‘ ‘ Beneath this marble is entombed the body of the illustrious J ohn Esterfield, 
 merchant, and twice Mayor of this town, and alderman also, together with the 
 remains of Alicia, a learned woman, and of Matilda, his wives.” 
 
 APPENDIX XXVII .—Page 224. 
 
 Of this family was Thomas Norton, who will ever be remembered for the 
 energy with which he followed the mysterious but vain pursuits of alchemy. 
 
 Rudder’s Gloucestershire. 
 
 + Ante, p. 47. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 579 
 
 He was a native of Bristol, and was probably born at the family mansion in St. 
 Peter’s Churchyard; his master in the subtle art being Sir George Ripley, an 
 ecclesiastic, to which profession Norton also belonged. Ripley was canon of 
 Bridlington, in Yorkshire, who wrote “The Compound of Alchymie,” which 
 he finished as follows:— 
 
 “ Thus here the Tract of Alchimy doth end, 
 
 Whych was by George Ripley, Chanon, pen’d; 
 
 It was Compos’d, Writt, and Sign’d his owne, 
 
 In Anno twice Seav’n hundred seav’nty one : 
 
 Reader! Assist him, make it thy desire, 
 
 That after Lyfe he may have gentle Fire.” 
 
 Norton’s “modesty embraced a middle way betwixt concealing and revealing 
 his name, proper for so great a Professor in Chymistry as he was, that his very 
 name must from his Book be mysteriously extracted. He was scarce 28 years of 
 age, when in forty days he learned the perfection of Chymistry.” * 
 
 He was author of the following works :— 
 
 “Alchimke epitomen. Lib. 1. Ad lionorem Dei, in tribus personis. De 
 transmntatione metallorum. Lib. 1. Et alia quaedii. Claruit anno gratise in 
 Christo revelat® 1477- Sub Edvaurdo cuis nominis quarto Anglorum rege.” + 
 Norton tells us, that when his book (Ordinall) was written, it was closed with 
 the following lines 
 
 “All that have pleasure in this Boke to reade, 
 
 Pray for my Soule, and for all both Quicke and deade. 
 
 In this yeare of Christ One thousand foure Hundred seaventy and seaven, 
 This Warke was begun, Honour to God in Heaven.” 
 
 “Pit’s and others say, that he (Norton) undid himself, and all his friends 
 who trusted him with their money, living and dying very poor about 1477.” + 
 “ In the time of Henry VIII. there flourished Nyne Brothers of the family of 
 the Norton’s and all Knights, one of them (viz.) Sir Sampson Norton, Master of 
 the Ordnance to the said King, (an Office of greate Honour, and not usually 
 confer’d but upon Men very eminent) lyes buried in Fulham Church nere 
 London, whose Tombe was adorned with several Hermeticke, Hieroglyphicall 
 paintings, which have lately perisht by the Ignorant zeale of those that 
 understood them not. 
 
 “ The Epitaph this. 
 
 “Of your cheritie pray for the Soule of Sir Sampson Norton, Knight, 
 late Master of the Ordinance of warre, with King Henry the 8th. 
 and for the Soule of Dame Elizabeth hys wyff. Whych Sir Sampson 
 deceassyd the eyglith day of February one thousand and five hundred 
 and seventeen.” 
 
 * Fuller’s Worthies. + Bale, p. 67. 
 
 £ Fuller’s Worthies. 
 
 T T 2 
 
580 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 APPENDIX XXVIII.— Page 226. 
 
 The gaol here mentioned is situated in the parish of Bedminster, in the 
 bounds of the borough, but not within the limits of the city of Bristol. The 
 foundation-stone of this spacious and well-constructed building was laid in 1816, 
 and the structure was completed in August, 1820; and on the 25th day of that 
 month, that vile, moral, and physical pest-house, old Newgate, with its 
 miserable cells almost suspended over the city ditch, was evacuated, and its 
 occupants were transferred to the new building, where there is air, light, space, 
 and decency, for those who have the misfortune to be debarred, for a time, 
 from the privilege of freedom. 
 
 Fronting the river is the lodge of entrance, over which criminals are executed. 
 In the centre of the whole building is the house of the governor, who has an 
 unrestricted Anew over the prison yards without the necessity of quitting his 
 apartment to obtain it. 
 
 By the exertions of the governor, a chapel for the accommodation of the 
 inmates of the prison has been erected, by the productive labour of the 
 prisoners themselves, and therefore free of cost to the city; its value being 
 estimated at £3,500. An organ has also been provided by the governor, at an 
 expense of £350. On a marble tablet at the entrance to the chapel is inscribed:— 
 
 “ This chapel was designed and built in the year of our Lord 
 one thousand eight hundred and fifty five, 
 by the governor, 
 
 James Anthony Gardner, 
 who, under the sanction of the visiting justices, 
 erected the same by the labor of the prisoners, and paid the 
 whole expense of the building by the proceeds of their 
 industry. 
 
 Psalm xc., v. 17. 
 
 ‘ Prosper thou the work of our hands upon us, O prosper 
 thou our handy work. ’ ” 
 
 The expense of the erection of the gaol itself was defrayed by a rate levied 
 upon the inhabitants of the city, and cost about £60,000, 
 
 APPENDIX XXIX.— Page 230. 
 
 Since the renovation of the Cathedral was commenced, the subject of 
 restoring the brass eagle, now in the Church of St. Mary-le-Port, to its original 
 place in the former building, has been seriously contemplated; and overtures 
 have been made to the rector and churchwardens, to effect that object, 
 but to no purpose; the latter having decided, that by removing the present 
 reading desk in their church, and substituting the eagle in its room, they shall 
 gain additional pew accommodation, and at the same time better carry out the 
 wishes of the donor, that the brass lectern should remain in the church for ever. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 581 
 
 APPENDIX XXX.— Page, 231. 
 
 In the vestry of Bridge Street Chapel hangs, framed and glazed, the very 
 license referred to; it is as follows:— 
 
 “ Charles R. 
 
 “Charles, by the Grace of God, King of England, Scotland, France, and 
 Ireland, Defender of the Faith, &c., to all Mayors, Bailiffs, Constables, and 
 other our Officers and Ministers, civil and military, whom it may concern, 
 greeting: 
 
 “In pursuance of our Declaration, on the 15th of March, 1G71-2, we do 
 permit and licence John Weeks, of the Presbyterian persuasion, to be a 
 Teacher of the Congregation allowed by us, in a room or rooms in the house of 
 John Lloyd, lying on St. James’s Back, in the city of Bristol, for the use of such 
 as do not conform to the Church of England, who are of the persuasion 
 commonly called Presbyterians; with further licence and permission to him, 
 the said John Weeks, to teach in any place licenced and allowed by us, 
 according to our Declaration. 
 
 “ Given at our Court at Whitehall, the 9th day of April, 1G72. 
 
 “ John Weeks, Teacher.” “Arlington.” 
 
 APPENDIX XXXI.—Page 243. 
 
 This noble was the eldest son and successor of Robert, Earl of Gloucester, of 
 whom honourable mention has been made in connection with the Priory and 
 Church of St. James. He appears to have been much more distinguished by 
 his zeal for the church than for his military achievements; for, with the 
 exception of his being governor of Bristol Castle, nothing warlike is recorded of 
 him, save that on his retiring to Cardiff Castle, his favourite residence, he was 
 greatly annoyed by a Welsh adventurer, named Yvor, whose property he seems 
 to have unlawfully secured for his own private advantage, and by whom he was 
 besieged in his own castle, and compelled to restore that which he had 
 unrighteously added to his former possessions. Cardiff' Castle was, like other 
 fortresses at that time, a receptacle of rapine, and many of these structures 
 were destroyed on that account by order of King Henry II. The Earl of 
 Gloucester, whose munificence to monasteries and religious establishments 
 generally, seems to have constituted his chief, if not only recommendation to 
 the gratitude of posterity, died November 23rd, 1183, and “ He willed to be 
 buried with his father at the Priory of St. James, but was privily conveyed by 
 night to Keynsham,” where he had founded a monastery of Black Canons 
 about the year 1170, which he dedicated to the Virgin Mary, St. Peter, and 
 St. Paul. 
 
 APPENDIX XXXH .—Page 253. 
 
 The ancestor of this family was Huldrick the Torn, uncle of Rollo, Duke of 
 Normandy, from whom sprimg the Houses of Thorn, ennobled as Toni, the 
 standard bearer, Tain and Thany, Gresley’s, Stafford, Mowbray, D’Abigny, 
 
582 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 Paulet, Duke of Bolton, the Earls of Chester, Cumberland, Arundel, and 
 Sussex, the Pincherna’s or Butler’s, &c., &c., &c. Roger founded the Abbey of 
 St. Peter, at Conches, near Evreux, in France. Kalph, his son, who was 
 standard bearer to the Duke of Normandy, married Alice Fitzosbome, daughter 
 of William Fitzosborne, Earl of Hereford, who was related to both William the 
 Norman and Edward the Confessor. Balph, Lord Thorn (Thorny or Toenio), 
 married Judith, daughter of Waltheof, the great Saxon Earl of Huntingdon, 
 &c., &c., and niece to William the Conqueror; and he had with her, Waltham¬ 
 stow, in Essex, and Kirtling, in Cambridgeshire. The executors of their 
 descendant, Bobert Thorn, in 1535, rebuilt, in part, Walthamstow Church; in 
 a window of which structure is inscribed as follows:—“ Christen people, praye 
 for the sowle of Bobert Thorn, citizen of London, with whose goodys thys syde 
 of thys Churche was newe edyfyd and fynyshed in the year of our Lord 1535.” 
 He died in 1532, and was buried in the Church of St. Christopher, Threadneedle 
 Street, London, aged 40 years; and is said, by Mr. Barrett, to have died a 
 bachelor,* which is not correct, as he married Bridget Mill, of Hampden, one 
 of whose f amil y was mayor of Beading, but died childless. John Thom, who 
 founded the Grammar School at Beading, was abbot there from 1446 to 1485, 
 and was either brother or cousin to Bobert Thorn, of St. Alban’s, the grand¬ 
 father of Sir Bobert Thorn. The elder Bobert is mentioned as one of “ten 
 venerable and discreet men, appointed a Commission, by the Abbot of St. 
 Alban’s, to inquire into the Penury and Poverty then existing; and to 
 endeavour to remedy the same in the year 1417.”+ A second John Thom 
 became Abbot of Beading, and died in 1519; he was brother to Sir Bobert. 
 
 The Thoms were largely engaged in maritime affairs; the same restless 
 spirit which characterized their ancestors predominated, too, in the Bristol 
 merchants of the same name, when they fitted out their ships and went with 
 Cabot to discover the north-west passage. They were also large clothiers— a 
 business which they continued to cultivate as late as 1665, when George Thorn, 
 mayor of Beading, who carried on the business at that place, died. Bobert 
 Thorn, senior, who was M.P. for Bristol in 1523, had a similar business at 
 London and Bristol; his elder brother, James, at Ipswich and Colchester; and 
 his fourth brother, William, at Beading. The above-named Bobert married 
 into the Witheypole family, who were largely concerned in the same business. 
 
 The arms of the De Spineto or Thom family, as given in the Harleian 
 Manuscripts, with Bobert Thorn’s pedigree, are—Azure, a fess between 3 lions 
 passant gardant or. Those used quarterly with the above, as the particular 
 coat of Bobert Thorn,+ the arctic navigator, are—Argent, a fesse nebulee sable, 
 in chief a lion passant azure, between 2 lozenges gules, in base a lozenge of the 
 
 * Hist, of Bristol, p. 650. + Eymer’s Fcedera, vol. ix., p. 500. 
 
 J Barrett says he “was sheriff (of Bristol) in 1503,” yet omits all mention 
 of his name in his list of city officials until 1514, when he states he was mayor. 
 See Hist, of Bristol, pp. 177, 683, 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 583 
 
 last. Crest. — A cock’s head couped or, with a red rose (or three roses) in the 
 beak. Motto.—Ad Gloriam per Spinas. 
 
 For the above particulars I am indebted to the kindness of William Thom, 
 Esq., M.D., of Harrow Road, London, who is descended from William, the 
 youngest brother of Robert Thorn, and father of Robert and Nicholas named 
 in the text. 
 
 APPENDIX XXXIII.— Page 256. 
 
 In the north aisle of this church is a board upon which is inscribed the 
 following:— 
 
 “ Memorand. That upon the 27 tl1 of November 1703 between 2 and 3 of the 
 Clock in the morning, arose a very Tempestuous Wind or Hurricane, that blew 
 down 3 of the Pinnacles from off the top of the Tower; which fell upon great 
 part of ® South Isle and part of the middle Isle, of this Church, and broke in 
 pieces many of £ Pews and glass Windowes, & by the Providence of God not 
 one Man, Woman, or Child, Perished in this Storm. The Church was rebuilt by 
 the 4th of May 1704. Mi’. David Potter, Mr. Tho: Birkin, Church Wardens.” 
 
 In this rebuilding of the church, the tower was restored to all its original 
 beauty. In the course of time the pinnacles thus again raised, fell into decay, 
 which having been ascertained in 1S22, all idea of again effecting a complete 
 renovation of them was abandoned, and the beautiful angular lattice-work 
 attached to each, and resting upon gurgoyles at the corners of the tower, were 
 demolished, being cut away with a mason’s common handsaw! “ This 
 
 mutilation was effected during the Cliurchwardenship of James Gillet, Cutler, 
 and Thomas Stone, Tea Dealer.”* Before this act of Vandalism was perpe¬ 
 trated, the effect of this structure was very striking and beautiful, and almost 
 unique; but “the true admirers of the most beautiful, because the most graceful 
 tower in England, have now to contemplate it as ‘ the Sun shorn of his 
 beams !’”+ At present (April, 1861) the whole of the pinnacles and latticed 
 battlements have been removed, preparatory to their complete renovation. 
 
 APPENDIX XXXIV. —Page 262. 
 
 “ On Friday last died, in the 53d. year of his age, the Rev. Mr. Catcott, Vicar 
 of Temple, in this city, and chaplain to the Earl of Buchan. His character as 
 a minister was consistently pious, as a man, uniformly good. In the discharge 
 of his public functions he was remarkably regular and punctual; but he did not 
 rest in the exterior of devotion, nor did he ever think that the duties of a 
 Christian minister were confined to the narrow limits of public instruction. His 
 zeal in the cause of God was accompanied with the most fervent charity for his 
 
 * Bristol Memorialist, p. 300. 
 t Dallaway’s Ancient Church Architecture, p. 17. 
 
584 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 fellow-creatures ; and while he earnestly preached the doctrines of Christianity, 
 his practice illustrated his preaching, and his works evidenced his Faith. His 
 unwearied attention to the sick, his warm benevolence to the poor, will make 
 his loss severely felt, and his name to be had in lasting remembrance. 
 
 “We hear he has (in grateful return for the obligations he was under to his 
 patrons, the Corporation of this city) bequeathed for the use and benefit of the 
 public, to be preserved in the City Library, all his valuable Museum, consisting 
 of a most well-chosen collection of Coins, Shells, Fossils, and other natural 
 curiosities, with a great number of manuscripts, and nearly 200 volumes of his 
 books on the subject of natural history; estimated worth about one thousand 
 pounds.” * This estimate of his gift is, I believe, greatly exaggerated. I am 
 not aware of the City Library ever possessing any such extensive and valuable 
 donation made to it by this gentleman. In his will he * ‘ bequeaths to the Mayor 
 Burgesses and Commonalty of the City of Bristol for the time being for ever, 
 to be deposited and kept in their Library-Room, situate in King Street, in the 
 said City,—all his Fossils and natural Shells, together with the Cabinet and 
 Drawers containing them;—also the Manuscript Catalogue of his Fossils, and all 
 his M.S. Journals and Papers, relating to the Observations he had made on the 
 earth;—Also his two Sets of Mr. Hutchinson’s Works and all his Hutchinsonian 
 Miscellanies, being YIII Volumes in 4to, XLYI Volumes in 8vo, and X Volumes 
 in 12mo;—also all his 4to, 8vo, and 12mo Books on the subject of Fossils, or any 
 way relating to the natural history of the Earth ;—also the following folio volumes, 
 Norton’s Natural History of Northamptonshire, Borlase’s History of Cornwall, 
 Johnson’s Hist: Nat: Animal, Herbarium diluiranum, Shaw’s Travels and 
 Supplement, and Guy's Museum.” This was the extent of Mr. Catcott’s 
 donation to the City Library. Of the books mentioned, there are now on the 
 shelves of the institution one hundred and twenty-two volumes of all the sizes 
 named above, of which 48 consist of controversial theology relating to the 
 peculiar tenets held by William Hutchinson and his followers, and which will 
 probably remain useless in their places, with the rest of his books, until by 
 natural decay they fall to pieces, for I am not aware that any single volume has 
 ever been consulted since I have had the honour of being its custodian. The 
 learned and ingenious William Whiston, who lectured at Bristol in 1726, says of 
 Mr. Catcott, ‘ ‘ Whatever unhappy bias made him a proselyte, to my real grief 
 and surprise, to that wild Hebrew enthusiast, Mr. Hutchinson, (he was) one of 
 the best scholars, and of as sober a mind as any of my auditors or friends at 
 Bristol.” 
 
 APPENDIX XXXV.—Page 269. 
 
 Robert Redwood appears to have been an occasional resident in the parish of 
 St. Leonard, in which the City Library is situated; and it is most likely that 
 the house which he occupied was that which, in his gift to the city, is called 
 
 Bristol Gazette, June 24th, 1779. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 585 
 
 his lodge, or private dwelling; it was, therefore, a sort of provincial town-house, 
 his country residence being at Congresbury. There were many persons of the 
 name of Redwood connected with the parish of St. Peter in this city, but 
 whether they belonged to the same family as the subject of these remarks, is 
 uncertain. The entries of the Redwood’s, in the parish registers of St. Peter’s, 
 extend from 1657 to 1729; but there does not occur one entry of the name of 
 Robert. All that seems to be known of him is that “he was a private 
 gentleman of good property;” but when, or where he was born, is uncertain. 
 He married first Ann, the widow of John Carr, founder of Queen Elizabeth 
 Hospital, who died in November, 1606, and was buried in St. Werburgh’s 
 Church. His second wife was also a widow, but except that her first name was 
 Catherine, she is wholly unknown. Robert Redwood died in 1630, his will 
 being dated June 12th in that year, and he was buried in St. Werburgh’s 
 Church, hut the place where he was interred is uncertain, as there is no 
 memorial of him remaining in that edifice. His best monument, however, is 
 the City Library; in some of the volumes there deposited by himself is still to 
 be seen, in his own bold and intelligible handwriting, “ Legatum Roberti 
 Redwood kuius Bibliothecae Fundatoris 1630; ” in English, “From the Library 
 of Robert Redwood the Founder.” 
 
 APPENDIX XXXVI.—Pape 269. 
 
 The donor of the books referred to, Dr. Tobias Mathew, Archbishop of 
 York, was a native of Bristol, having been born, in 1546, on Bristol Bridge, in 
 the parish of St. Thomas, where his father, John Mathew, carried on business 
 as a linen draper and silk mercer. The ancestors of the archbishop, on both 
 sides, were descended from respectable Welsh families; Margaret, the daughter 
 and co-heir of Edmond Mathew, marrying John Williams, Receiver, of 
 Flintshire, in the reign of King Edward IV., who took the name and arms of 
 Mathew. Their son was Sir George Mathew, Knt., whose grandson was the 
 archbishop. * 
 
 The archbishop lived, beloved and respected, to a great age, and at his 
 death, at Cawood Castle, was interred in the Lady Chapel of York Cathedral; 
 a costly monument was erected to his memory, according to the fashion of the 
 time, in the Debased English, or Anglo-Italian style of architecture, which 
 prevailed so much in the reign of Queen Elizabeth; with an effigy of the 
 deceased, stiff and formal in attitude, and extended, at length, beneath an 
 elaborated pediment. On the tomb was a long Latin inscription, which, 
 translated, is as follows :— 
 
 * Gwilliam Abr., vol. i., pp. 406-7. Vincent’s Collections, 136, 665, in Coll. 
 Arm. The late Father Mathew, the great apostle of the Temperance cause, 
 and the present Matthew Mathew, the publisher of the Bristol Directory, both 
 descended from the same family. 
 
 v v 
 
586 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 “ Tobias Mathew, 
 
 descended from the illustrious family of the Mathew's in Wales, was bom at 
 Bristol and educated at Oxford. When he had united the knowledge of 
 Theology to that of Polite Literature, he immediately entered upon the public 
 Services' of the Church, and became equally celebrated in the City, the Country, 
 the College, and the Palace. Nor will Greece hereafter have more to boast of 
 her Chrysostom, than England of her Mathew. He was immediately known to 
 Queen Elizabeth, and was in great esteem with that princess. There was no 
 preacher that she heard with more pleasure, or commended with more warmth. 
 In the 2Sth year of his age he was made head of the College of St. John Baptist, 
 Oxford, and at the same time archdeacon in the church of Wells, and Canon of 
 Christ Church, to the deanery of which he was soon after promoted. At 
 length, having enjoyed all the honours of the University, he was made dean of 
 Durham. After a few years the deanery became too small a dignity for his 
 growing reputation, and such was the Queen’s favour towards him, that he was 
 created Bishop of Durham.—When he had presided about twelve years in this 
 See, he was translated by King James to the Archbishopric of York.—So great 
 a Genius, whatever course it took, cordd not stop short of the highest attain¬ 
 ments in it.—These were the steps by which he arrived at so elevated a station. 
 The virtues with which he adorned it, this monument cannot contain, they 
 exceed the province of the sculptor. History alone can do them justice. 
 Among other things his singular hospitality ought to be recorded. His house 
 was a perpetual scene of entertainment for the rich, and of charity for the poor. 
 It was a singular felicity to this See, that though he was in his 60th year when 
 he took possession of it, he held it for twenty-two years. That rich vein of 
 eloquence that he possessed was not impoverished even in extreme old age.— 
 After he if as 70 years old there was no one that preached more constantly, 
 more successfully, or more acceptably. When his strength became unequal to 
 these public services he immediately began to languish, as if he had lived by 
 that breath alone, which he spent in preaching the Word of God, and was 
 unwilling to survive these studies and these labours. Having lived a long, 
 excellent, and happy life, on the 29th of March, 1628, and in the 83d year of 
 his ac'e, he calmly departed out of it.—The body which he has put off, brought 
 hither in the midst of universal lamentation and regret, is waiting for the 
 Coming of Christ and the Return of the Soul.—Passenger, do not think that he 
 derives any honour from this stately Marble; what is here deposited is nobler 
 than the noblest Monument. To this Marble Sepulchre, and to this sacred 
 Temple, the Name of Mathew is a Monument that will survive the strongest 
 Fabric and the most durable Materials.” 
 
 Adjacent to that of the archbishop was also a monument to the memory of 
 his lady, thus inscribed 
 
 “ Frances Mathew, first married to Matthew Parker, son to Matthew Parker, 
 Archbishop of Canterbury; afterwards to Tobie Mathew, that famous Arch¬ 
 bishop of this See: She was a woman of exemplary wisdom, gravity, piety, 
 bounty, and indeed in other virtues not only above her sex, but the times. 
 One excellent act of her, first derived from this Church, and through it flowing 
 upon the country, deserves to live as long as the Church itself. The library of 
 the deceased Archbishop, consisting of above three thousand books, she gave 
 entirely to the public use of this Church.* A rare example that so great care 
 
 * This donation has no reference to that made to Bristol, which was a 
 previous gift by the archbishop himself in 1615. His son, Sir George Mathew, 
 was a Jesuit. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 587 
 
 to advance learning should lodge in a WOman’s breast! but it was the less 
 wonder in her, because she was kin to so much learning. She was daughter of 
 William Barlow, Bishop of Chichester, and in King Henry the Eighth’s time 
 ambassador into Scotland, of that antient family of the Barlow’s in Wales. 
 She had four sisters married to four Bishops; one to William Wickham, Bishop 
 of Winchester; another to Overton, Bishop of Coventry & Lichfield; a third to 
 Westphaling, Bishop of Hereford; a fourth to Day, that succeeded Wickham in 
 Winchester; so that a bishop was her father, an archbishop her father-in-law; 
 she had four bishops her brethren, and an archbishop her husband. When she 
 had lived seventy eight years, the eighth of May she changed this life as full of 
 honour as of years, Anno Domini 1629.” 
 
 On the tomb of the archbishop * were blazoned the arms and quarterings of 
 his family and those of his wife; as also the arms of the See of York impaled 
 with his own, which were Sable, a lion rampant argent, armed and langued 
 gules, by the name of Williams, of the counties of Flint and Lincoln. Crest, a 
 Moorcock. These arms, as well as the name of Mathew, were assumed, as 
 before stated, by John Williams, on his marrying the daughter and heir of 
 Edmond Mathew, in the reign of King Edward IV. 
 
 Archbishop Mathew, who was much engaged in politics, appears to have been 
 a great wit and a punster, but as a divine, most exemplary, conscientious, and 
 indefatigable, both in preaching and in other duties connected with his office. 
 He kept an account of all the sermons he preached (which were always 
 extempore), by which it appears that while Dean of Durham he delivered 721, 
 when Bishop of Durham 550, and when Archbishop of York, 721; making a 
 total of 1992. Preferment never once induced him to desist from his duty, 
 and there was scarcely a pulpit in the dioceses of Durham or York, in which 
 he had not preached; yet he seems to have committed to the press one Latin 
 sermon only, entitled “ Concio Apologetica contra Campianen.” 
 
 APPENDIX XXXVII.— Page 271. 
 
 As an artist in wood-carving, too much cannot be said in praise of Grinling 
 Gibbon. He was of Dutch extraction. By some it is said that he was born in 
 Spur Alley, Strand, London, but others assert that he was born in Holland, of 
 English parents, and that he came to England at the age of nineteen, which is 
 regarded as most correct. So delicate was his workmanship, that “he carved 
 a pot of flowers, which shook surprisingly in the room with the motion of the 
 
 * The tomb of the archbishop and also that of his lady, were destroyed by the in¬ 
 cendiary tire of one Martin, a lunatic, February 2nd, 1829, and nothing remains of them but 
 the effigy of the former, which is: extended on the floor of the building; beneath the spot once 
 occupied by their monuments—the east window of the Lady Chapel. To the memory of the 
 archbishop, however, a handsome marble altar-tomb, in mediaeval style, was erected on the 
 south side of this chapel, in 1844, by his descendant. Captain “Georgius Bcneventus Mathew,” 
 round the upper edge of which is a short inscription, and on its sides are ten shields emblazoned 
 with the arms of the prelate, and of those of his family connections. Local guide-books 
 inform us that the effigy above-mentioned is laid on the top of this tomb which is not correct, 
 as it is placed on the pavement of the Lady Chapel, at the spot I have indicated, and at some 
 distance from the modern monument. 
 
 V V 2 
 
588 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 coaches passing in the street. There is some foliage hy his hand, in the chapel 
 at Windsor, and in the choir of St. Paul’s. He executed the Stoning of St. 
 Stephen, in bas-relief, and the Last Supper, in alto-relievo; besides chimney- 
 pieces, and picture-frames, where dead game, flowers, and foliage, almost 
 deceive the eye into a belief of their reality. His heads of cherubs, and pro¬ 
 ductions of a similar nature, possess a sweetness of expression, and an angelic 
 loveliness, which, as long as they exist, will render them the admiration of all 
 lovers of ideal beauty. There are some charming productions of his in different 
 churches of the metropolis, particularly in St. Paul’s Cathedral; m St. James’s 
 Church, Westminster ; in All-Hallows, Bread Street; at Windsor and Kensing¬ 
 ton; and in a variety of other ecclesiastical and palatial residences. The 
 archbishop’s throne in Canterbury Cathedral, and the decorations of Petworth 
 House, Chatsw'orth, Southwick, and Houghton, are evidences of his taste and 
 genius as a sculptor in wood. Lord Campden’s monument at Exton, the base 
 of Charles the First’s statue at Charing Cross, and that of James the Second 
 at the back of Whitehall Chapel, are specimens of his ability as a statuary. * 
 Gibbon may be considered the last of our native sculptors in wood whose 
 works deserve an European reputation; but, even to the present day, many 
 ingenious men are to be found, whose efforts in the same art would throw no 
 discredit on its most esteemed age. 
 
 “ Gibbun died August 3rd, 1721, at his house in Bow Street, Covent Garden, 
 and in November of the following year, his collection, a very considerable one, 
 of pictures, models, &c., was sold by auction. Among other things were two 
 chimney-pieces of his own work, the one valued at £100, the other at £120 
 it is one of these chimney-pieces that is believed to adorn the Bristol City 
 Library. 
 
 APPENDIX XXXVIII.— Page 277. 
 
 The name of Knapp frequently occurs in the municipal rolls of Bristol. 
 Thomas Knapp was bailiff in 1370, sheriff in 1379, and mayor in 1380, 1391, 
 1390, 1399, and 1403. Lie also appears to have been a member of Parliament 
 for Bristol in 13SG. A descendant of this gentleman, who received the same 
 name, was an eminent merchant of this city, and gave twenty pounds towards 
 rebuilding the Church of St. Nicholas, in 1702. 
 
 Arms.—Argent, a cross formee between four roses, gules. 
 
 Spicer is another worthy name in connection with Bristol. It first occurs in 
 1311, when Thomas Spicer w T as one of the seneschals, and again in the following 
 year, when he is called Thomas le Spicer. In 1322 he was one of the bailiffs, 
 and in 1323 Stephen le Spicer filled the same office, as also in 1324, 1330, 1332, 
 and 1334 ; and that of mayor in 1337, 133S, 1343, and 1344. Another member 
 
 Walpole’s Anecdotes of Painting, vol. iii., pp. 87—90. 
 t Ibid, p. 91. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 589 
 
 of this family, John le Spicer, was bailiff in 1337, when Stephen, his relative 
 (probably his father), was mayor, to which dignity John also attained in 1348 
 and 1351. Richard le Spicer (or, as the name was at this time spelt, Spycer,) 
 was mayor in 1353 and 1354, and member of Parliament for Bristol in 1355. 
 Richard Spycer, probably a son of the last-named, was mayor in 1371. 
 Another of the family, John Spycer, was bailiff in 1431 and sheriff in 1435. 
 Thomas Spicer (the spelling of the name being again altered) was bailiff in 1482 
 and sheriff in 1489. William Spicer was bailiff in 1484, and the last of the 
 name in connection with the annals of Bristol, John Spicer, served the same 
 office in 1497, from which time we find no farther mention of the family. How 
 far they were connected with the public buildings of Bristol can only be 
 inferred from the fact, that Richard Spycer, mayor in 1371, founded the Chapel 
 of St. George, which was destroyed on rebuilding the Guildhall; and to this 
 family undoubtedly belongs the honour of erecting Spicer’s Hall, on the 
 Welsh Back. 
 
 APPENDIX XXXIX.— Page 279. 
 
 “ The Bath and Bristol theatres were then (1780), and for many years after¬ 
 wards, what in trade language is called one concern. The performers were 
 stationed half the year in one city, half in the other. When they played on 
 Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays in Bristol, they went to Bath on the 
 Saturday, in two immense coaches, each as big as a caravan of wild beasts, and 
 returned after the play. When the nights of performance at Bath were 
 Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays, they played at Bristol on the Monday. 
 Mondays and Saturdays were the fashionable nights. On Thursdays and 
 Fridays they always played to thin, and very frequently to losing houses. The 
 population of London is too large for a folly like this to show itself there.” * 
 
 APPENDIX XL .—Page 285. 
 
 “The Public Charities and Benefactions given and founded by Edward 
 Colston, Esquire. 
 
 In Bristol. 
 
 On St. Michael’s Hill. 
 
 1691, An almshouse for 12 men and 12 women; the chief brother to 
 receive Gs., the other 3s. per week, besides coal, &c. To a chaplain 
 £10 per annum. The whole to be paid by fee farm rents on 
 estates in Northumberland, Cumberland, and Durham, and by 
 
 some houses and lands near the house. The charge about.£S500 
 
 In King Street. 
 
 Six sailors to be maintained in the Merchant’s almshouse, by a 
 farm in Congresbury, Somerset. The charge about. 600 
 
 Southey’s Life and Correspondence, vol. i., p. 41. 
 
590 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 In Temple Street. 
 
 1696, A school for 40 boys to be clothed .and taught, endowed with an 
 annuity out of the manor of Tomarhear, Somerset. An house and 
 garden for the master. The charge about.£3000 
 
 In the College Green. 
 
 1702, To the rebuilding the boys’ hospital. 
 
 And for 6 boys to be clothed, maintained, instructed, and 
 apprenticed. A farm of £70 per annum in Congresbury. The 
 charge about. . . . 
 
 In St. Peter’s Parish. 
 
 To the Mint workhouse. 200 
 
 And for placing out poor children. 200 
 
 On St. Augustine’s Back. 
 
 1708, An hospital for a master, two ushers, and a catechist, and 100 
 boys to be instructed, maintained, and apprenticed. The charge 
 
 about. 40000 
 
 One hundred pounds per annum to be given for twelve years after 
 his death, either to those who have been apprenticed from the 
 hospital of St. Augustine’s Back, or from the apprenticing of boys 
 
 from Temple school, by £10 each. 1200 
 
 To the several charity-schools each £10 per annum, given for many 
 years while he lived, and to be continued for twelve years after 
 his death. 
 
 To the repairing and beautifying of churches. 
 
 All Saints.250 St. Michael. 50 
 
 Cathedral.260 St. Stephen’s. 50 
 
 Clifton. 50 Temple.160 
 
 St. James.100 St Thomas. 50 
 
 St Mary Eedcliff.100 St. Werburgh.160— 
 
 For reading prayers at All Saints every Monday and Tuesday 
 
 morning, £7 per annum. 
 
 For twelve sermons at Newgate, £6 per annum. 
 
 For fourteen sermons in Lent £20 per annum, now discontinued... 
 
 In London. 
 
 To St. Bartholomew’s hospital. 
 
 To Christ Church ditto . 
 
 To St. Thomas’s ditto . 
 
 To Bethlehem ditto .. 
 
 To the new Workhouse without Bishopsgate. 
 
 To the Society for propagating the Gospel. 
 
 To the Company of Mercers. 
 
 1230 
 
 140 
 
 120 
 
 400 
 
 2500 
 
 2000 
 
 500 
 
 500 
 
 200 
 
 300 
 
 100 
 
 500 
 
 1500 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 591 
 
 In Surry at Sheen. 
 
 An almshouse for six poor men, built and endowed. 
 
 At Mortlake. 
 
 For the education and clothing of 12 boys and 12 girls, £45 
 
 per annum.. . £900 
 
 To 85 poor people at his death. . 85 
 
 In Lancashire. 
 
 Towards building a church at Manchester. 20 
 
 To 18 charity-schools in several parts of England for many years 
 after his death, £90 per annum. 
 
 To the augmentation of 00 small livings. 6000 
 
 In all £70695” 
 
 “ This great and pious benefactor was known to have done many other 
 excellent charities, and what he did in secret is believed to be not inferior to 
 what he did in public.” * 
 
 APPENDIX XLI .—Page 288. 
 
 “The great fault of biography, is, that winters too often proceed on a system 
 of concealment. Their chief aim appears to be, almost to deify then - hero, and 
 totally to exclude from observation, every incident and trait of character which 
 brings him down to truth and the level of humanity. Virtues may be magnified, 
 without limit, but defects, though prominently characteristic, must be suppressed 
 as blight and mildew that injure the stateliness of the plant: so that we often 
 find substituted for the man, (that alone which the reader wants) a beautiful 
 but almost an ideal image. It is not enough that he should be great, or other¬ 
 wise great and good, but, (however fidelity might be sacrificed) he must present 
 no admixture of contrary qualities. He must march on through his earthly 
 career, irradiated alone by unattainable excellence.” + 
 
 APPENDIX XLII .—Page 288. 
 
 There is a tradition that this house was brought from Holland, as well as the 
 two adjoining ones, the proprietor “ taking a fancy to as many different styles 
 of front, and brought over the wood-work of all three in one ship from 
 Amsterdam. ” J 
 
 * Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, pp. 443—445. 
 t Cottle’s Early Recollections of Coleridge, vol. i., p. 11. 
 J Evans’s Chronological Outline. 
 
692 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 APPENDIX XLIII .—Page 293. 
 
 Henry Abyndon was a Bachelor of Music, at Cambridge, in 1463, a member of 
 the King’s Chapel, and Master of St. Catharine’s Hospital, Brightbow, Bed- 
 minster. He belonged to the well-known local family of that name, the owners 
 of the hostelry mentioned in the text. 
 
 APPENDIX XLIV .—Page 29S. 
 
 They were first called “The Poor of the Holy City,” but they afterwards 
 assumed the name of Knights Templars, for the reason stated in the text. This 
 religious order was founded by Baldwin II., then King of Jerusalem, with the 
 assent of the Pope. Every knight was compelled to have three horses, and one 
 esquire to attend him. Their grand master resided at Paris, but in every king¬ 
 dom of Europe they had a particular governor, called Master of the Temple, or 
 of the militia of the Temple. Their badge of distinction was a white habit, 
 with a red cross sewed upon their cloaks. Not only Knights Templars, but all 
 Crusaders were exempt from the payment of taxes (which in those times greatly 
 oppressed the people), at least during the period in which they wore this emblem 
 of our common faith; for then the hero was under the protection of the Church, 
 and could not be sued in any civil court for debt, nor could be impleaded at all 
 except on criminal charges, or on matters relating to agrarian disputes. The 
 interest payable on all debts contracted by Crusaders was also remitted, and 
 could not be recovered in courts of law, so that “taking up the cross ” was at 
 once to rid the debtor of his liabilities while serving under its shadow, and to 
 exonerate him from the consequences of any imprudence of which he may have 
 been guilty in contracting them. By way of penance, the most heinous crimes 
 were atoned for by men of rank who joined the Crusades to avoid the punish¬ 
 ment due to their offences against society,—a certain number of years of such 
 servitude being allotted them by the Church, as a sufficient expiation. 
 
 Few in number, and destitute of power or possessions, the members of this 
 order were at first exposed to but little temptation to break their vows of 
 humility and poverty; by degrees, however, their splendid military achievements, 
 and their high sense of chivalry and honour, attracted multitudes to their stan¬ 
 dard, and heaped upon them those riches which finally became the occasion of 
 their dissolution. Pride, luxury, and cruelty, were their distinguishing 
 characteristics; and losing, with the exception of their valour, all those virtues 
 which had caused their elevation, they were cut off, even in their highest and 
 most palmy state, by the general detestation of Christendom, aided, however, 
 no doubt, and directed by the avarice of its needy monarchs. The Knights of 
 the Temple were widely scattered through every Christian nation. Their 
 fraternity embraced valiant men of every country, and in ever}' country held 
 ample possessions, which at the time of their abolition numbered 16,000 manors. 
 England was their stronghold ; owing probably to the distracted state of the 
 country, but as they were able to preserve a considerable force in each of their 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 593 
 
 foreign territories, and were accounted the best lances in the world, they were 
 not only respectable, but formidable to the most powerful sovereigns of their 
 time. The Order having existed nearly two hundred years, was finally 
 abolished in 1312, by the concurrence of the Pope, the Emperor, and the King 
 of France. The Grand Master and several of the knights were burnt at Paris, 
 on charges of sorcery ; and in England their possessions (at a period shortly sub¬ 
 sequent), either reverted to the representatives of the donors, or were 
 appropriated, by Act of Parliament, to their more fortunate rivals, the Knights 
 of St. John. 
 
 APPENDIX XLV .—Page 304. 
 
 This man “ was a psalm-singer, a ventriloquist, and an actor of Christmas 
 plays or mummeries, and had practised upon the credulity of his immediate 
 neighbourhood for eighteen years, when his fame reached to Bristol. He had 
 exhibited in Temple-Church, and being employed as a common-carrier between 
 Yatton and Bristol, he was known to many of our fellow-citizens. In the 
 performance of his engagement to join the serious assemblage at the church, he 
 once called at the shop of Messrs. Bath and Pinkey, the corner of Itedcliffe- 
 street and St. Thomas-street, for the purpose of inviting those gentlemen to be 
 witnesses of his premeditated calling of ‘ spirits from the vasty deep; ’ but 
 Mr. Bath affecting to doubt the conformity of infernal agency with human 
 arrangements of an adverse tendency, contented himself with hastening George 
 on his way towards Temple-street. Happening ourselves, about 1804 or 1805, 
 to reside in the road of Lukins’s journeyings to and fro, as he ‘ toddled ’ along 
 with an arm-basket and a stick, he was frequently the subject of observation, 
 which he invariably acknowledged by a polite touch of his hat. He was then 
 a fair-looking, cleanly dressed, little old man, of yet comely and not hard 
 favoured features, with good tempered simplicity, rather an archness of ex¬ 
 pression, that sufficiently accounted for the readiness with which so many 
 became the dupes of his innocuously diabolical vocation. ” 
 
 In 1788, a pamphlet was published, entitled “ A Narrative of the Extraor¬ 
 dinary Case of Geo. Lukins, of Yatton, Somersetshire, who was possessed of 
 Evil Spirits for near eighteen years. Also an Account of his remarkable 
 Deliverance, in the Vestry-Boom of Temple-Church, in the City of Bristol. 
 Extracted from the Manuscripts of several persons who attended. To which is 
 prefixed, a Letter from the Bev. W. B. W. (dated Wrington, June 5.) The 
 fourth edition; with the Bev. Mr. Easterbrook’s Letter annexed, authenticating 
 the particulars which occurred at Temple-Church. 8vo., pp. 24. ” 
 
 “ The ridicule that accumulated around the devoted heads of the confiding 
 ones, we believe, tended to shorten the otherwise really useful life of the Vicar 
 of Temple, (the Bev. Joseph Easterbrook), who was also Ordinary of Newgate; 
 of the goodness of whose heart, whatever might be said of his share of that 
 needful material of the head, common sense, derivable chiefly from close and 
 excursive observation of human nature, there were scarcely two opinions.” * 
 
 * Evans’s Chronological Outline. 
 
 w \v 
 
594 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 APPENDIX XLVL— Page 309. 
 
 This fraternity derived, its designation from St. John of Jerusalem, sumamed 
 “the charitable,” who was a Cypriot by birth, and had filled the honourable 
 office of patriarch of Alexandria; and not, as has been erroneously supposed, 
 from either the Evangelist or the Baptist of the New Testament. The Knights 
 of St. John were even richer than the Templars, possessing not less than nine¬ 
 teen thousand manors in Europe alone ! and they were as remarkable for then- 
 pride and avarice as their brethren of the Temple, and were as deservedly 
 reproached, and as severely reprobated. The Order of St. John was instituted 
 in 1124, for the sole purpose of protecting the Holy Land from the infidels. The 
 site of their house in Bristol, in which previously the Templars had their 
 dwelling, is only known by conjecture. 
 
 APPENDIX XLYII .—Page 310. 
 
 Since the introduction of water into the city by a company established for 
 that purpose, the ancient pipes and conduits have been in great part superseded, 
 and modern drinking fomitains have also been erected for public convenience, 
 the first of which came into use in the month of June, 1859; since which time 
 others have been placed in various parts of Bristol. Scarcely one of them, how¬ 
 ever, can lay claim to be a good architectural design; the only one at all 
 approaching to it was erected at the cost of Thomas Prust Jose, Esq., at the 
 corner of St. Augustine’s Churchyard; the architect of which has, however, 
 shewn us to what an extent of absurdity professional men can carry their 
 vagaries, by his design for a fountain since erected in St. James’s Churchyard, 
 next the Horse Fair, which is, perhaps, the most ridiculous conception ever 
 executed. 
 
 The revenue of the Water Works’ Company arising from rates, was for the 
 year ending December 31st, 1860, £17,910, 18s. 2d. 
 
 APPENDIX XLV1II .—Page 313. 
 
 “ Gylbert de Sante Leonfardoe, Byshope of Chychestre.” H Chatterton had 
 not some authority from writings really found by him, as he said, in the 
 muniment room of Bedcliffe Church, it is difficult to conjecture how he could 
 have known that this prelate held the see he has assigned to him; for it is a 
 fact, that he was actually Bishop of Chichester at the time named, having been 
 installed in 1288, and he retained the bishopric until his death, which occurred 
 in 1304—that is three years after he is said to have consecrated Redcliffe 
 Church. His name is not mentioned by Holinshed nor by Camden—the only 
 antiquarian writers with whose works Chatterton is known to have been at all 
 acquainted, previous to his leaving Bristol for London. 
 
 APPENDIX XLIX .—Page 334. 
 
 “A critical history of the whole edifice, with biographical accounts of the 
 founders and contributors, would constitute an interesting, and indeed an 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 595 
 
 important literary memoir; for whilst it would unfold and elucidate the local 
 manners, customs, pursuits, and habits, of a large and influential class of 
 provincial society, it would also tend to exemplify the political, moral, and 
 philosophical state of the country, at different epochs.” * 
 
 APPENDIX L.—Pagc 367. 
 
 “The sister and niece of Chatterton are now wholly destitute (July, 1797): 
 on this occasion I appear as editor of all his works for their relief; this is an 
 heinous sin against the world’s opinion, for a young lawyer, but it would have 
 been a real crime to have refused it. We have a black scene to lay before the 
 publie; these poor women have been left in want, while a set of scoundrels 
 have been reaping hundreds from the writings of Chatterton. I hope now to 
 make the catastrophe to the history of the poor boy of Bristol .... we 
 hope and expect to place Mrs. Newton (his sister) in comfort during the last 
 years of her life.”!' 
 
 APPENDIX LI .—Page 371. 
 
 Of this famous rib Mr. Barrett makes no mention. The first writer to do so, 
 as far as I am aware, was J. P. Malcolm, whose work was published in 1807.i 
 In it he says, ‘ ‘A bracket, inserted on the angle of the arch of the north aisle, 
 supports the celebrated rib of the enormous dun cow said to have been killed by 
 Guy, Earl of Warwick, which is unquestionably a bone, but of what animal I 
 am not naturalist enough to determine.” It has, therefore, occupied its 
 present position ever since Malcolm wrote, and perhaps long before, yet I am 
 inclined to believe it is not the place in which it was originally deposited; if it 
 had been, surely Chatterton would have made something marvellous out of the 
 legend relating to it, and we should have had a poetical record of the fearful 
 tourneying of the renowned Guy and the cow; somewhat after the fashion of 
 the fabulous account he has given of the encounter betwen Alderman Sir 
 Simon de Burton and Sir Ferrars Nevylle, a strong and doubly knight, and with 
 about as much truth in his story. 
 
 APPENDIX LII .—Page 372. 
 
 Joseph Eaton was a native of Bristol, where he was born in the year 1792* 
 His father, George Eaton, a highly respected member of the Society of Friends, 
 was a wholesale ironmonger, in which business his sons Joseph and George 
 succeeded him, but both of them relinquished commercial life in 1835, to enjoy 
 
 * Britton’s Appeal, &c., p. 24. 
 
 t Southey’s Life and Correspondence, vol. i., p. 319. See also Cottle’s 
 Early Recollections, vol. i., p. 256. 
 
 + Excursions in Gloucestershire, &c., p. 232. 
 
 W w 2 
 
596 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 a luxury unknown to many—“the luxury of doing good.” About four years 
 later, George died of consumption, a younger brother James having previously 
 deceased; leaving Joseph, who alone survived of the family, with increased 
 means at his command, and of whom it may be said, that few men lived a more 
 useful life, or spent their days more disinterestedly for the welfare of suffering 
 humanity,—the widow, “ the poor that cried, the fatherless, and him that had 
 none to help him,”—being his constant care, and the great objects of his bounty. 
 He was a bachelor, and the time which the cares of a family would have 
 demanded at his hands was occupied in acts of benevolence. Whilst in his 
 business his days were devoted to the duties of the counting-house, in which he 
 was most assiduous; and it was his wont to abridge his hours of repose at night 
 by preparing articles for the press on behalf of the oppressed negro slave, for 
 whose welfare he was very zealous. In every good cause he cheerfully engaged, 
 and bestowed of his substance with a bounteous hand—“ the luxury of doing 
 good” being his great recompense of reward. In the circulation of the Bible, 
 and the erection of schools and places of worship, he took a very active part; 
 and in the promotion of the temperance movement he greatly rejoiced— 
 expending annually large sums of money in the diffusion of information on the 
 pernicious use of intoxicating drinks. Of his munificence, the New General 
 Hospital will be, perhaps, his most durable monument, and the thousands there 
 relieved of their bodily maladies will bless his name in coming ages. Mr. 
 Eaton lived the life of a practical Christian, and his death, which took place 
 at his residence, Redcliffe Parade, May 26th, 1858, was in accordance with it. 
 Pie was in the CCth year of his age; and his unostentatious obsequies were 
 performed at the Friends’ Meeting House, Rosemary Street; every mark of 
 respect being paid to’the deceased ; the flags on the tower of St. Mary Redcliffe, 
 on the Shot House, and the shipping in the river, were half-masted, the church 
 bell tolled muffled, and the shops in the line of route were closed during the 
 funeral procession. 
 
 APPENDIX LIII .—Page 3S2. 
 
 “ It was probably during the period of William Penn’s residence in Bristol, 
 that he arranged the building of the streets to the eastward of the Friars’ 
 premises, which still bear the names of Philadelphia, Penn, Hollister, and 
 Callowhill Streets. Hannah Callowhill, the mother of Hannah Penn, was a 
 daughter of Dennis Hollister, and as the ground on which these streets were 
 built adjoins the Friars, which Friends pmchased of him, there is but little 
 doubt that it formed part of his property. I believe, also, that some of these 
 streets were built on the ground formerly occupied by the great orchard, in 
 which the larger meetings of Friends were at first held.” * 
 
 APPENDIX LIV .—Page 384. 
 
 It is bound in calf, and lettered on the back, “ Newe Testamente by Tyndall, 
 1st Edition, MDXXVI.” 
 
 * Tanner's Lectures on the Society of Friends in Bristol, &c., p. 119. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 597 
 
 A newspaper notice of this volume, pasted inside the cover, informs us that 
 “On Tuesday evening, 13th May, 1760, at Mr. Langford’s sale of Mr. Ames’s 
 books, a copy of the New Testament by Tindall, and supposed to be the only 
 one remaining which escaped the flames (which will presently be explained), 
 was sold for fourteen guineas and a half. This very book was picked up by 
 one of the late Lord Oxford’s collectors (John Murray), and was esteemed so 
 valuable a purchase by his lordship, that he settled £20 per annum for life 
 upon the person who procured it; his lordship’s library being afterwards 
 purchased by Mr. Osborne, of Gray’s Inn, he marked it at 15s., for which price 
 Mr. Ames bought it. 
 
 “ This translation was finished in the reign of Henry VIII., Anno 1526, and 
 the whole impression as supposed (this copy excepted), was purchased by 
 Tonstall, Bishop of London, and burnt at St. Paul’s Cross that year.” 
 
 On a flydeaf is written, “N.B. This choice book was purchased at Mr. 
 Langford’s sale on the 13th May 1760 by me John White, and on the 13th day 
 of May 1776 I sold it to the Rev. Dr. Giffard for Twenty Guineas—‘ v !‘ was the 
 price at first paid for it by the late Lord Oxford, (signed) Jno. White.” 
 
 On another flydeaf is written, “For proofl' of its being® 1st Edition see® 
 Note at ® End of his address To theReder, wherein he saisthis is the fyrst Tyme." 
 This is followed by the arms of “Ames of Norfolke.” 
 
 There never was a title page of any kind to this volume, or prefatory remarks ; 
 it therefore commences at once with the first chapter of the Gospel by Matthew, 
 at the beginning of which is a small illuminated print, representing its author 
 in the act of writing it. A similar print appears at the commencement of each 
 separate book; Mark and John are writing — Luke is painting — and the emblems 
 by which they are each distinguished appears with the grouping of each subject. 
 The Acts of the Apostles has the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the day of 
 Pentecost; the Epistles to the Romans anil Hebrews have Paul with 
 the sword of martyrdom. Peter’s Epistles have the author with the keys; 
 those of John, his figure with his emblem. James and Jude are each resting 
 on a club; and the Book of Revelations has John seated on the ground in the 
 act of writing the Apocalypse, at Patmos. The rest of the Epistles begin with 
 illuminated capitals, as do all the chapters throughout the entire volume, but not 
 much elaborated. The text is black letter, and remarkably clear in its 
 execution. The whole closes with the Address “to the Reder,” before 
 mentioned, and a correction of “ The erroars committed in the prentynge,” 
 On a fly-leaf at the end of the book is the following, referring to a portrait of 
 Tyndale:— 
 
 “ Gulielmus Tyndale, Martyr, olim ex Aula Magd.” 
 
 (William Tyndale, Martyr, formerly of Magdalen Hall.) 
 
 To this is added a description of his portrait, as follows : — “ N.B. His hand 
 rests upon a Bible, under ^ are the 2 following Latin Verses (lines) written on 
 a scroll, 
 
598 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 “ Hac tu Luce tuas dispergam Roma Venebras 
 Sponte extorris era, Spoiite Sacrificium.” 
 
 In English thus:—By this light (the Bible on which his hand rests) I will 
 disperse thy darkness, O Rome, involuntarily shalt thou be banished and 
 sacrificed. 
 
 Under these lines is inscribed, in Roman capitals, 
 
 “ Refert hasc tabella quod solum potuitars, Gulielmi Tyndale hujus olim 
 aulas alumni simul et ornamentis, qui post felices purioris theologiae primitias 
 hie depositas, Antwerpsae, in Novo Testamento, nec non pentateucho, in 
 vernaculam transferendo operam navavil, anglissius eousq: salutiferam, ut inde 
 non immerito angliae Apostolus audiret martyrio Wilfordse prope Bruxellas 
 coronatus Ao. 1536 vir si vel adversario (procuratori nempe imperatorio 
 generals) credamus perdoctus pius et bonus. ” 
 
 To this is added, 
 
 “N.B. The above inscription was transcribed in 1787, from, I believe, (says 
 the writer) an original half length picture, large as life, then in the possession 
 of Matthew Howell, Esq., of Cromhall, in the County of Gloucester, who 
 married a lady of the name of Tyndale, an immediate descendant from this 
 venerable reformer.” 
 
 Such is a description in detail of the only complete copy of the first octavo 
 edition of Tyndale’s translation of the New Testament which is known to exist. 
 There are, however, two mutilated duplicates of it—one formerly possessed by 
 the Bishop of Lichfield, but now in the British Museum ; and the other is in 
 the library of St. Paul’s Cathedral, London, but in a very imperfect state. 
 The latter copies, too, are destitute of all embellishment, while the Bristol 
 volume has all its initial woodcuts finely illuminated. One circiun stance, however, 
 attaches peculiar interest to the copy in St. Paid’s, which is, that it is treasured 
 on the very spot, contiguous to which stood St. Paid’s Cross, where, a little 
 more than three centimes since, Cardinal Wolsey had a scaffold erected, on 
 which he stood, arrayed in the scarlet livery of Rome, surrounded by a 
 numerous band of bishops, mitred abbots, and other dignitaries of the Church, 
 and cast upon the blazing faggots beneath, the Word of God as heretical! 
 
 APPENDIX LV .—Page 390. 
 
 At Stapleton Grove, in the autumn of 1833, died that interesting and very 
 enlightened man, the Rajah Ram Mohun Roy, who was known to many in this 
 city, by whom he was greatly esteemed and respected. 
 
 “ His paternal ancestors were Brahmins of very high standing, and were 
 devoted to the religious duties of their race, untd about the beginning of the 
 seventeenth century, when they relinquished their spiritual for worldly pursuits. 
 His maternal ancestors, also of high Brahmiidcal rank, and priests by birth and 
 by profession, devoted their whole time to religious observances.” 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 599 
 
 The Rajah ! ‘ was born in the district of Burdwar, in Bengal, about the year 
 1774, and was a Brahmin by birth; his father, Ram Hant Roy, trained him 
 early in the doctrines and ceremonies of his sect; under the paternal roof he 
 learnt the Persian language, he afterwards went to Patna to study Arabic, and 
 subsequently he was sent to Benares to acquire a knowledge of Sanscrit. He 
 afterwards learnt seven other languages: Hindustanee, Bengalee, English, 
 French, Hebrew, Latin, and Greek; most of which he could speak and write 
 with fluency. 
 
 “His father died in 1803, and he soon afterwards published several books 
 and pamphlets on the abuse of the Brahminical rites and forms of government. 
 In 1816 he began to direct his attention to the Christian religion, and to study 
 the Scriptures; and published in 1820, in English, Sanscrit, and Bengalee, a 
 series of selections principally from the first three gospels, which he entitled, 
 ‘The Precepts of Jesus, the guide to Peace and Happiness.’ For writing this 
 work he met with great opposition, and was styled a heathen by many of his 
 religious opponents. 
 
 “ He had for a length of time, ardently desired to visit Europe, and in parti¬ 
 cular, England; at last in the year 1830, he embarked for this country, having 
 been engaged by the King of Delhi to make a representation of grievances to 
 the British Government. Before his departure, the king conferred on him the 
 title of Rajah, when giving him the appointment of ambassador to this country. 
 So well did he discharge his mission for his employer, that he succeeded in 
 obtaining an additional stipend of about £30,000 per annum for the King of 
 Delhi, for which his own reward was to be between £3,000 and £4,000 per 
 annum. 
 
 “ He arrived in London in April, 1831, and his coming created much interest, 
 not only in the metropolis, but in this country generally. He subsequently 
 visited several provincial towns, but in none did he stay longer, nor in any 
 other town was he more esteemed than in Bristol. While in this city he 
 attended worship at Lewin’s Mead Chapel, having been on terms of intimacy 
 with the late Rev. Dr. Carpenter, one of the ministers. ” * He died while on 
 a visit to Stapleton Grove, September 27th, 1833, and was first interred in the 
 grounds of that residence, by his own desire. Several years afterwards his 
 remains were removed to the Cemetery at Arno's Vale, where there is a hand¬ 
 some monument, in the Indian style of architecture, erected to his memory, 
 with this inscription :— 
 
 “Rajah 
 
 Ram Mohun Roy 
 died 
 
 27 September 1833.” 
 
 There is a full-length painting of the Rajah in his native costume, at the 
 Bristol Institution, Park Street. 
 
 Abridged from the “ Curiosities of Bristol. 
 
600 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 APPENDIX LVI .—Page 395. 
 
 “The despotism of Charles went to deprive the nation of alT”that is most 
 valuable to civilized man. The lives, the liberties, the properties of the people, 
 were to be at the disposal of the monarch, who held himself accountable to 
 Heaven alone for the exercise of the powers which he claimed. A galling ecclesias¬ 
 tical tyranny also pressed on the people, fettering conscience and controlling the 
 free expression of thought. Is there any one so base, so unworthy of the name 
 of freeman, as to regret that this state of things has not been perpetuated to our 
 own times ? And what certainty have we that such would not have been the 
 case had Charles not been checked in his career, and that Popery would not 
 again have overspread the land, if he had transmitted the plenitude of 
 despotism to his Popish sons? ”* “ If, by fatal mismanagement, nothing was 
 
 left to England but a choice of tyrants, the last tyrant whom she should have 
 chosen was Charles. ” + 
 
 APPENDIX LVI I .—Page 397. 
 
 Of King Charles I. Lord Macaulay, in another place, says that ‘ ‘ Faithlessness 
 was the chief cause of his disasters, and is the chief stain on his memory. He 
 was, in truth, impelled by an incurable propensity to dark and crooked ways. 
 It may seem strange that his conscience, which, on occasions of little moment, 
 was sufficiently sensitive, should never have reproached him with this great 
 vice. But there is reason to believe that he was perfidious, not only from 
 constitution and from habit, but also on principle. He seems to have learned 
 from the theologians whom he most esteemed, that between him and his 
 subjects there could be nothing of the nature of mutual contract; that he could 
 not, even if he would, divest himself of his despotic authority; and that, in 
 every promise which he made, there was an implied reservation that such 
 promise might be broken in case of necessity, and that of the necessity he was 
 
 the sole judge.. He was not only a most unscrupulous but a 
 
 most unlucky dissembler. There never was a politician to whom so many 
 frauds and falsehoods were brought home by undeniable evidence. He 
 publicly recognised the Houses of Westminster as a legal Parliament, and, at 
 the same time, made a private minute in council, declaring the recognition null. 
 He publicly disclaimed all thought of calling in foreign aid against his people : 
 he privately solicited aid from France, from Denmark, and from Loraine. He 
 publicly denied that he employed Papists : at the same time he privately sent 
 to his generals directions to employ every Papist that would serve. He 
 publickly took the sacrament at Oxford, as a pledge that he never would even 
 
 Keightley’s History of England, vol. ii., p. 75. 
 t Macaulay’s Essays, vol. i., p. 78. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 601 
 
 connive at Popery: he privately assured his wife, that he intended to tolerate 
 Popery in England; and he authorised Lord Glamorgan to promise that Popery 
 should be established in Ireland. Then he attempted to clear himself at his 
 agent’s expense. Glamorgan received, in the royal handwriting, reprimands 
 intended to be read by others, and eulogies which were to be seen only by him¬ 
 self. To such an extent, indeed, had insincerity now tainted the king’s whole 
 nature, that his most devoted friends could not refrain from complaining to each 
 other, with bitter grief and shame, of his crooked politics. His defeats, they 
 said, gave them less pain than his intrigues.” * 
 
 APPENDIX LVIII. —Page 403. 
 
 George Boucher was buried in St. Werburgh’s Church, where a small stone 
 was raised to his memory, with the following somewhat inappropriate 
 inscription:— 
 
 “Sanguis Martyrum semen ecclesise.” 
 
 (The blood of the Martyrs is the seed of the church.) 
 
 “ Whoever chanceth this way, pass not by 
 These sainted ashes with a careless eye; 
 
 They are undaunted dust, and did outbrave, 
 
 Whilst they retain’d a soul, Death and the Grave; 
 
 And still bear witness, in our Martyr’s right, 
 
 That they dare murder, who yet ne’er durst fight. 
 
 Ne’er was so bold a lion by such hares 
 Worried to death, so merciless their snares ; 
 
 Yet he so stout that whether none can tell 
 His courage or their cruelty did excel. 
 
 Mirror of Patience ! Loyalty 1 thy fall 
 Hath proved yet a successful funeral: 
 
 Since ’twas guilt of thy death, no battery 
 That storm’d these forts, that gain’d us victory: 
 
 Eor though our foes were fenced with walls and roof, 
 
 Yet there’s no wall, no fence is conscience proof: 
 
 Thus is thy murdering wreath to us become 
 A laureate, to thee a crown of martyrdom. 
 
 G. B.” 
 
 Boucher’s companion in crime was buried at Christ Churcli. 
 
 APPENDIX LIX .—Page 406. 
 
 After Beading surrendered to the Parliamentarian forces, articles of capitu¬ 
 lation were signed by the Earl of Essex, the town was delivered up, “ and the 
 Garrison march’d (April 27th, 1643) to the king, who stay’d for them, and with 
 him to Oxford. But at their coming out of the Town, and passing through the 
 Enemies’ Guards, the Soldiers were not only reviled, and reproachfully used, 
 
 Hist, of England, vol. i., pp. 83, 125. 
 
 X X 
 
C02 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 but many of them disarm'd, and most of the Waggons plunder’d, in the presence 
 of the Earl of Essex himself, and the Chief Officers ; who seem’d to he offended 
 at it, and not to be able to prevent it; the unruliness of the Common Men being 
 so great. As this breach of the Articles was very notorious, and inexcusable, 
 so it was made the rise, foundation, and excuse for barbarous Injustice of the 
 same kind throughout the greatest part of the War; insomuch as the king’s 
 Soldiers afterward, when it was their part to be precise in the observation of 
 Agreements, mutinously remember’d the violation at Reading; and thereupon 
 exercised the same Licence ; from thence, either side having somewhat to object 
 to the other, the requisite honesty and justice of observing Conditions was 
 mutually, as it were by agreement, for a long time after, violated. ” * 
 
 Hume, who quotes Rushworth, makes no mention of this circumstance, but 
 relates that the king’s commandant at Reading was content to yield the town, 
 on condition that he should bring off all the garrison with the honours of war, 
 and deliver up deserters. This last article was thought so ignominious and so 
 prejudicial to the king’s interest, that the governor was tried by a council of 
 war, and condemned to lose his life, for consenting to it. His sentence was 
 afterwards remitted by the king.f Clarendon is clearly open to suspicion in the 
 above matter, and the more so as he says ‘ ‘ this breach of Articles was very 
 notorious,” and yet I do not find it mentioned by any other writer of authority. 
 He also says that by the articles ‘ ‘ the Earl of Essex should provide a Guard 
 for the Security of the Garrison-Soldiers, when they begun their march; ” which 
 makes it very unlikely that they were molested at all, as stated by the king’s 
 Lord High Chancellor, who, it must be remembered, was a corn-tier historian, 
 and by no means an impartial writer. 
 
 APPENDIX LX.—Page 407. 
 
 “ During the summer of 1645 singular confederacies had been formed in some 
 places, avowedly for protecting their property against both parties. Those who 
 belonged to them were known as ‘Clubmen.’ They were to some extent 
 neutrals; but they were principally called into activity by royalist gentry. 
 They were not ‘ clubbable ’ men in Johnson’s sense of the term. Their 
 business was to use their clubs as valiantly as they might. They became 
 annoying in the south-west to the parliamentary army; and Cromwell, in a 
 march towards Shaftesbury, encountered about two thousand of them. They 
 fired upon a party of his horse, but of course were soon routed. ‘ We have 
 taken about three hundred,’ Cromwell writes to Fairfax, ‘many of which are 
 poor silly creatures, whom if you please to let me send home, they promise to 
 be very dutiful for time to come, and will be hanged before they come out 
 again.’ Fairfax had taken some of the Clubmen previously; and Cromwell 
 
 Clarendon’s Hist, of the Rebellion, vol. iii., p. 237. 
 t Hist, of England, vol. vi., p. 614. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 603 
 
 told those who interceded for them that ‘ they were to be tried judicially for 
 raising a third party in the kingdom.’ ” * 
 
 APPENDIX LXI .—Page 414. 
 
 “We have seen the restraint put upon Nonconformists, by the Corporation 
 Act. It expelled and excluded from all civil offices, all whose conscientious 
 scruples constrained them to refuse conformity to the Episcopal Church. This 
 
 was the opening of the crusade for the coercion of religious liberty. 
 
 The infamous bill, called the Act against Seditious Conventicles, (was) passed 
 in 1664. This was to extirpate all public worship except that by law 
 established. The attempt was irrational, the means barbarous. It failed. 
 All the Acts of Parliament man’s ingenuity could devise, could not shut out the 
 omnipotence of God’s truth, or stay the conscientious preacher of his Holy 
 Word. The act had passed — life, liberty, and property, were in the hands of 
 common informers.” 
 
 “ Were we to recapitulate year by year, the persecutions the Nonconformists 
 endured, we should but weary the attention. Therefore we have allowed an 
 act passed in 1666, under the plausible pretence of defending Monarchy from 
 the encroachments of Dissenters, to remain unnoticed. From the cruel hatred, 
 and rigorous treatment the Nonconformists received throughout the greater part 
 of England, Bristol is not exempt. Pepys is alluding to the ‘ five mile act,’ 
 when he says, ‘ this law against Conventicles is very severe, as Greed or Creed, 
 whom I meet here do tell me ; that it being named that Papists’ meetings might 
 be included, the House was divided upon it, and it was carried in the negative, 
 which will give great disgust to the people I doubt—and this business of 
 religion do disgust every body, the Parliament being vehement against the 
 Nonconformists, while the King seems to be willing to countenance them ; we 
 are all poor and in pieces—God help us.’ ” + 
 
 APPENDIX LXII. — Page 415. 
 
 “The Bishop also sent three, and sometimes more, of his own clergy, namely, 
 Parson Pledwell (Pleydell), of Peter’s; Heath, of Austin’s, and Godwin, of 
 Philip’s (parishes in Bristol), that would come up in our meetings in the 
 midst of sermon, and stay some time, and take notice of as many as they could 
 know, then go to the Mayor, and give information against us. Thus when they 
 should be preaching to their own flocks in their own parishes, they left them, 
 and would so audaciously come to devour us, in the attire of foolish shepherds, 
 but inwardly were ravening wolves.” J 
 
 * Popular Hist, of England, vol. iv., p. 47. 
 t Garrard’s Life of Colston, pp. 252, 288. 
 t Broadmead Records, p. 216. 
 
 x x 2 
 
604 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 APPENDIX LXIII .—Page 416. 
 
 “Sir John Knight obtained an unenviable notoriety from his implacable 
 hatred to all Nonconformists, by which he distinguished the year of his 
 Mayoralty. The citizens generally disapproved of his proceedings, but he 
 appears to have been willingly assisted by some of the re-instated Aldermen. 
 
 These men belonged to an age of religious intolerance.They were 
 
 no sooner re-possessed of power than they affected to be infallible,—and refused 
 to others that liberty of conscience which they had claimed for themselves. 
 Dissent became a crime under the legitimate, as under the illegitimate govern¬ 
 ment. Persecution was the spirit of the age. Stimulated by a remembrance of 
 the sufferings of the past,—gratified in the exercise of recovered authority,— 
 they executed to a merciless extent the laws against Nonconformists. They 
 even sacrificed their Sabbath duties, for what they considered of higher 
 import,—destroyed its peace, and neglected their devotions, that they might 
 interrupt the devotions of others,—who met for prayer according to the dictates 
 of conscience, but not in the form the law prescribed. One hundred of these 
 injured people were interrupted in their prayers, 17th of July, 1664, at a house 
 in Broadmead. Sir John was lessening their numbers, and fast filling the 
 
 prisons.Not to multiply instances,—we ascertain from evidence 
 
 before us, that during his Mayoralty, upwards of nine hundred and twenty 
 persons, male and female, were either fined or committed to prison for indulging 
 in liberty of conscience.” * 
 
 Seyer saysf that Sir John Knight “ appears to have been of the high or tory 
 party ; but the great object of his vast ambition was to be principal man in the 
 Common-council, and to that object everything gave way. He was busy, 
 
 clamorous, insolent and abusive.In the year 1669 he informed his 
 
 Majesty, that the Mayor and most of the Councell were fanatics. Whereupon 
 Sir Pvobert Yeamans was sent for up to London, and was committed prisoner to 
 the Tower. But it was soon found to the contrary; and the informer was forced 
 to fall on his knees to his Majestie and crave pardon. Sir Bobert Yeamans 
 returned the 21st of February, and was honom-ably brought into Bristol with 
 220 horse : but the said informer, Sir John Knight, came to Lawford’s Gate, 
 and privately passed over the water to his own house in Temple Street. 
 
 APPENDIX LXIV .—Page 416. 
 
 Many innocent and peaceable Inhabitants of this City (without any regard 
 to Age or Sex) were hurried into the noisom Goal of Newgate, where they were 
 treated by those that cast them in, more like Dogs, than like Christian Men 
 and Women. What generous spirited person is there, who (delighting in Dogs) 
 would not, in case of any of their sickness, not allow, but command their 
 
 * Garrard’s Life of Colston, p. 253. 
 t Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 514. 
 
HIST011Y OF BRISTOL. 
 
 G05 
 
 Keeper, to let them out of their Kennel into the open Air, in order to their 
 recovery? but this benefit was denied to the languishing bodies of several of 
 these innocent sufferers, who lay throng’d together in that miserable manner, 
 in that unwholsom Prison, ready to be stifled for want of Air to breath in, and 
 convenient room for Rest, that the sense of their sad condition would have 
 drawn tears from hearts of Flint. 
 
 “Their Complaints were spread abroad in the City, and the Cry of their 
 Barbarous Usage was great. Which, though it had no influence on their 
 Persecutors to move them to pity, yet it begot so much compassion in the 
 hearts of some sober Citizens (all or most of whom are living) as that they went 
 to view the Prison, and inquire into the distressed condition of their suffering 
 Neighbours, who (upon strict observation made touching both,) did (like 
 merciful men) give the following Certificate under their Hands, (viz.) We find 
 the said Goal is very noisom in general, and void of out-let for Air, and 
 therefore unfit to contain so great a number of Prisoners as we now find 
 therein, being One hundred twenty and five close Prisoners, besides the Keeper 
 and his Family, Fourscore and five whereof are the People called Quakers, who 
 are unreasonably throng’d together, filling all the Rooms in the Goal, fit for 
 lodging, (except where the Felons are) with four, five, six, seven, and nine Beds 
 in a Room, besides divers little corners filled with three in a Bed. Notwith¬ 
 standing all which, many of these People are necessitated to lye on the ground, 
 and spreading their Mats on the ground, they lye at a miserable rate, that it 
 was a grief to us to behold, (viz.) some athwart the Room, some under the 
 Table, (being a Kennel where the Dogs were wont to lye) some upon the 
 Tables, and some in Hammocks over the Table, which necessarily endangers 
 their lives. 
 
 “A Certificate of the like Contents was given in, under the hands of four 
 publiekly known Physicians, inhabitants of the City (who are yet living) who 
 say, among other things, That great numbers of the People called Quakers, 
 were throng’d in a miserable manner, into the noisom Goal of Newgate, and 
 are destitute of room for rest, which hath a ready tendency to the destroying 
 them, and to the indangering of the lives, not only of the said Prisoners, but of 
 the many Inhabitants of this great and populous City. 
 
 “Notwithstanding which, the Bonds of the Prisoners were not loosed, nor 
 the Prison doors opened, that the sick might have the benefit of the open ah’ to 
 breath in, in order to their recovery, although large security was tendred for 
 their return again into Prison, either alive, if recovered, or their Bodies in case 
 of Death; but this was rejected: so that they were still continued under their 
 merciless confinement and cruel usage (the particulars of which I shall forbear 
 to mention) until it pleased the Lord to deliver five of them from the hands of 
 their oppressors, by death in the Prison; and a sixth, that was removed out of 
 the Prison (but too late) soon died, and was returned back, and buried 
 thence. ” * 
 
 * Speed’s Reason, against Rage, pp. 2—4. See also ante, p. 211. 
 
G06 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 APPENDIX L XX.—Page 417. 
 
 A fitting accomplice for Bishop Carleton in these deeds of darkness, was 
 Ralph Olliffe, (sometimes written Olive) another mayor of Bristol, who “was 
 especially distinguished by an exercise of the authority with which the procla¬ 
 mations of the Government against sectaries had endowed him. He is said to 
 have entered upon his official career, with the understanding that he would use 
 his most strenuous efforts to back (stop) dissent,—for which reason he himself 
 declared he had accepted the civic sceptre. He was a vintner and publican, 
 landlord of a noted tavern in Corn Street; of which the ‘Three Tuns,’ the 
 Yintner’s Arms, was the sign. Here, with other convivial members of the 
 fraternity, he indulged himself as freely in wine, then scarcely deemed a fault, 
 as he did in putting into execution the stringent and unhealthy laws against 
 Nonconformists. Here, with his creatures around him, as ignorant and besotted 
 as himself, the chief Magistrate of the City held his domestic empire; diversi¬ 
 fying the afternoon’s carouse by concocting measures with his boon companions 
 for hunting Conventicles the following morning.”* Associated with him and 
 the Bishop, was “One John Helliar, a lawyer, ‘crafty and subtle,’ and so 
 notoriously impure that ‘ the like of him was not in the country round.’ ” + 
 
 “Near eight thousand Nonconformists perished in the prisons of England in 
 the reign of Charles the II., and that merely for dissenting from the church in 
 some points, for which they were able to give good reason. As for the severe 
 penalties inflicted on them, for seditious and riotous assemblies, designed only 
 for the worship of God, they suffered in their trades and estates, within the 
 compass of three years, at least two millions; and (the writer) doubts, whether 
 in all the times since the Reformation, including the reign of Alary, there can 
 be produced anything like such a number of Christians who have suffered 
 death; and such numbers who have lost their substance for religion. The 
 names of sixty thousand Dissenters who had suffered on a religious account, 
 between the restoration of Charles II., and the revolution of King William, 
 were collected, five thousand of whom died in prison ? ” Yet should it “ stand 
 upon record, that the Church of England had been TWICE RESCUED FROM 
 THE MOST IMMINENT DANGER, BY MEN FOR WHOSE SATIS¬ 
 FACTION THEY WOULD NOT MOVE A PIN, NOR ABATE A 
 CEREMONY; first in 1660, when the Presbyterians restored the King and 
 constitution, without making any terms for themselves; and again at the 
 revolution, when the church fled for succour to a Presbyterian prince, and was 
 delivered by an army of fourteen thousand Hollanders, of the principles with 
 the English dissenters; how uncivilly those troops were afterwards used, is 
 too ungrateful a piece of history to remember. ” t 
 
 * In the Corporation Accounts is the following entry, made during the 
 mayoralty of Ralph Oliffe:—“1675 July 3 Paid for watching four Quakers 
 Shops when their Windows was shut and nailed down £8.11.6.” 
 
 t Garrard’s Life of Colston, p. 288. The Broadmead Records, and Fuller’s 
 Dissent in Bristol. 
 
 + Neal’s History of the Puritans, vol. ii., pp. 607-634. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 G07 
 
 It ought not to be forgotten that from the fact of the Nonconforming divines 
 when ejected from their pulpits in 1662, as mentioned at page 412, taking with 
 them their clerical habits, the Nonconformists of the present day, particularly 
 the Independents, claim the right to wear them as a standing memorial of the 
 persecutions to whicli their forefathers were subject, rather than violate 
 conscience. 
 
 APPENDIX LXVI .—Page 419. 
 
 “ On Sunday last, (October 23rd, 1859), during the morning service at Salem 
 Chapel, St. Augustine’s Back, the Rev. George Midler, in as few and simple 
 words as though the humblest member of the congregation were referred to, 
 stated, for the information of those whom the intelligence had not yet reached, 
 that a telegram had been received the previous afternoon, conveying the 
 melancholy news that brother Conrad Finzel had died suddenly on Friday night 
 at Wiesbaden, in Germany. 
 
 “Brief and inornate as the announcement was, it was in a measure charac¬ 
 teristic of the object of it. The late Conrad Finzel was a man of deeds, not of 
 words. We speak without exaggeration when we say, that perhaps never since 
 the death of Edward Colston, has one been taken from amongst the citizens of 
 Bristol, whose loss has caused so great a void in the charitable transactions of 
 the place. Like the old Philanthropist, Mr. Finzel died at a distance from the 
 city his liberality had so benefitted; but, unlike Colston, we cannot claim him 
 as a Bristolian or even a Briton by birth : here, however, was the beginning of 
 his fortune, and here his remarkable career of public usefulness was run; and 
 here, we believe, will never cease to be cherished the memory of his good and 
 simple character, which, on the whole, has been as consistent in act and motive, 
 as it is permitted to men of ordinary mortal mould to be. , 
 
 “ The deplorable event—deplorable in its true sense—which was publicly 
 announced on Sunday, but privately known on Saturday, occurred when Mr. 
 Finzel was on his way back to England from his native State, Frankfort, where 
 he was on one of his (of late) frequent visits to his friends. He had previously 
 written home to his son, Mr. Conrad Finzel, Jun., stating his purpose to leave 
 Frankfort on the 19tli (Wednesday) on his way to England, and it is thought that 
 he was on his route through Wiesbaden when he was suddenly seized with illness 
 on Thursday, and after two days’ suffering died on Friday night. A letter was 
 received in Bristol on Monday, written by his medical attendant in the course 
 of the day on which he expired, stating that the writer feared Mr. Finzel would 
 not survive the attack, which was brought on, as he stated, by a severe cold, 
 and is therefore concluded to have been inflammation of the chest. 
 
 “The early history of the deceased had something of romance in it. He 
 was quite a young man when the colossal power of the First Napoleon bestrode 
 Europe, and brought Germany also in subjection to his arms. Young Finzel 
 was drawn as a conscript for the Imperial army, but participating in the 
 detestation with which his countrymen regarded the French despot, he 
 
608 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 resolved to do anything rather than swell his legions. Accordingly, he and 
 two others, who had also been drawn, fled into Hanover, and there being no 
 other mode of escape from a kingdom which was then also under the Napoleonic 
 influence, if not sway, he and his comrades adopted the bold, almost desperate, 
 resolve to commit then’ lives and fortunes in an open boat to the stormy North 
 Sea, and thus were fortunate enough to reach in safety the Island of Heligoland, 
 where they found a ship which conveyed them to England. The young 
 fugitives, with little or no money, and unable to speak a word of English, were 
 landed in the port of London, 
 
 “ The world was all before them where to choose. 
 
 Young Finzel, in his passage through the streets, luckily alighted on a Sugar 
 Refinery, where some of his countrymen were employed, and entered it as a 
 workman. The poet tells us that ‘ that is Providence which men call chance,’ 
 and it was a most fortunate circumstance which led him to such a manufactory, 
 as it was soon found that this was, as it were, his ‘speciality.’ By intelligence 
 and a faculty for close observation, and a promptitude to act upon discovery, 
 he soon advanced to be second boiler in the house, and was afterwards by 
 Messrs. Savage, of Bristol, engaged as their principal refiner. 
 
 “ Thus it was he became a citizen of this place. Some twenty two or three 
 years ago, he left Messrs. Savage’s employment, and opened in connection with 
 Mr. Darts, a grocer, near the Market Gate, in High Street, a small (very small) 
 Refinery, in Counterslip, occupying, we believe, a part of the site of the present 
 vast and palatial manufactory, which, under the designation of ‘ Finzel, Son, 
 and Co.,’requires a fleet of between fifty and sixty large sugar ships in the 
 course of the year to keep it in work—manufactures something like a thousand 
 tons of sugar a jveek, and is popularly said to have frequently realised as much 
 profits in a twelvemonth, as the combined income of the two great Glouces¬ 
 tershire chieftains, the Duke of Beaufort and Earl Fitzhardinge, derived from 
 then- broad lands, or, as surpassed the public revenue of the hereditary prince 
 of the German state, on which Mr. Finzel’s father worked a moderate farm. 
 Not very long since, the writer of this notice was taking a country friend over 
 this immense refinery, when Mr. Finzel, in a suit of flannel, fresh from his 
 steaming work, happened to pass, and after a few words of conversation, he 
 pointed to a small copper boiler, capable it might be of containing some 
 three hogsheads or so, which was fixed by the stage near where we then were 
 standing, and said, in his strong German accent, and in his frank way, ‘ With 
 that little copper I began the world as a master refiner fifteen years ago.’ The 
 contrast between that very small beginning, as represented by the little copper, 
 which its owner regarded with something of grateful interest, and the spectacle 
 of busy and thronged vastness which surround us—the building, pulsating as it 
 were with mammoth steam machinery, equal to seven hundred horse-power—- 
 more than three hundred active workmen plying their tasks, and altogether, 
 edifice and plant put together, at an outlay of nearly a quarter of a million—we 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 CO!) 
 
 say, contemplating all this, in connection with the first small boiler with which 
 the strong characteristic man in white flannel before us commenced the world, 
 this alone would have stamped the (humanly) unaided artificer of so much 
 fortune as an original man, without our mental recurrence to the ‘other’ striking 
 ‘miracle’ of the Orphan House oil Ashley Hill, which has grown with the 
 growth of the Eefinery at Counterslip, and with which the public have so far 
 associated it (and w r e suspect not incorrectly), that they always classed Conrad 
 Finzel amongst the chief, though anonymous, supporters of that marvellous 
 institution near our city, which is, if possible, rather more a wonder to the rest 
 of England, than even to ourselves. The amount of Mr. Finzel’s liberality to 
 that Asylum, which now shelters, clothes, and educates (172 children deprived 
 of father and mother, and is being rapidly prepared to accommodate 450 more, 
 so that when all is ready there will be room for 1150 orphans in the establish¬ 
 ment—is, of course, conjectural; yet we have as good reason to believe, as any 
 one under the circumstances can have, that of late years, his contribution, in 
 one form or another, to this charity alone, has been little, if anything, short of 
 £10,000 per annum. Mr. Muller, the able and excellent man, who, like Mr. 
 Finzel, is a German, and originated this vast voluntary charity, states in his 
 recent report, issued only some couple of months, that last year’s income had 
 reached to £25,221, while the expenses were £10,993; the total amount received 
 for the building fund, ‘since I began to pray for it,’ being £41,911, of which 
 £20,508 remained as a balance in hand. From this, therefore, we may conclude 
 that there are other large contributors to the Orphan House besides Mr. Finzel, 
 for we gather from Mr. Muller’s statement that the receipts for the year reached 
 him in between three and four thousand different sums, without any appeal 
 made, or a single person solicited for a penny, but (as Mr. Muller believes) in 
 answer to his prayers offered in faith : so that his reliance in Providence still 
 remaining the same, the death of even so great a contributor can in no way 
 affect, in the founder’s estimation, the fortunes and future support of the 
 thousands of orphans that will very shortly occupy that modern ‘miracle in 
 stone and mortar on Ashley Hill.’ Indeed, we believe that a kind friend to the 
 institution, only second in the extent of his offerings to the deceased contributor, 
 still survives in the person of a Bristol gentleman belonging to a leading family 
 of Friends, and yet actively and largely connected with trade. 
 
 “There was little interval between the time that Mr. Finzel and Mr. Muller 
 settled in Bristol, and we believe that the latter had a powerful influence in 
 directing the current of Christian liberality which has kept even flow with his 
 countryman’s commercial career, widening with his prosperity, keeping pace 
 with it in almost stated and regulated proportion, until both assumed that 
 splendid and expansive form and character already noticed. Indeed, we 
 believe, that his getting and the giving were so ordered, that the Orphan 
 House became in his mental calculation a partner in the profits of the Sugar- 
 house ; and it is possible it might be found, if the means of testing it were at 
 hand, that the deceased, by a secret and understood rule with himself, had 
 
 Y Y 
 
610 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 kept no more than he gave away, sharing his success, so to speak, with the 
 divine Giver who conferred it. 
 
 “With all this, Mr. Finzel was a cheerful, genial, hearty man, actively 
 moving in and enjoying life. His giving was on calm principle. He had a 
 forethoughtful consideration, as well as an open heart, for the poor. Almost 
 every one went to him when money was wanted for public or charitable 
 purposes, and the claim, if a good one, was allowed; while hundreds and 
 hundreds of poor had proof that the Orphan Asylum was not the only, and was 
 far from being the only, depository of his bounty. 
 
 “His wealth would have given him power in the city, if he had chosen to 
 exercise it, but he did not care for ‘that sort of thing;’ though he could be 
 induced to come forward on occasions and say his few simple and sensible 
 words, which always, however, received point from a large donation. In 
 politics he was a Conservative—in religion a liberal Dissenter, but a friend to 
 the Church. Always independent and self-reliant, his riches did not make him 
 * high-minded,’ and he could estimate his own faculty and fitting tastes. 
 When elected an alderman about seven years ago, he declined the office in a 
 frank and friendly spirit, saying to the Mayor, who waited upon him, ‘God 
 gave me a faculty to be a good sugar-boiler, but no turn or talent to be a town- 
 councillor.’ His two most important discoveries of the centrifugal vat for 
 making crystals, and the vacuum pan, are proofs of his acute and inventive 
 power in his business. He is said to have obtained as payment for the use of 
 these patents, from other refineries, some £10,000 a year. At the last general 
 election he was solicited to become a candidate for Bristol on the Conservative 
 interest; but, while he took part in the contest, he declined to be a principal in 
 it, from the same reasons—that he had always abstained from public life. 
 
 “ His personal habits were simple, without being self-denying. He was fond 
 of music, and like all his countrymen, a great smoker. When in Bristol he 
 dined usually at the Belinery, returned to his residence, which he built at 
 great cost at Clevedon, at about four, and was immediately afterwards seen, 
 regular as the day, in his Scotch cap, on his strong cob, starting for his ride of 
 ten miles. Except during the months of January and February he bathed 
 regularly in the sea, near his residence, every morning, his last bath for the 
 winter being on Christmas Day. Though not a teetotaller, he was almost an 
 abstainer from wine, and his strong muscular frame, set off by the broad 
 honest bearded German face, seemed to give promise that a habit of wholesome 
 labour and temperance would have prolonged beyond the age of 66 a life so 
 exemplary and so useful; but it has pleased Providence to order it otherwise, 
 and the man who so well did his duty to his neighbour has received a 
 comparatively early reward. It is, however, somewhat impressive to reflect on 
 the circumstances of his death. After an eventful and remarkable career in 
 another country, he breathed his last on his native soil, but away from the 
 bosom of his family, and amongst those who were personal strangers to him. 
 Something like half a century had elapsed since he quitted his German home, 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 611 
 
 and arrived in England a penniless and unknown youth. Yet his death, which 
 took place comparatively unregarded in a foreign hotel, was no sooner known 
 in the English city of his adoption, than it elicited from all classes but one 
 expression of deep and sincere sorrow. Indeed, the universal throb of regret 
 which was felt throughout Bristol on Sunday, when the intelligence was 
 known, ought not to be without its effect on those who have the means, but 
 have omitted the opportunity of doing something like him. 
 
 “ Though Mr. Finzel’s death was so sudden, we believe as a prudent and 
 foreseeing man would do, he had provided for that which may come upon us 
 all unexpectedly, so that whatever were his purposes in a private or public 
 sense, he has had opportunities of maturely considering and deliberately 
 securing them by will. He was twice married, but had only a family by his 
 first wife; namely, two sons and three daughters, who, as well as a widow, 
 survive him. His eldest son, Mr. C. Einzel, and Mr. J. Budgett, have been 
 associated in business with him; it is, therefore, satisfactory to know that this 
 vast and splendid concern, so essential to the commercial prosperity of the city, 
 employing so many men, and requiring such large importations, will be 
 continued without any interruption. Indeed, during the last two or three 
 years, the late Mr. Einzel, who was fond of travelling, devoted only a small 
 portion of his personal superintendence to it. 
 
 “ The friends of this lamented gentleman being unable, it is said, owing to 
 certain laws with reference to sepulture in the State in which he died, to 
 remove his remains to England, they were interred in a burying-ground close 
 to Frankfort. On examination after death, a very large internal tumour (we 
 believe on the lung) was discovered, which must, under any circumstances, 
 have greatly shortened his valuable life: though the immediate cause of his 
 death was inflammation of the chest. 
 
 “ We have heard from a reliable quarter an anecdote of this good man, 
 which is so characteristic that we do not doubt its correctness. It will be 
 remembered that, some years ago, his sugar refinery on the Counterslip, and 
 which occupied the site of the present magnificent building, was burned down, 
 thereby causing great loss and interruption to Mr. Finzel’s trade. After the 
 new Refinery—which quickly replaced the one destroyed—had been in work 
 some time, Mr. F. said to a friend—‘ When the house was burned down, I 
 asked myself what Conrad Einzel had done to call for this chastening stroke 
 from God; and after thinking for some time, the truth flashed upon me. The 
 'Almighty had punished me because I had not given to His uses as He had 
 blessed me: He had greatly increased my store, and I had only helped the 
 poor in the same proportion as when I had little. Thus I deserved punishment, 
 and God sent me this affliction to remind me of my duty : so, instead of giving 
 so-and-so, I said I will give one-third of my gains for the future. I have given 
 them, and God has gone on blessing me.’ The strong faith which he had in 
 the abiding help of Heaven to the Orphan House was shown in a remark which 
 fell from him to another friend, who was despondingly speculating on the effect 
 
612 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 which the possible death of Mr. Muller, who was then in delicate health, might 
 have on the institution. ‘ What has the life of George Muller, or Conrad 
 Finzel, or any one else,’ he replied, with great warmth, ‘to do with the Orphan 
 House—it is God’s work, and God will take care of it when there is not one of 
 us left.' 
 
 “ Not until he had been in Bristol nearly thirty years, and become rich, did 
 he visit the land of his boyhood ; but on becoming wealthy he determined to do 
 so. On reaching his native village in Germany, with a beating heart he took 
 the path which led to the cottage where he first saw the light. He lifted the 
 latch and entered. The only inmate was a plain-spoken man about his own age. 
 The worthy German-Bristolian asked the occupant of the house many questions 
 as to his family, and expressed a deep interest in his relatives. ‘ Had you a 
 brother, then?’ inquired Mr. Finzel. ‘Yes, I had,’ said the man, ‘but he 
 went away, and is dead, I suppose.’ ‘When did you last hear of him?’ 
 inquired Mr. Finzel. ‘ The last time we heard anything about him he was in 
 England, at a place called Bristol. ’ ‘ How long is that since ? ’ ‘20 or 30 years,’ 
 was the reply. ‘And his name was’—continued Mr. Finzel. ‘Conrad,’ said 
 the man, finishing the sentence. ‘ Oh ! I knew him,’ said Mr. Finzel—‘ I knew 
 your brother well, worked in the same shop with him, slept with him, ate the 
 same bread, drank the same drink.’ At this, the man, little thinking who his 
 brother’s ‘ companion ’ was, expressed the deepest interest in him, because of 
 his knowledge of Conrad, and pressed for more information. At last, unable 
 longer to disguise his emotions, the rich merchant exclaimed, ‘ Do you not know 
 me ?—I am Conrad, your brother! ’ We need not describe the joy there was in 
 the village on this discovery of the lost one; but our story -would lose its point 
 did we not state that before leaving the village, Conrad Finzel had settled 
 annuities on his brother and every relative he could find in the neighbourhood.” * 
 
 AITENDIX LXVII.— Page 419. 
 
 The mineral fields round Bristol are very extensive as well as rich ; indeed, 
 the city itself would almost appear to be built upon one vast subterranean area 
 of mineral wealth, the large coal basins being traversed by almost parallel seams 
 of iron clay; while limestone of the best description for furnace purposes is 
 quarried in any quantity on the banks of the river. In the neighbourhood the 
 smelting of iron has commenced, giving promise of forming, at no distant 
 period, a very considerable acquisition to the local and maritime trade of Bristol, 
 it being the opinion of competent authorities that there is in the immediate 
 locality of the works alluded to, the means of keeping six or eight smelting 
 furnaces constantly working the natural resources close at hand. Already pig- 
 iron of very fine quality is produced; the extent of the virgin mineral field is 
 of very considerable dimensions ; and that of coal appears to be inexhaustible. 
 
 Local Journals, October 29th, 1859. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 613 
 
 The potteries, too, mentioned in the text, are not only of great extent, but also 
 of great age, the first established in Bristol being as early as the reign of 
 Edward I. Towards the middle of the eighteenth century the pottery of Mr. 
 Champion, Castle Green, issued specimens of the plastic art, of surpassing 
 beauty and skill, even rivalling the best productions of the East; his patent 
 was sold in 1777 to a firm in Staffordshire. A pottery was first established on 
 Temple Backs in 1787- 
 
 APPENDIX LXVIII.— Page 419. 
 
 In the Proceedings of the Archaeological Institute in Bristol, 1851, page 35, 
 the late Mr. William Tyson, F.S.A., says, “I am desirous of submitting to the 
 members of the Institute a few remarks respecting a Bristol ship of considerable 
 notoriety in the fifteenth century, called the Nicholas of the Tower; ” the object 
 of his remarks being to claim her as a Bristol-built vessel, which he supposes, 
 with Mr. Seyer, to have been built by John Burton, merchant of the town, near 
 the Round Tower, on the Quay, in the parish of St. Nicholas ; from which circum¬ 
 stance it received its name. Mr. Seyer, in relation to this subject, quotes 
 “ Bree’s Cursory Sketch ; ” on which a well known writer observes, * “I must 
 confess I have been not a little surprised at the amount of inaccuracy which is 
 here exhibited by (Mr. Seyer) an historian for whom I have always entertained 
 a high degree of respect.” He then proceeds to shew where that writer has 
 been misled by Mr. Bree, who copied inaccurately from the Harleian MS.; and 
 he shews, also, that Mr. Tyson was wrong in asserting that the “ Nicholas of 
 the Tower” took its name from a tower at Bristol near which it was built, or 
 that it was at all connected with the old town, or had Burton for its owner. 
 The truth appears rather to be that it received its designation from the Tower 
 of London. 
 
 “ When it was first proposed to send a steam-vessel across the Atlantic, 
 scientific men, who were looked up to as authorities on the point, declared 
 that, if attempted, it would be found impracticable. Despite this opinion, 
 however, some spirited merchants of Bristol determined to try the experiment, 
 and forthwith laid down the hull of a steamer, which it was their intention to 
 send over the ocean at all hazards; ” this steamer was the world-renowned 
 “ Great Western,” which was built here by Mr. William Patterson, a gentleman 
 much celebrated among naval architects, at a cost of about £63,000. “ When 
 
 ready for sea, she was freighted; seven adventurous persons became passengers, 
 and on the 8th of April, 1838, the Great Western started from Bristol to solve 
 the great problem of ocean steam navigation. She had only been 3 days at sea, 
 when she overtook “ a brave old liner,” which had sailed from Liverpool seven 
 days earlier; a dashing a-head, “the new wonder of the deep continued her 
 voyage without interruption, and arrived off New York on the afternoon of 
 St. George’s day, having performed the voyage in the unprecedentedly short 
 
 John Gough Nichols, F.S.A. 
 
614 
 
 HISTORY OR BRISTOL. 
 
 space of 15 days and 10 hours, without let or hindrance.” * Having remained 
 a fortnight in harbour, the Great Western started on her homeward voyage on 
 the 7th of May, with sixty-six passengers on board, “and after steaming for 
 exactly a fortnight, and over 3,218 nautical miles, she arrived at Bristol on the 
 22nd of the same month.” 
 
 “Thus the great problem of crossing the Atlantic by steam was solved, in 
 spite of the winds, the waves, and the philosophers. Between the 8th of April, 
 1838, and the 23rd of November, 1844, she performed seventy passages, in the 
 course of which she had run 250,000 statute miles, at an average speed of a 
 fraction more than ten miles an hour. + She had conveyed 5,774 passengers, 
 besides an immense quantity of goods; she had not been favoured by the 
 weather, that having been in some instances severely stormy; she has not met 
 with any serious accident, yet we learn from the report of a surveyor appointed 
 by government to examine her, and from the frequent reports of the surveyor- 
 general at Lloyd’s, that she is (1845) as sound in material, and as perfect in 
 form as on the day she was launched.” A better ship never sailed; nor was 
 there ever a vessel that did greater credit to a port than the Great Western did 
 to Bristol. She was a noble specimen of naval architecture, and her name has 
 become historical; for she “joined the two hemispheres,” and made the 
 passage between the old and new worlds, as punctual and certain “ as though 
 we had laid a railroad on the bed of the Atlantic. ” 
 
 The spirited company who owned the Great Western also built the Great 
 Britain, an iron ship, which is a hundred feet longer than a first-rate man of 
 war; but is, unlike the former vessel, propelled without side paddles. She was 
 begun in 1839, and was so far finished, as to be launched July 19th, 1843; and 
 early in 1845 she steamed round to London, beating the fastest steamer that 
 could be found to race with her. She has since sailed from Liverpool to America. 
 
 Many other noble ships destined for commercial purposes have been built in 
 the dock-yards of Bristol, as well as ships of the line and gun-boats for her 
 Majesty’s service; the whole of which have not only shown the superior 
 excellence in construction possessed by our local ship-builders, but also their 
 knowledge of the great wants of the age in naval architecture. In 1066 
 a frigate of war, named the St. Patrick, pierced for 52 guns, was built near 
 Prince’s Street Bridge, at the launch of which King Charles II. vans present, 
 and the Mayor and Corporation attended with great state and ceremony. Here 
 v T as also built in 1778, the Gloucester, for CO guns, and subsequently, the Medea, 
 for 32, and the “ saucy ” Arethusa, a war vessel well known in the naval 
 history of the country. Bristol, too, was often used for repairing the king’s 
 ships, one of 64 guns coming into the port in 176S, for that purpose. 
 
 * Chambers’s Edinburgh Journal, vol. iv., p. 29. “ It is necessary to state 
 
 ' here, that three days before the Great Western set out, the Sirius — a steamer 
 which usually plied between London and Cork—was dispatched, and arrived 
 on the morning of the same day, 23rd of April.” 
 
 t Till the year 1842, the Great Western sailed from Bristol; subsequently 
 from Liverpool. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 615 
 
 APPENDIX LXIX .—Page 419. 
 
 For years past the condition of our river and the dock accommodation of the 
 port have excited considerable anxiety in the minds of the citizens. It is a fact 
 which cannot be disguised, that many heavily-laden vessels arriving at Kingroad, 
 at neap tides, have to remain at that anchorage till the spring tides before they 
 can pass up to the Floating Harbour to discharge. Yet so many plans have been 
 laid before them for the improvement of the port, that they are almost 
 bewildering. Since Mr. Mylne proposed to have a pier at Portishead in 1828, 
 various engineers have made all sorts of suggestions regarding the increase of 
 our accommodation for shipping. Mr. Brunei produced three plans—one being 
 for the construction of a lock of sufficient dimensions to admit large vessels into 
 the Float, and the deepening, widening, and straitening of the river — the second 
 was to construct docks at some distance down the river, where the channel is 
 wider and deeper—the third was to make a pier near Portishead for the accom¬ 
 modation of large vessels. Twenty-one years have elapsed since these plans were 
 first discussed. In 1841 we had Mr. (now Sir) John M’Neill’s proposal for “the 
 Great Western Steam Pier,” at Portishead. In 1852 followed Mr. Rendel’s plan 
 for piers and docks at the mouth of the river. Then came one including a pier 
 at Portishead, docks and basins at the mouth of the river, a canal and a railway 
 to Bristol; and another, by Mr. Neale, for a floating dock at the former place. 
 These various plans were succeeded by those of Mr. Thornton, Mr. May, Mr. 
 Parkes, Mr. Green, Messrs. W. Maule and Sons, Mr. Morgan, and Mr. Howard. 
 With all these plans before them the Town Council determined, in October, 1860, 
 to submit to two civil engineers “the reports and plans for increasing the dock 
 accommodation of the port; ” and as the latest plans (including that of Mr. 
 Howard), had favoured the proposal for dockising the river, the two engineers 
 were requested specially to report whether the plan for converting the bed of 
 the river into a floating harbour would be practicable. They were also requested 
 to state which of the schemes, and if neither, what scheme would be best 
 adapted for securing to Bristol her fair share of the ocean steam-trade of the 
 country. The engineers called in were Messrs. Page and Hawkshaw, and the 
 reports and plans of these gentlemen have some time been before the public. 
 Neither of the engineers adopts the plan of any of his predecessors, but each 
 makes a fresh one of his own, and it is not a little remarkable that both of them 
 disapprove of the conversion of the river into a floating harbour, as proposed by 
 Mr. Howard (the Borough engineer) and others. Mr. Hawkshaw proposes the 
 deepening, widening, and straitening of the river; a new basin and dock leading 
 into the float near Cumberland Basin; a steam wharf in the same locality; a 
 dock at the mouth of the river, capable of holding nine of the largest steamers; 
 and a railway from this dock to the Float. Mr. Page proposes the construction 
 of a pier on the east side of the Avon-mouth to accommodate four of the largest 
 steamers that may be built, and a railway from the pier to Bristol. “All 
 vessels,” says Mr. Page, “ of such draught of water as forbids them passing up 
 the Avon, at neap tides, would be so far discharged at the pier as to enable them 
 
616 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 to pass up to the docks at neaps, and the great drawback of the port of Bristol 
 would be almost entirely removed.” Mr. Page anticipates that the increase of 
 trade to the port, caused by the working of the pier and railway, would provide 
 funds for deepening the river, so as to allow vessels of 22 feet draught to come 
 up to the docks at neap tides. The deepening of the river would be useless, 
 however, unless the ships could enter the basin, and Mr. Page consequently 
 proposes to construct a new basin, to occupy the bed of the river a little above 
 Pownham—a short new cut being made on the Somerset side, for the channel of 
 the river. He also suggests that a bridge be made across the new cut of the 
 river, with an opening in the centre for the passage of vessels up to Bathurst 
 Basin. This would certainly be a great improvement upon the ferry at Rown- 
 ham, which Mr. Page pronounces dangerous, but its utility would not be so 
 apparent if the Suspension Bridge were completed. Provision is also made in 
 Mr. Page’s plans for the construction of extensive docks at the mouth of the 
 river. 
 
 Since the above plans were submitted for consideration, others, by local 
 engineers, have succeeded, which, however, by a recent decision of the Town 
 Council, have been entirely abandoned; it having been resolved, at a meeting 
 of the Corporation, February 19th, 1861, “That it is not expedient to incur 
 any further liability on the fixed property of the city, for the purpose of making 
 dock accommodation for ocean steamers at the mouth of the river,” &e., &e. * 
 
 APPENDIX L XX.—Page 421. 
 
 “An inhabitant of the square inclosing this area, observed to me, that his 
 whole family viewed the approach of September with dismay. ‘ How,’ said his 
 lady, ‘ shall I express the effects of the scene as it appeared from our windows ? 
 Tombs covered with cloths, toys, and gingerbread, children and servants 
 admiring the follies of a great city, and at the same moment treading upon 
 fragments of the dead but too often exposed after recent interments, stages 
 supporting puppets, ridiculous yet innocent, intermingled with painted hideous 
 males and females, their drummers, fiddlers, and trumpeters; when the 
 constant roar of sounds was at intervals interrupted by the tolling of the 
 church-bell for a funeral.” + 
 
 APPENDIX LXX1 .—Page 424. 
 
 “ The English Jacobite was animated by a strong enthusiasm for the family 
 of Stuart; and in his zeal for the interests of that family he too often forgot the 
 interests of the state. Victory, peace, prosperity, seemed evils to the staunch 
 
 * Public Local Journals. 
 
 + Malcolm’s Excursions, p. 222. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 617 
 
 nonjuror of our island if they tended to make usurpation popular and per¬ 
 manent. Defeat, bankruptcy, famine, invasion, were, in his view, public 
 blessings, if they increased the chance of a restoration. He would rather have 
 seen his country the last of the nations under James the Second or Janies the 
 Third, than the mistress of the sea, the umpire between contending potentates, 
 the seat of arts, the hive of industry, under a prince of the House of Nassau or 
 of Brunswick.” * 
 
 There are three great societies instituted in Bristol to do honour to the 
 memory of Colston, whose meetings are annually held on the 13tli of November, 
 when collections are made for charitable purposes, which yearly amount to 
 hundreds of pounds. “ The occasion is avowedly one in which party politics 
 occupy, at two of the gatherings, much prominence, if they do not absorb more 
 feeling than is consistent with the object.” At the “Anchor” the politics are 
 Liberal, at the “Grateful” they are neutral, it being chiefly composed of old 
 “Colston Boys,” whilst the “Dolphin” is enlivened “by smart Conservative 
 speaking;” things “looking (politically) clieei'ful and promising at the old True 
 Blue table.” + Sever the political from the charitable at these anniversaries, 
 and Colston’s name would soon be like the names of greater men, remembered 
 only by the amount of the customary alms doled out to needy recipients, or by 
 the boys in his Charity Schools. 
 
 APPENDIX LXXII .—Page 424. 
 
 Probably meaning the year 1709, when, “On the 21st of May the colliers of 
 Kingswood, about 200 men, came into the city, and being joined by other poor, 
 caused a great consternatiou, and the militia was raised: but having received a 
 promise that wheat should be sold on Monday next at 6s. and 8d., they 
 dispersed. Some of the colliers, however, staid behind, and for some 
 threatening words were seized and secured in the Council-house: of which the 
 rest being informed, they returned, and there was some bustle between them 
 and the militia. Two or three of the mob were wounded; but some of the sash 
 windows of the Council-house, lately made, were broken, through which the 
 colliers made their escape. ” This narrative is recorded by Mr. Seyer,£ upon 
 the authority of manuscript calendars, but as they are corroborated by the 
 writer in the text, they may be regarded in this instance as correct. 
 
 * Macaulay’s Hist, of England, vol. iii., p. 177. 
 t Local Journals, November, 1860. The “Steadfast,” “True Blue,” and 
 “ White Lion ” Clubs, succeeded the “ Loyal Society” mentioned in the text; 
 each of which, at contested elections, strove hard for the candidate who would 
 support “Arbitrary Power, Hereditary Right,” and everything else that 
 savoured of opposition to the Rights of the People. At the Dinner of the 
 “ Loyal Society,” which held its anniversary on Colston’s birthday, as its 
 successors have since done, it is recorded that that gentleman was prevented 
 attending in 1713, the year before the Riot, “ being aged ; ” he was, however, 
 “ represented by Henry, Duke of Beaufort.” Evans’s Chronological Outline. 
 
 J Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., p. 558. 
 
 z z 
 
618 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 APPENDIX LXXIII. —Page 451. 
 
 John Evans, the author of the “ Chronological Outline of the History of 
 Bristol,” was a native of this city, where he was long well-known as a printer 
 and a musical amateur. In the former capacity he was connected with the 
 Bristol Mercury, and subsequently with the Bristol Observer, as printer; and 
 at times, too, he carried on business on his own account, but he seems never to 
 have been very prosperous in any of his undertakings, which caused him to 
 quit the profession, and engage himself as clerk in the Phoenix Glasshouse, 
 Temple Gate. Hoping, however, to better his condition, he relinquished this 
 situation and proceeded to London, where, for some years, he had cultivated an 
 acquaintance with many who united musical talent with a practical knowledge 
 of printing. At first he was employed in the office of the lessee of one of the 
 theatres, until a permanent situation offered, of which he was just in prospect, 
 when the fall of the Brunswick Theatre, February 28th, 1828, deprived him of 
 life in the fifty-fifth year of his age. 
 
 Mr. Evans was escorting a young lady who w r as about to make her first 
 appearance, and he had just entered the stage door when the former felt herself 
 repelled, as it were, by some unknown force, into the street, where she was 
 found lying flat on her face, unhurt; whilst her less fortunate companion was 
 separated from her, and propelled, by the same invisible agency, into the 
 theatre, and met with instantaneous death from the falling structure. 
 
 “As a public writer he was not happy; he had a peculiar and crochety mode 
 of expression, and an unfortunate tendency to punning, which distracted, 
 instead of rivetting the attention of his readers; but he was, nevertheless, a 
 man of considerable talent and research, and if he had possessed greater 
 advantages, would doubtless have been an ornament to his profession.” 
 
 APPENDIX LXXIV .—Page 464. 
 
 “A letter from Bristol gives this description, by an eye-witness, of what was 
 going on all night in Queen’s Square, the main scene of action :—‘The mob gave 
 notice of the houses they meant to attack, by knocking at the doors, and they 
 allowed the family a quarter of an hour to escape. This interval they spent in 
 dancing; they cleared a circle in the middle of the square, and went round 
 hand in hand, prisoners in their prison dresses (drunk with the delight of having 
 been set free), and women of the worst description. The light from the blazing 
 houses made them all appear black ; and the dance was to many of them the 
 dance of death; for they were so improvident for their own escape that they 
 set many rooms and different stories on fire at the same time; and when the 
 roofs fell in many of them were seen to drop into the burning ruins. ’ It is not 
 known how many perished there, but the niunber killed and wounded by the 
 soldiers was not short of 500.” * 
 
 Southey’s Life and Correspondence, vol. vi., p. 16S. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 619 
 
 APPENDIX L XXV.—Page 468. 
 
 “ Oliver Cromwell, with a salary of £5 per arm., and a pipe of Canary, and 
 half a ton of Gascoigu wine ordered him, as a present.” * As this is the only 
 instance of a remark of any kind being appended to the names of the Lord 
 High Stewards of Bristol, it woidd appear as though the writer was desirous of 
 conveying to his readers the idea that the Protector was the only individual 
 among them who was mean enough to accept of a gift for the mere loan of his 
 name to do honour to the Corporation. This is, however, by no means correct. 
 The office was without duties, and, as the name and title or titles of the person 
 filling it were thought to add dignity to the Corporation, the latter, in return for 
 the honour, presented something of value to the acceptor. Thus, Robert, Earl 
 of Leicester, was scarcely twelve-months in office, when three hogsheads of 
 claret, and one of white wine, the total cost of which was £13, were sent to 
 him at Kenilworth. In 1613, William, Earl of Pembroke, had a pipe of racked 
 Canary wine voted him “ for his gratification,” which cost £15 4s. 8d.; besides 
 which, Alderman Whitson, on the part of the Corporation, sent him, in 1626, 
 a gift of marmalade, sugar, oranges, lemons, jars of olives, and other confections, 
 amounting in value to £26 18s. Id. Sir Harry Vane got four years’ salary paid 
 to him,—£21, and the Corporation paid £11 10s. “ for horsemeat and diet,” for 
 his entertainment whilst in Bristol. From this circumstance it may be inferred 
 that during the Commonwealth there was a small salary attached to the office. 
 In 1664 the Duke and Duchess of Ormond visited the city at an expense to the 
 Corporation of £177 9s. 10d.; besides which, the Duke “got no end of sack, 
 sherry, and claret,” presented him, with the freedom of the city. 
 
 APPENDIX LXXYI .—Page 473. 
 
 Robert Ricaut was a member of the Society of Kalendaries, a body of learned 
 men, whose business it was to “record events, customs, laws, liberties, and 
 such other circumstances relative to Bristol, as are necessary to be remembered 
 and inviolably observed,” as he himself says in “The Maire ys Kalendar; ” a 
 manuscript in the possession of the Corporation, and of which he was the 
 author. This book is ornamented with sundry rude drawings and quaint 
 devices, and undertaken for “ the honour of Almighty God and the glory and 
 praise of His Blessed Mother;” but has little to recommend it as a literary 
 production. Robert Ricaut appears to have filled the office of town clerk until 
 the year 1503, with great reputation; when it is probable his death occurred, 
 as we hear nothing further of him. 
 
 APPENDIX LXXVII. —Page 474. 
 
 “ A very rich man, said to be the best chamberlain ever known; by his care, 
 and partly at his charges, causeys seven miles round the city, were made; liis 
 administration of the city revenue was not only irreproachable, but he im- 
 
 * Barrett’s Hist, of Bristol, p. 115. 
 
 z z 2 
 
620 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 paired his own fortune by his various charities; and being reduced, that he 
 might not be chargeable to the city, he got removed to the wardenship of the 
 Back Hall, in which post he died, much lamented by all good men.” * 
 
 APPENDIX LXXVIII .—Page 477. 
 
 Mr. Barrett says this man was seven times mayor of Bristol, which is un¬ 
 doubtedly a mistake, as it is easily seen there must have been at least two 
 persons of this name. The first appears as holding the position of chief 
 magistrate in 1289, and it is but a fair presumption that he was then forty 
 years of age, and if we again presume that the same person filled the office for 
 the last time in 1326, he would then have reached the age of 77 years, when, 
 as I suppose, his son appeared in public life, and four years afterwards was 
 elected mayor for the first time, which office he seems to have held six times, 
 if I am correct, the last time being in 1341. This, to me, is the most probable 
 solution of the difficulty of accounting for the same name appearing in the 
 same character so many times in our civic annals. 
 
 APPENDIX LXXIX .—Page 485. 
 
 “ When the discovery of so many countries and seas hitherto unknown had 
 given a considerable impulse to maritime adventure, the merchants of Bristol 
 were not behind the rest of their countrymen in seeking celebrity and profit by 
 
 the same means.In the year 1609 Mr. John Guy, merchant, one 
 
 of the Council of Bristoll, intending a plantation in Newfoundland, procured a 
 licence and charter of the King for the same, having some rich merchants of 
 London joyned with him: and many of this city did put their money with 
 them. And so Mr. Guy and some other young merchants went over to make 
 trial, whether the land -would bear corn. They also carried cattle and swine 
 over with them to increase the land.” + Mr. Guy “stayed there with the 
 colony both winter and summer, w-hose natures and conditions in general agreed 
 very well with the soil and clyme. In this plantation there were sent none but 
 men of civill lyfe, and of some honest trade or profession, by which course they 
 lived and prospered the better.” 7 
 
 APPENDIX LXXX .—Page 530. 
 
 “The merits of the question, involved in the dissention between Ann 
 Yearsley and Mrs. H. More, as to its quintessence, lay in a small compass, and 
 it deserves to be faithfully re-stated, for a most erroneous impression has too 
 long prevailed. And even the public are interested in repelling a groundless 
 
 * Barrett’s History of Bristol, p. 117. 
 f Seyer’s Memoirs of Bristol, vol. ii., pp. 259, 260. 
 
 7 Stow quoted by Mr. Barrett, p. 178. 
 
HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 621 
 
 charge of ingratitude, which, if substantiated, would tend to repress the spirit 
 of patronage, and, consequently, to quench the spontaneous emotions of 
 benevolence toward the humbler children of genius. The baneful effects, 
 arising from an uncorrected statement of the ingratitude of Ann Yearsley 
 towards her benefactress, might be the proximate means of dooming to penury 
 and death some unborn Chatterton, or of eclipsing the sun of a future Burns. 
 
 “Hannah More discovered that the woman who supplied her family daily 
 with milk, was a really respectable poetess. She collected her productions, 
 and, for her benefit, published them, with a recommendatory address. The 
 Poems, as they deserved, became popular; doubtless, in a great degree, 
 through the generous and influential Support of Mrs. H. More; and the profits 
 of the sale amounted to several hundred pounds. In this instance, as in most 
 of those family and individual feuds that distract the world, the foundation is 
 that sad ‘ mammon of unrighteousness ! ’ 
 
 “The money obtained by the sale of her Poems, (as most others would have 
 done) the milkwoman wished to receive herself : at least such a command over 
 it as her reasonable exigencies should require; that is, for the promotion of 
 herself in life, and the assistance of her two promising sons, who inherited much 
 of their mother’s talent. Hannah More, on the contrary, in conjunction with 
 Mrs. Montague, thought it most advisable to place the money in the Stocks, 
 in the joint names of herself and Mrs. M. as trustees for Ann Yearsley, so that 
 she might receive a small permanent support through life. In all this, whether 
 there were an error in judgment, or not, Hannah More acted with the purest 
 intention. But what did an ignorant milkwoman know of that inexplicable 
 subtlety, the 1 Stocks! ’ She wanted the money ;—the produce of her own 
 Poems: something present and substantial, that depended for its existence on 
 no mere abstraction. 
 
 “ Here was a strong-minded, illiterate woman on one side, impressed with a 
 conviction of the justice of her cause; and further stimulated by a deep 
 consciousness of the importance of success to herself and family; and on the 
 other side, a refined mind, delicately alive to the least approximation to 
 indecorum, and not unreasonably, requiring deference and conciliation. Could 
 such incongruous materials coalesce? Without extraneous testimony, the 
 presumption is, that Ann Yearsley’s suit, on this occasion, was urged with a 
 zeal approaching to impetuosity, and expressed, not in that measured language 
 which propriety, uudeniably, would have dictated ; and any deficiency in which 
 could not fail to offend her polished and powerful patroness. 
 
 “Ann Yearsley obtained her object, but she lost her friend. Though her 
 intention was not censurable, yet her manner, in the absence of due allow¬ 
 ances, may have been objectionable. Her name, from that moment, was 
 branded with ingratitude, and severe indeed was the penalty entailed on her by 
 this one act of indiscretion! The fearful tidings rapidly extended far and near. 
 ‘Ann Yearsley has proved an ingrate! ’ Her good name was forfeited ! Her 
 talents, in a large circle, at once became questionable, or vanished away. Her 
 
622 
 
 HISTORY OF BRISTOL. 
 
 assumed criminality also was magnified into audacity, in daring to question the 
 honour, or, at least, oppose the wishes of two such women as Mrs. H. More, 
 and Mrs. Montague! and thus, through this disastrous turn of affairs, a dark 
 veil was suddenly thrown over prospects, so late the most unsullied and 
 exhilirating, and the favourite of fortune sunk to rise no more! 
 
 “Gloom and perplexities in quick succession oppressed the Bristol milk¬ 
 woman, and her fall became more rapid than her ascent! The eldest of her 
 sons, William Cromartie Yearsley, who had bidden fair to be the prop of her 
 age, and whom she had apprenticed to an eminent engraver, with a premium of 
 one hundred guineas, prematurely died ! His surviving brother soon followed 
 him to the grave ! Ann Yearsley, now a childless and desolate widow, on the 
 produce of her library, retired, heartless, from the world, and died many years 
 after, in a state of almost total seclusion, at Melksham, in Wiltshire. An 
 inhabitant of the town lately informed me, that ‘Ann Yearsley was never seen, 
 except when she took her solitary walk, in the dusk of the evening ! ’ She lies 
 buried in Clifton church-yard. 
 
 “ In this passing notice of the Bristol milkwoman, my design has been, to 
 rescue her name from unmerited obloquy, but certainly, not in the remotest 
 degree to criminate Hannah More, whom I knew and respected, from early life; 
 whose views and impressions in this affair may have been somewhat erroneous, 
 but whose intentions, it would be impossible, for one moment, to question.”* 
 
 * Cottle’s Early Recollections, vol. i., pp. 71—77. 
 
 THE END. 
 

D00676672Y