« PreviousContinue »
which lay scattered and in confusion were put into order. In short, during his decanical administration, constantly supported by the unanimous efforts of the chapter, the state of the society became every day more flourishing. Their muni- . ficence was always most cheerfully, and generously, employed. At one time, a considerable sum of money was given for the redemption of captives in Algiers ; at another, their liberality was extended toward the redemption of poor Christian slaves from Turkey.
Bishop Cosin held his Primary Visitation of his cathedral in 1662, the second year of his consecration. In 1665, he held a second. The Articles of Inquiry differed in many respects from those of his predecessors, and were reduced by him into a more convenient method * How active the Dean and Chapter were to restore the church to it's former splendor, appears from their answers in 1665. “ As it hath been our resolu. tion and care, ever since our restauration, to repaire all the ruines which the wickedness of the late times had made in our Church and houses, and to restore all the ornaments which have been lost or spoiled ; so it is visible, that wee have not spared any cost or paines to effect what wee have intended, with as much speed as wee could.” And again—“ Wee have done many of these things mentioned in these Articles, and many more which are not mentioned; and, in effect, wee have done as much as wee could in this time, keeping many workmen continually at worke, who are still employed by us daily to finish what remaines to be done. And to the end there may be no obstruction herein, wee have provided afore-hand materialls of wood, stone, and lead; and have always been careful to reserve money to pay for them, and to discharge all other occasions of the church, and so wee shall continue to do. Wee are not willing to boast of what wee have done; wee had rather our workes should praise us, than wee them: but wee are not ignorant, that there are some cases, in which men may lawfully commend themselves. And wee can truly say, that the inhabitants of this city, neighbours, and strangers (especially those, who had seene the ruines before) that occasionally resort hither, wonder to see how much wee have done in so few yeeres, and how well wee have done it. And wee hope your Lordship will acknowledge, that what wee have done, we have done willingly and freely, and like men who had a due regard to their statutes, their commerce, and their honour. As for those things which are still to be done, wee are about them, and endeavour to have them finished with as much speed as wee can. But wee humbly conceive that there are some things, which your Lordship will not press upon us, untill you have our reasons why wee conceive they belong not to us.
quiry exhibited to them by John Lord Bishop of Durham, July 19, 1662, it is declared, that “the fair and rich pulpitcloth with the college-arms fairly embossed in gold and silver upon it, and divers other ornaments and utensils of the Church were embezzled and taken away by Mr. Isaac Gilpin, who also lent Gerard's Herbal (which cost 10lb.) to Col. Rob. Lilburn, who is now in the tower, and still detains that book from the Church's Library.”
* Copies of them are preserved in Hunter's MSS. deposited in the Chapter-library at Durham.
The sacrilegious persons here inquired off wee cannot yet find out, though your Lordship hath put us in hope of finding out one of them.”
It must not however, be concealed, that their Diocesan was dissatisfied with some of their
He hints at some strange abuses, that demanded correction. When he enumerates several of the privileges of the Church of Durham, he observes that it is none of their privileges to come into the quire “in their furre and nightgowns, or to sit with their hats on their heads at the reading the first and second lessons.” He mentions an extraordinary custom of coming to the church, “ wearing long rapiers, great skirted jumpes, and short daggers.” It is difficult to conjecture, how excesses of this kind could prevail.
The representation of the people in the English House of Commons arose to it's present state by
gradual and progressive improvement. Whatever may be it's defects at this time, an acquiescence in them is to be preferred to those crude notions, with which vain and seditious men have attempted to endanger the public welfare. At the general Quarter-Sessions of the Peace held at Durham on the third day of October, 1666, the Grand Jury presented a petition to the Court in behalf of the freeholders of their county; setting forth, that “ they do not enjoy the privilege of sending members to parliament as all other counties do, and expressing their hopes that the Justices will take the same into their consideration, and pursue such means as they may think most proper to accomplish their just and reasonable request.” This petition was strongly opposed by the Bishop of Durham, who entered his protest against it. Dr. Sudbury was one of the five magistrates who joined in a similar protest, while eleven others supported the petition and exerted their utmost endeavours to insure it's success. Two years after the death of Bishop Cosin, and one year before Dr. Nathaniel Crew was translated from the See of Oxford to that of Durham, the gentlemen of the county renewed their application, and in 1673 obtained an Act of Parliament by which they were empowered to choose four representatives, two for the county and two for the city*.
* Hutchinson's History of the County of Durham.
In 1690, Dr. Sudbury purchased an estate at Hepworth in the county of Suffolk, which he immediately appropriated to the purpose of binding children apprentices to freemen and inhabitants of St. Edmund's Bury. Trustees were duly appointed by him, to execute this benevolent design. Whatever overplus remained at the end of the year was reserved for the use of the free grammar-school of that town, founded by King Edward VI., “ for and toward the maintenance of such
scholars as shall from thence be sent to the university of Cambridge.” He was induced to form this charitable institution, previously to his death ; having justly observed, that, “ if any settlement be not well made during the lives of the donors, they do oftentimes miscarry either through the covetousness, negligence, or other misdoings of their executors or other overseers, who have been entrusted therewith; and likewise considering that it is most agreeable to God for those, whose hearts he has enlarged to do works of this nature, to part with so much as they intend to bestow for such purposes, rather in the times of their lives whilst it is in their power, than after their deaths when they can no longer enjoy it *."
About the same time, he founded a Greek lecture in his own College at Cambridge, and
* Communicated by Sir Thomas Gery Cullum, Bart.