MADELEY.

There is a touch alike of poetry and of meaning in the name. Our ancestors were delineators of natural scenery, verbally, and by the use of names. Taking possession of primeval lands and uncleared forests, driving their aboriginal owners before them—in one or more syllables they were wont to give the history of a place, or the more distinguishing features of a country, and word-pictures then current come down to us little altered, having coiled up within them considerable sense and by-gone meaning. Tradition, no less than the popular and generally accepted etymology of the name, informs us that Shrewsbury was originally the place of shrubs; that the dusky crow croaked at Crawley, and the chattering daw built its nest at Dawley. The broc or brag—Anglo-Saxon terms for the badger, once numerous along the Severn Valley—gave us the Brocholes. To reynard we are indebted, in like manner, for the modern name of Foxholes—a place near to the latter, where this animal flourished when Madeley Wood, now covered with cottages, was what its name implied.

Little local or archæological lore is required to know that Madeley Wood was the wood bordering on the meadow, or that Madeley is a name derived from meadowly, or mead—a term still used in poetical productions of the day. In like manner, Mad-brook, a little stream on the borders of the village, meandering through meadow land, was Mead or Meadow-brook—as one of our smaller English rivers is called the Medway, from like circumstances, and as Brockton on Madbrook was formerly Brook-town—the town or enclosure on the brook. A tolerable estimate of Madeley, in one of its early phases, and as it appeared to the commissioners appointed to carry out the Domesday Survey, at the time it formed part of the manor belonging to the Abbey of Much Wenlock, may be gleaned from the following extract:—

“The same (St. Milburg’s) holds Madeley, and held it in the time of King Edward. Here is one hide (100 or 120 acres) not geldable (not liable to pay taxes) and three other hides geldable. In demesne are eleven ox teams, and six villiens (those employed in ignoble service) and (there are) IIII. boors (peasants) with IIII. teams. Here are IIII. serfs (slaves of the lower class) and there might yet be VI. teams more here. There is a wood sufficient to fatten 400 swine. In the time of King Edward the manor was worth £4 per annum; now it is worth £5 per annum.”

England at that time was covered over with such manors; they had overgrown the free peasant proprietors which previously existed in Saxon times. On each manor was the house of the lord with the Court yard and garden, &c., comprising several acres. The manor land was for the use of the lord, but portions were let off. Some doubt now exists as to the true meaning of a hide of land, as both hides and virgates on adjoining lands differed, but the conclusion that the hide was a land measure of 33 English acres has been received by some, whilst others hold that it meant a measure of land sufficient for the support of a family. The most important agricultural operation of the period was ploughing, and a peasant rarely undertook this for himself on his own little plot, which was not sufficient for separate or independent management, with his own team and plough. The team of a plough consisted then as a rule of not less than 8 draught cattle, and this continued to be the case, as recorded by Arthur Young. The bad fodder of that period diminished the labour power of the draught cattle, especially during winter ploughing, which was on straw feeding alone. Madeley is undoubtedly derived from terms still in use, Meadow and ley, or lia; meadows having sometimes been subjected for a whole year to common pasturage whilst the adjoining land lay fallow, in order not to exhaust it by constant hay crops.

Such was Madeley in the olden time, when men were goods and chattels, subject to the rapacity and oppression of their owners, when laws were enacted by which to kill wild animals was a crime equal in enormity to killing human beings, and punished with the same rigour; when the right to hunt was in the hands of kings and those holding tenure to whom they thought proper to delegate it. The park, to which the modern names of Park, Rough Park, and Park Street, now apply—names that serve to recall former features of the surface—was enclosed from the forest, mentioned in the above extract. Its origin was this; November 28th, 1283, King Edward (1st) being petitioned that it would not be detrimental to his forest of Mount Gilbert if the Prior and Convent of Wenlock should enclose their Wood of Madeley (though within the limits of the forest) with a ditch, and fence, (haia) and make a park there—allowed them to do so. The same park is alluded to in a valuation taken 1390; together with one at Oxenbold, which—including the meadows—was said to be scarcely sufficient to maintain the live stock of the Priory. The Prior, who appears to have built houses within the boundary of the forest, in 1259 was ordered to pull them down; but having offered a fine to the king a charter was granted the following year, stating that, “for £100 now paid the Prior and Convent may have the houses in peace, although within the forest.”

The Court House, formerly surrounded by this park, and near to the station now called by its name—on the Great Western line—is an exceedingly interesting building, and one claiming the attention of the visitor. The present structure is in the Elizabethan style of architecture; but the grounds present traces of earlier buildings. In the years 1167, 1224, 1250, and again in 1255, mention is made of the Madeley Manor. In 1379 the estimated value of pleas and perquisites of the court is entered at two shillings.

Near the old mansion is the Manor-mill, formerly worked by a steam called Washbrook, which formerly supplied the extensive vivaries or fishponds that furnished the kitchen of the establishment with the necessary means of observing fast-days. Interesting traces of former pools and fisheries are observable. Under date 1379, we find the water-mill at the Court or Manor house “fermed” for 10s. per annum, and at a valuation taken of the prior’s temporalities at an earlier period, viz., 1291, the same mill is mentioned. Mills, then, were invariably the possession of the lord of the manor, lay or ecclesiastical, and tenants were compelled to grind there. They were therefore an important source of profit, and carefully enumerated, and it is worthy of remark that where a mill is described as being at a particular place, even at an earlier period—as in the Domesday survey of the country—there, as in the case of the Manor mill at the Court, one is now generally to be found in ruins or otherwise. In the garden, which is still highly walled, and which was probably originally an enclosed court, upon an elegant basement, approached by a circular flight of steps—the outer one being seven feet in diameter and the inner one about three—is a very curious planetarium, an horological instrument serving the purpose of a sundial, and that of finding the position of the moon in relation to the planets. It is a square block of stone three feet high, having three of its sides engraved, and the fourth or north side blank. Over this is a semicircular slab of stone so pierced that the eye rests upon the polar star.

Although little of the original building where festivals were held, suitors heard, or penalties inflicted, remains, the present edifice has many points of interest. The substantial, roomy, and well-panelled apartments, upon the ground floor, and the solid trees, one upon the other, forming a spiral stair-case to the chambers above, are objects of no little interest. Ascending these stairs the visitor finds himself in the chapel, the ceiling of which is of fine oak, richly carved, having the arms of various ancient families in panels. The arms of the Ferrars family may be seen in a shield over the principal doorway,—indicating the proprietorship at one time of some member of that family. It was also the residence of Sir Basil Brooke, fourth in descent from a noble knight of that name, a zealous royalist in the time of Charles I.

This family appears to have been resident at Claverley in the fourteenth century. Mr. Brooke, of Haughton, near Shifnal, has deeds in his possession showing the purchase of certain arable and pasture lands at Beobridge, by Richard de la Broke, of Claverley, in 1316, and again in 1318, where he is described as Richard de la Broke, clerk, son of Richard de la Broke, Claverley.

Mailed and full-length fine stone figures of this highly-distinguished family, who lived here, and shed a lustre on the place, formerly reposed in the church, to whose sacred keeping they bequeathed their dust. Equally vain, however, were their bequests and hopes, for when the originals were no longer able to put a copper on the plate their very tombs were destroyed, and their stone effigies ruthlessly turned out of doors, and placed in niches outside the church, where, shorn of a portion of their limbs, they still do penance in pleading attitudes, and look as though they implored a bit of paint to prevent the inscriptions beneath from being lost for ever. The stone in one case has lost its outer coating, and the artifice of the sculptor in tipping nose and chin with a whiter material has been disclosed, and thick coats of paint are peeling off the defaced epitaphs which set forth the merits of their originals. The inscriptions are in Latin, but the following is, we believe, a free, if not an exact, translation:—

“Here lieth interred John Brooke, Esquire, the son of Robert Brooke, Knight, Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas. He was a zealous and loyal subject of Queen Mary, and assisted her in securing her rights in opposition to the violent factions of the time. He published an excellent commentary on the English Law in several volumes. After a study of jurisprudence and science, being of an extensively liberal mind and universally beloved, he made a Christian-like end, October the 20th, in the year of our Lord, 1598, in the 62nd year of his age.”

The following is another:—

“Here lieth the remains of Etheldreda, the wife of Basil Brooke, Knight, a woman not only well-skilled in the knowledge of the Latin, Italian, French, and Spanish languages, and in the science of music, but also exemplary for piety, faith, prudence, courage, chastity, and gentle manners. She left to lament her loss a husband, with an only son, named Thomas, and five daughters, namely—Anne, the wife of William Fitzherbert, Esquire, the grandson of Henry, Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, eminent for his commentary on our laws; Mary, the wife of Thomas More, a descendant of that renowned character, Thomas More, formerly Lord High Chancellor of England, a man in his life and death universally esteemed; Dorothy, Agatha, and Catherine, all of whom were of amiable dispositions. She died in the year of our Lord —” (the date is defaced).

The original is in Latin. The pillared arches and backs of the recesses are elaborately carved.

In “Villages and Village Churches,” published a few years ago, in describing Claverley, we stated that the present vicarage was supposed at one time to have been the residence of the Lord Chief Justice, whose likeness is carved upon one of the timbers. We also described a magnificent tomb of Lord Chief Justice Brooke, in the north-east corner of the Gatacre chancel, which is both elaborate and imposing. On the top are recumbent figures of the Lord Chief Justice in his official robes, and of his two wives, with ornamental head-gear, mantles, ruffs, ruffles, &c., of the period; and round the tomb are their eighteen children, also in the respective costumes of their time. On the outside is the following inscription, in Old English characters:—

“Here lyeth the body off Robert Brooke, famous in his time for virtue and learning; advanced to be com’on Serjaunt of the Citie of London, Recorder of London, Serjaunt at Law, Speaker of P’lyament, and Cheife Justice of the Com’en Pleace, who visiting his frendes and country, deceasd the 6th day of September 1558, after he had begotton of Anne and Dorothee, his wiefs, XVIII children. Upon whose sowles God have mercy.”

Jukes, in his Antiquities of Shropshire, says:—

“This Robert was the son of Thomas Brooke de Claverley, in this county, and was made Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas in the first year of Queen Mary, when he received the honour of Knighthood. He died in the communion of the church of Rome, A.D. 1558, and left his zeal for his religion to posterity, and his excellent performance of the Abridgment of the Common Law to the Students of that Profession. 36th Hen. VIII. William Astun did homage for a shop here. 38th Hen. VIII, the said Robert Brooke likewise did homage pro shopa in Madalie. Recorda Paschæ, 2d Edw. VI rot. 11, de Roberto Brooke, Armigero, et Dorothea uxore ejus occasionalis ad ostendendum qualiter ingressi sunt et tenent unam shopam et dimid. acræ terræ in Madeley. 3d. Edw. VI, the king grants to Edward Molyneux and Robert Brooke, of London, Esqrs. all that annual rent of £4 13s. 9½d. reserved to the crown out of this manor, together with the demenses of the same, and other lands therein specified, in fee simple. John Brooke, Esq. 27th Eliz. made a settlement of Madeley on Richard Prince, Esq. Sir Basil Brooke, Knight, 3d James I, sold lands here to David Stilgo, Robert and Edward Stilgo. Matthew Fowler, Gent. son and heir of Roger Fowler, had general livery 17th James for his lands in Madeley.”

Mr. Brooke had the reputation of being a great lawyer, and whilst a barrister we find him engaged by the Corporation of Shrewsbury to examine a petition from the town “for the discharge of the subsidies.” According to the entry in the Corporation books (1542) he and Serjeant Molyneux were paid 15s. for their services. He is described as Recorder of London whilst visiting the town, with Roger Townesende, Chief Justice of Wales, and Richard Hasshall, Esqr., “one of the Commissioners of our Lord the King,” and as being presented with “wayffers and torts,” at the expense of the corporation.

With regard to Basil Brooke, we find by an indenture of release, dated the 29th of May, 1706, that he, Basil Brooke, Esq., of Madeley, deceased, by his will bequeathed to the poor of the parish of Madeley the sum of £40, which the churchwardens and parishioners of the parish desired might be laid out in the purchase of lands and tenements for the use of the poor. And it was witnessed that Comerford Brooke, in consideration of the said £40, and also a further sum of £30 paid to him by Audley Bowdler and eight other parties to the said indenture, granted to the said Audley Bowdler and others, their heirs and assigns, three several cottages or tenements, with gardens and yards thereto belonging, situated in Madeley Wood, in the said parish, and in the said indenture, more particularly described, on trust to employ the rents and profits thereof for the use of the poor of the said parish in such manner as the grantees, with the consent of the vicar and parish officers, should think fit.

Near one of the fields adjoining the Court House, called the “Slang,” a man, while clearing a piece of rough ground, which appeared not previously to have been cultivated, a few years ago, came upon a large number of gold coins, chiefly of Queen Elizabeth’s reign, and of the modern value altogether of between three and four hundred pounds.

Looking at what the place now is, and calling to mind what it must have been when the spacious rooms rang with the joyous laugh, and echoed the minstrel songs of bygone days, one is reminded of Southey’s Eclogues, in one of which he seeks to connect the past and present by an old man’s memory, only that in this case more than one generation has gone to rest since the old Court House was complete with park, and moat, and fish-ponds. The old stonebreaker bemoans the change in some old mansion-house thus—

“If my old lady could rise up— God rest her soul!—’twould grieve her to behold What wicked work is here.

* * * *

Aye, master, fine old trees. Lord bless us! I have heard my father say His grandfather could just remember back When they were planted there. It was my task To keep them trimmed, and ’twas a pleasure to me; My poor old lady many a time would come And tell me where to clip, for she had played In childhood under them, and ’twas her pride To keep them in their beauty.

* * * * *

I could as soon Have ploughed my father’s grave as cut them down. Then those old dark windows— They’re demolished too; The very redbreasts that so regular Came to my lady for her morning crumbs Won’t know those windows now. There was a sweet briar, too, that grew beside; My lady loved at evening to sit there And knit, and her old dog lay at her feet, And slept in the sun; ’twas an old favourite dog. She did not love him less that he was old And feeble, and he always had a place By the fireside; and when he died at last, She made me dig a grave in the garden for him, For she was good to all: a woeful day ’Twas for the poor when to the grave she went. —At Christmas, sir! It would have warmed your heart if you had seen Her Christmas kitchen—how the blazing fire Made her fine pewter shine, and holly boughs So cheerful red; and as for mistletoe, The finest bush that grew in the country round Was marked for madam. Then her old ale went So bountiful about! A Christmas cask, And ’twas a noble one. God help me, sir, But I shall never see such days.”

Still greater changes than those described in the lines quoted above are witnessed at the old Court House and in its immediate vicinity,—changes so great that were it possible for one of its former feudal owners to revisit the scene he would fail to recognise the place. Ugly pit-mounds are seen surrounding the building; the place is illumined by the blaze of the blast-furnace, the screech of machinery is heard around it, and the snort of the iron horse sounds across the park, where the hounds were wont to

“Rend the air, and with a lusty cry Awake the echo, and confound Their perfect language in a mingled voice.”

The fashions and manners here represented have passed away, and these relics of antiquity look like fossils of old formations, or like dismantled wrecks cast up by the ever-moving current of time. They contrast strangely enough—these trophies of times gone by—with the visible emblems of man’s altered genius around. Modes of life have changed; every age has turned some new page as it passed. Instead of monasteries and moated manor-houses, with country waste and wood, thistled and isolated, whose wild possessors neglected even to till the surface, we have men of active mould, who do daily battle with the stubborn elements of the earth, while flashing fires flicker round their stolid effigies, telling of wealth-producing agencies that make millions happy. Ideas begotten of time, not then dreamt of, have leaped over moat and rampart, re-constituted society, converted parks into pit-mounds, and around the habitations of knighted warriors reared forges and constructed railways.

We are tempted to dwell a little longer here in connection with the Old Court, because considerable interest attaches to features, memorials, and traditions of such places. Viewed from the position we now occupy, a position the culminating result of past efforts and past struggles, they remind us of less favourable phases of society, and picture to the mind ideas, manners, and institutions—the cradle of our present privileges. Manor houses, many of which were destroyed during the Civil War, were held by the Church, and by distinguished personages, lay or clerical, who granted or leased land they did not themselves require. Hence the rise of copyholds—estates held by copy of the roll of the Court of the Manor. Courts were held within these manors and jurisdiction was had of misdemeanours and disputes. On forest borders, on grassy plains, amid fat meadow lands, by rivers, on rocky spurs and projections, these mansions or castelled structures stood, whilst their occupiers, with little industrial or political activity to escape the ennui of their position, were often driven upon the high road of adventure. One can scarcely conceive the privileged owners of such mansions to do otherwise than despise the dependent population—boors, serfs, and villeins, who cultivated their domains. Salient and strongly marked were the two classes—knowledge and power paramount with the one, ignorance and incapacity characterising the other: a proud supremacy and subserviency—claimed and admitted. Priors, bishops, and lay proprietors moved from manor to manor, taking their seats in these feudal courts, receiving homage and inflicting penalties. Woe to the bondsmen of the estate—doomed from the cradle to the grave to slavery—found guilty of an attempt to “steal himself,” as the old Roman law had it, from his lawful owner. Even tenants under these proud holders were subject to great exactions,—the cattle of the manor, boar or bull, by the condition of the tenure being free to roam at night through standing corn or grass: a provision as just as that with which in this the nineteenth century the lord of the manor has power, after purchase, to mine under and throw down the house one has built, in this same manor of Madeley, without one farthing compensation. Sturdy radicals, troublesome fellows, then as now held up at times the glass by means of political squibs to perpetrators of such injustice. One quaint old Shropshire satirist in the 14th century lashes severely the vices of the times. Another in a political song colours his picture deeply. The church at times interfered to mitigate the condition of the people, but the spiritual overseers of the poor, as a rule, thought more of the sports of the field than of their flocks except, indeed, at shearing time. Chaucer in estimating their qualifications was of opinion that “in hunting and riding they were more skilled than in divinity.”

We need not wonder, then, to find in the thirteenth century the Rector of Madeley a sportsman. Henry III, being in Shrewsbury, in Sept. 1267, at which time he concluded a treaty with Llewellyn, and settled sundry little differences with the monks and burgesses respecting a monopoly claimed by the former, of grinding all corn used in the town, and possessing all mills within its limits, granted through Peter de Neville to Richard de Castillon the rector, licence to hunt in the royal forest of Madeley. In such sport the clergy were borne out by their prelates. Of one Walter, bishop of Rochester, it is recorded that he was so fond of the sport that at the age of four score he made hunting his sole employment, to the total neglect of other duties. There were jolly churchmen in those days, for

“The Archdeacon of Richmond, we are told, in his initiation to the Priory of Bridlington, came attended by ninety-seven horses, twenty-one dogs, and three hawks. Walter de Suffield, Bishop of Norwich, bequeathed by will his pack of hounds to the king; whilst the Abbot of Tavistock, who had also a pack, was commanded by his bishop, about the same time, to break it up. A famous hunter, contemporary with Chaucer, was the Abbot of Leicester, whose skill in the sport of hare hunting was so great, that the king himself, his son Edward, and certain noblemen, paid him an annual pension that they might hunt with him.”

The faithful portraits Chaucer drew of the Sumptner and Pardoner, agents of ecclesiastical courts—one to hunt out delinquents who were wealthy, the other to make them pay well for their sins—are familiar to most. The prior of the Madeley manor carried this so far that he drew down upon him one bright day in April, 1243, before he was aware of it, a king’s writ for exacting “toll,” “on beer, seizing the third of widows’ goods who died within the vill of any deceased tenant, before his debts were paid, and otherwise oppressing those within the limits of the priory.” As the author of the “Antiquities of Shropshire” has said,

“The prior ground down the vicar, the vicar in turn impoverished his subordinates, and they (the chaplains) either starved their flocks or were themselves paupers. The bishops moreover, doubtless for certain considerations, connived at, nay, prominently aided the whole system of extortion.”

This had been carried so far as to require the presence of Bishop Swinfield, who held the See, in 1285, to rectify misappropriations of tithe in sheep and corn, and to arrange disputes respecting them within the boundaries of the Priory. In April, 1290, the bishop paid another visit, being by invitation the guest of the Prior; we do not get the expenses of the feast, but he is known to have been a joval soul, well to do, with two palaces in the country, and three in London, constantly moving about, taking care to carry about with him his brass pots, earthen jugs, and other domestic utensils for his retainers, who were littered down in the great halls of the manors, at each stage of the journey. He had numerous manor houses of his own, a farm at each, stables for many horses, kennels for his hounds, and mews for his hawks. His kitchens reeked with every kind of food; his cellars were filled with wine, and his spiceries with foreign luxuries. Take a glance at the bishop’s feast after a fast at his residence on the Teme. On Sunday, October the second, at the bishop’s generous board, the consumption was, three quarters of beef, three sheep, half a pig, eight geese, ten fowls, twelve pigeons, nine partridges, and larks too numerous to mention, the whole accompanied with a due proportion of wine.

Madeley not being a “fat living,” there was great shuffling on the part of the incumbents, none of them caring to hold it very long. One, master Odo de Horbosio, who was instituted March 14, 1299, on presentation of the Convent and Prior of Much Wenlock; and again, June 4th, 1300, has license to study, and to attend to business of himself and friends. August 2nd, 1300; William de Fonehope, who was presented by the Bishop of Hereford, (by lapse,) on March 18th, 1318, we find exchanging in 1322, with Sir William Hoynet, rector of Westbury; the said William the fifth of August, the same year, exchanged with James de Tifford, who exchanged with another, John Aron, who resigned it in November, 1319.

The oftener these changes occurred the better for the priors, who held the right of presentation to the bishop, and exacted fealty and fees. In Madeley, being lords of the manor, they nominated and presented the vicars: and in Badger, Beckbury, and elsewhere, where there were lay lords who nominated, they held the right of presenting such as were nominated to the bishop, and of exacting fees for their mediate offices between the nominators and the bishop.

As the land came to be cultivated, and the population engaged in agricultural and other pursuits increased in number, the living, we imagine, improved in value, and the advowson in importance. We have shown from the commissioners’ description in Domesday what was the state of Madeley just subsequent to the Norman conquest, and Madeley being still within the limits of the forest of the Wrekin, which surrounded it on three sides, little progress was made in the way of cultivation. From the “Survey of Shropshire Forests” in 1235, it appears that the following woods, besides those of Madeley, were subject to its jurisdiction:—Leegomery, Wrockwardine Wood, Eyton-on-the-Weald Moors, Lilleshall, Sheriffhales, the Lizard, Stirchley, and Great Dawley. Forest laws were rigorously enforced, and encroachments, either by cultivation or building without royal license to do so, were severely punished.

Prior Imbert was fined for three such trespasses, in 1250, in the heavy sum of £126 13s. 4d., chiefly in connection with Madeley. In 1390 the park and meadows the prior had been permitted to enclose with those at Madeley, Oxenbold, and other manors, were estimated as barely capable of maintaining the livestock of the priory.

A perambulation of forests in the reign of Edward I. shows the village of Madeley, with its bosc and two plains, to be disforested, as well as Coalbrookdale, one half of Sutton Maddock, and some other places. Coming down, however, to a much later period,—to the thirty-sixth year of the reign of Henry VIII., when he sold the Madeley manor,—cultivation had made considerable progress, and the property of the priory had very much increased in value. The last of the Wenlock priors, Sir John Bailey, alias Cressage, gave up possession on the morrow of the Conversion of St. Paul, 1539, with his own free will and consent, according to the deed, together with that of the sub-prior, and eleven monks. Take

“The fourth part of the Close Rolls of the 31st King Hen. VIII. 26th January, 31st Hen. VIII. Deed of Surrender to the Crown of the Monastery of Wenlock.

“To all faithful christians to whom the present writing shall come, we, John Cressegge, Prior of the monastery of St. Milburgh the Virgin, of Wenlock, in the county of Salop, and the Convent of the same place, greeting in the Lord everlasting, know ye that we the aforesaid Prior and Convent, with our unanimous assent and consent, and with our deliberate purpose, certain knowledge and mere motion for certain just and reasonable causes, as our mind and consciences specially moving, have freely and spontaneously given and granted, and by these presents do give, grant, and yield up, and deliver and confirm to our most illustrious and invincible prince and lord Henry the Eighth, by the grace of God of England and France king, defender of the faith, lord of Ireland and on earth of the church of England supreme head, all that our said monastery, and also all the scite, ground, circuit, and precinct, and church of the same monastery, with all our movable debts, chattels, and goods to us or our said monastery belonging or appertaining, as well those which we at present possess, as those which by bond or any other cause whatsoever to us and our said monastery are due in any manner; and also all and singular our manors, lordships, messuages, gardens, curtilages, tofts, lands, and tenements, meadows, feedings, pastures, woods, and underwoods, rents, reversions, and services, mills, passages, knights’ fees, wards, marriages, bondmen, villains, with their sequels, commons, liberties, franchises, privileges, jurisdictions, offices, courts leet, hundred courts, views of frankpledge, fairs, markets, parks, warrens, vivaries, waters, fisheries, ways, paths, wharfs, void grounds, advowsons, nominations, presentations, and donations of churches, vicarages, chapels, chanteries, hospitals, and other ecclesiastical benefices whatsoever, rectories, vicarages, chanteries, pensions, portions, annuities, tithes, oblations, and all and singular other our emoluments, profits, possessions, hereditaments, and rights whatsoever, as well within the said county of Salop, and in the liberties’ of London, Sussex, Chester, and Stafford, as elsewhere in the kingdom of England and Wales, and the marches of the same, to our same monastery aforesaid, in any manner belonging, appertaining, appended, or incumbent, and all and all manner of our charters, evidences, obligations, writings, and muniments whatsoever to us or our said monastery, lands, or tenements, or other the premises with their appurtenances, or to any part thereof in any manner belonging or appertaining, to have, hold, and enjoy our said monastery and the aforesaid scite, ground, circuit, and precinct, and our church aforesaid, with all our debts, goods, and chattels, and also all and singular manors, lordships, messuages, lands, and tenements, rectories, pensions, and other premises whatsoever, with all and singular their appurtenances, to our aforesaid most invincible prince and king aforesaid, his heirs, successors, and assigns for ever; and in this behalf, to all effects of law, which shall or can result therefrom, we subject and submit ourselves and our said monastery, with all and singular the premises, and all rights to us in any wise howsoever acquired (as is fitting), giving and granting, and by these presents we do give and grant, yield up, deliver, and confirm to the same king’s majesty, his heirs, successors, and assigns, all and all manner of full and free faculty, authority and power to dispose of us and our said monastery, together with all and singular manors, lands, and tenements, rents, reversions, and services, and every of the premises, with all their rights and appurtenances whatsoever, and according to his free and royal will and pleasure to be alienated, given, exchanged, or transferred to any uses whatsoever agreeable to his majesty, and we ratify such dispositions, alienations, donations, conversions, and appropriations by his aforesaid majesty henceforth in any wise however to be made, promising, moreover by these presents that we will hold firm and valid all and singular the premises for ever; and that moreover all and singular the premises may have due effect we publicly, openly, and expressly, and of our certain knowledge and spontaneously will, renounce and withdraw all elections from us and our successors, and also all plaints, challenges appeals, actions, suits, and other processes whatsoever, rights, remedies, and benefits, to us and our successors in that behalf by pretext of the disposition, alienation, donation, conversion, and translation aforesaid, and other the premises in any wise howsoever competent and to be competent, and laying aside and altogether putting away all objections, exceptions, and allegations of deceit, error, fear, ignorance, or of any other matter or disposition, whatsoever as by these presents we have renounced and withdrawn and from the same do recede by these presents: and we the aforesaid prior and convent, our successors, our said monastery, and also all the scite, ground, circuit, precinct, mansion, and our church aforesaid, and all and singular our manors, lordships, messuages, gardens, curtilages, tofts, lands, and tenements, meadows, feedings, pastures, woods, and underwoods, rents, reversions, and services, and all and singular other the premises, with all their rights and appurtenances, to our aforesaid lord the king, his heirs, successors and assigns, to the use aforesaid, against all men will warrant and for ever defend by these presents. In testimony aforesaid, we the aforesaid prior and convent to this our present writing have subscribed our names and put our common seal. Given at our chapter house the twenty-sixth day of the month of January, in the thirty-first year of the reign of our aforesaid most invincible prince and lord Henry the Eighth.”

At any rate the prior, sub-prior, and eleven monks retired upon a pension of £100, which was divided between them thus:—

£ s. d.

Extranni Baylie (alias Cressage) nuper priori ibidem 30 0 0

Willielmus Corfeld nuper sub prior ibidem 6 13 4

Richard Fishewyke presbitero 6 0 0

Thomas Acton presbitero 6 0 0

Johanni Caslett presbitero 6 0 0

Richardo Fenymo presbitero 6 0 0

Richardo Benge presbitero 6 0 0

Richardo Norgrave presbitero 6 0 0

Thomas Ball presbitero 6 0 0

Willielmo Morthowe presbitero 5 6 8

Johanni Lee presbitero 5 6 8

Willielmo Chamberlain presbitero 5 6 8

Johanni Hopkins presbitero 5 6 8

Summa 100 0 0

Sir John, the last of the long list of Wenlock priors,—many of them noble and distinguished men,—retired upon his life-pension of £30 to the old Court House, Madeley, where he resided till his death, which took place in 1552. Mr. Eyton says he died on Christmas-day, at the Madeley manor-house, and was buried next day in Madeley church. The Wenlock register, at Wynnstay, contains the following entry by Sir Thomas Butler, the then vicar:—

“1549. 25 Decr departed and dyed in the manor place of Madeley about IX of the clock in the nyght Sir John Baily Clercke the last Prior of Moncks that was in the Monastre of Moch Wenlock prior ther at the tyme of the Surrender thereof, whose bodie was buryed on the morrow, vz fest of St. Stephan in the parish churche of Madeley aforesaid.”

The same authority, Sir Thomas Butler, who seems to have been a most painstaking recorder of events, under date of February 20, 1539, has the following entry a little higher up:

“Edwd Browne Servant to my Lord Prior was married in Madeley and the Certf. entered in the book of the parish Church of Madeley.”

Unfortunately that register has been lost, if it existed. It may be that it did not, as many existing churches were then chapels, that is affiliations without a baptistery or a cemetery.

Madeley was subject to the mother-church of Wenlock, and we know how zealously the vicars of that church guarded their privileges. Broseley was in the same position, and in our “Tourists’ Guide to Wenlock” we quoted a memorandum made in the Wenlock register, in which the vicar says:—

“1542. Feb. 3rd Mem. at the same time in this Chancel of the Holy Trinity that I went to bury the Corpse of the sd John, Sir Edmund Mychell Parson of Browardesley aforsaid, in the presence of Rowland Wilcocks of the same Browardesley, willed me to give my consent that they of Browardesley might have their chapel there dedicate for the Burial there so to be had unto whom I answered (if the law would so bear me) I would not consent to the dedicating of that their Chapel of Browardesley nor of none other annexed and depending unto this the mother Church of the Holy Trinity of Moch Wenlock.”

These privileges were not strictly regarded, we believe, but as a rule the dead had to be carried to Wenlock to be buried, excepting in the case of persons of distinction, like lords of the manor or wealthy tenants of the prior, who were buried in the church.

The king having got possession of the property of the Wenlock priory, proceeded to dispose of it; and Madeley was sold to Robert Broke for what must have seemed a good round sum in those days. The following translation, which a friend has been kind enough to make for us, from a Latin copy of the original deed preserved in the archives of Madeley church, may be of interest.

Patent Roll, 36 Henry VIII., Part V. Grant to Robert Broke, Esquire, of the title and advowson of Madeley, co. Salop.

“The king to all whom it may concern, etc. salutation.

“Be it known to you all that we, in consideration of the sum of £946 3s. 8d., of our own legal English money, delivered over for our use into the hands of our legal treasurer, for the increase of the common revenue of our crown, by our beloved subject, Robert Broke, Knight, the sureties having been paid on the said sum of £946 3s. 8d., we declare that we shall be satisfied, contented, and fully indemnified, and that thenceforward Robert Broke, his heirs and executors, are to be exonerated and free from molestation, by force of these present letters, which we have given and conceded from our own special goodwill, certain knowledge, and of our own accord; and by these same present letters we give and concede to the aforesaid Robert Broke the whole of that manor named Madeley, with all and each of its rights, connections, and patronages, in our county of Salop, enjoyed lately over the priory of Wenlock, lately suppressed, in the abovementioned county, and all the belongings formerly attached to the lately existing monastery. Likewise all the other revenues of ours whatsoever, with their patronages in the above-named Madeley, and elsewhere in the above-named county, which have been part members or subject to the above-named manor, either by acknowledgment, acceptation, enjoyment, reputation, localization, or even by forcible separation.

“Likewise the advowson, the free enjoyment and the right of patronage of our vicariate parish-church of the above-named Madeley, in the above-mentioned county, as well as the rights attached to the whole of the place and buildings that go under the one name of the Smithy Place, and Newhouse called Calbrooke Smithy, with its patronages in the aforesaid Madeley.

“Likewise all our tithes of all fruits and grain annually growing, being renewed or produced in Madeley the afore mentioned, and now or lately in the possession of Richard Charleton; also the whole of that yearly and perpetual endowment of ours, viz., of three shillings annually, coming to us from the vicarage or church of the aforesaid Madeley; and the whole of that annual and perpetual pension of ours of 3s. 4d. annually, due from the rectory or church of Badger, in the above-named county.

“Likewise the messuages, tofts, houses, dwellings, stables, dovecots, stagnant ponds, and vivaries, springs, gardens and orchards, lands, tenements, incomes, revenues, dues, meadows, pasturages, woods, shrubberies, and trees.

“Likewise all the permanent feudal rights and customs, the permanent dues, endowments, tithes, offerings, belongings, annuities, products, revenues, and the annual result of engagements entered into by whomsoever such engagements and provisions were made . . . common fisheries, ways, paths, void grounds, as well, moreover, as the liberties, franchises, and jurisdictions, profits, emoluments, rights, possessions, and the rest of our heraditaments, both spiritual and temporal, with all their rights, situated, lying, within, and existing in the manor of the above-named Madeley, over the late priory, whether belonging to the possessions or revenues of the late existing. . . .

“This manor, in truth, with its tenements, and the other things premised, reaching the clear annual value of £46 17s. 7d., not considering the tithe. The aforesaid manor, its advowson, rents, revenues, services, and all and each of the other of its rights, are to be possessed and held by the aforesaid Robert Broke, his heirs and assigns, for the personal use of the said Robert Broke, his heirs and assigns in perpetuity.

“In consideration of the military service due in taxation to us, our heirs and successors, viz., the twentieth part of the value of one feudal knight, £4 13s. 9¼d. of our legal English money are to be paid to our legal treasurer, for the increase of the common revenues of our crown, on the feast of St. Michael the Archangel, each year, for all the rents, services, and demands whatsoever . . .

“We also wish, and by these presents we concede, to the aforesaid Robert Broke that the said Robert Broke shall have and retain these letters patent of ours, drawn up in the usual manner, under our great seal of England, and signed without fine or tax, heavy or light, to be paid into our revenue office, or in any other way to be demanded or paid to the use of us, our heirs, or successors.

“Therefore express mention of this our will has been made, etc. In testimony of which, etc., T. R. Signed at Westminster, 23 July [1544]. On behalf of the king himself, in virtue of the royal commission.”

The MS. breaks off abruptly in places, probably from the copyist not being able to decipher the original. Of the Richard Charleton here mentioned we have no account in connection with Madeley, but a Richard Charlton is mentioned some ten years earlier, in the accounts of the first-fruits office, as the king’s bailiff or collector at the Marshe, near Barrow, where the Wenlock priors had one of their principal granges, and held a manorial court.

This was in the twenty-sixth year of the reign of Henry VIII., and shortly after the very subservient parliament of 1534–35 had requested the king “to be pleased, as their most gracious sovereign lord, upon whom and in whom depended all their joy and wealth, to receive the first-fruits of all spiritual dignities and promotions.” An earlier member of this family is also mentioned as Bishop of Hereford, examining the titles of the prior to certain privileges in Madeley, during one of his Visitations. We have also heard it said, but are not aware on what authority, that one of this very ancient and distinguished family at one time lived at the Hay, in the parish of Madeley.

The deed is further interesting from its mention of the ironworks at Coalbrookdale, described as Smithy Place and New House. It is earlier by a century than any notice previously met with, and we shall further allude to it when we come to speak of these works. The patronages spoken of, probably, were the rights exercised over the minerals by the Wenlock priors, one of whom, in the exercise of such rights, had, in 1322, for the sum of six shillings, granted a license to Walter de Caldebroke to dig for coals in the Brockholes, for the term of one year.

Some light is thrown upon the advowson and tithe of Madeley by interesting old documents carefully preserved in the vestry of Madeley church. The following copy of the “Terrier,” kindly lent by Joseph Yate, Esq., made March 14th, 1710, shows the kind of tithe then collected:

“True copy of the Terrier of the parish of Madeley, in the county of Salop. For the vicar and clerks’ fees, tythes, offerings, and minister’s fees, &c.

“Imprimis. The court demesnes pays Easter offerings for master and servants, but no other tythes, except eight shillings at Easter, in lieu of tythes. The general way of tything within the parish is: hay and clover is due throughout the whole of the parish, except the demesnes, and is to be gathered at every eleventh cock; grass at the tenth cock; every pig and goose pay at the tenth, but for want of that number pay at the seventh; wool and lambs pay at the tenth, but in case they are set, is twopence a fleece and threepence a lamb, and for what lambs are fallen in wintering the owner pays twopence; calves are gathered in like kind, at the tenth, but for want of ten, at sixpence per calf. One penny a cow, in lieu of milk. Tythes of orchards or fruit-trees are gathered in kind throughout the parish, except the demesnes. The parishioners pay twopence for every stall of bees they put down, in lieu of tythe-money. Twopence for every colt, and two eggs for every hen or duck. Three eggs for every cock or drake at Easter. Surplice fees are paid after this manner: every marriage solemnized by banns, three shillings and sixpence; if by license, five shillings (let the parishioner be man or woman). For churching every woman, sixpence. Easter dues are: every man pays threepence, every woman pays twopence; one penny smoke, and one penny garden, clerks fees. Every hen at Easter, one egg; every marriage by banns, sixpence; if by license, one shilling. Churching every woman, twopence. Every burial without a coffin and ringing the bell, twopence; if with a coffin, one shilling and sixpence. Fourpence for every plough land; twopence every householder; double fees for all strangers (and likewise the minister). Ten shillings per year for looking after the clock. Tythes of corn-mills are due in all parishes except demesnes.

“Taken 14 March, 1710. Jeremy Taylor, vicar. John Stringer and William Wood, churchwardens.”

It would appear from this that the dead were sometimes buried without a coffin, in which case a coarse cloth was, we believe substituted. The “smoke penny” was a penny collected for every chimney emitting smoke, or rather a tithe paid to the vicar upon the wood burnt. A dispute having arisen in the earlier part of the last century between the vicar and impropriator, respecting the right of the former to tithe on woods, a parish meeting was called and a case got up by the vicar and churchwardens for the opinion of counsel, in which the payment of the smoke-penny was quoted to establish the vicar’s claim. We give the queries put and counsel’s replies in the Appendix.

Tithe and Easter offerings were occasionally paid in kind, as appears from the churchwardens’ accounts. In one case two heifers are mentioned, which it is added, produced forty shillings.

In the churchwarden’s accounts of Easter offerings to the vicar of Madeley, in 1693, we get an insight of the household of the Court. The sums given are not stated, but the entry is as follows:—

“Basil Brooke and wife gave —, John Brooke gave —, John Bowdler gave —, John the butler gave —, Dennis — gave —, Joseph Littlehales gave —, Thomas gave — Francis, — gave —, Anthony — gave —, Edward — gave —, Mrs. Lawson gave —, Margaret — gave —.”

We have already referred to this distinguished family in connection with Madeley and Claverley, where one branch continued to reside for many generations, whilst another was seated at Blacklands, in the neighbouring parish of Bobbington. Dukes says:—

“The family of Brooke, formerly of Lapley, in Staffordshire, and afterwards of Bobbington, and subsequently of Haughton, in Shropshire, had possessions in this parish, in whose family it continued until 1800, when the capital mansion and estates belonging thereto were sold by George Brooke, Esq. to different purchasers.”

In Claverley the name of John de la Broke occurs in 1242, and that of Thomas de la Bruche, in 1260, both of whom are supposed to have resided there. In 1268 a Geoffrey de la Broke is mentioned as having been on an inquest at Kinver. From 1299 to 1338 Richard de Broke, of Claverley, is sometimes called Richard atte [35] Broke, in connection with juries on which he sat, and in attesting deeds at Claverley, Bridgnorth, and elsewhere. In 1316 he was a grantee of land at Beobridge, whilst his son Richard is mentioned as a clerk in 1318, and the same son is again mentioned with his father in 1324. In 1342 and 1343 this succession, Mr. Eyton thinks, continues in Thomas atte Broke, of Claverley; but Randolf atte Broke, who was at Enville, in 1347, he takes to have been an ancestor of Brooke of Blacklands, one of whom (deceased in 1385) seems to have married a co-heiress of the Gravenors.

We have already noticed the very magnificent alabaster tomb, in the N.E. corner of the Gatacre chancel, on which are the recumbent figures of Lord Chief Justice Brooke, in his official robes, and his two wives, one on each side; and a subsequent visit enables us to add some additional particulars. The female-figures have ornamental head-gear, flowing mantles, single ruffs round their necks, three rows of chain necklaces hanging loose, and ruffles with braid at the hands. On the three sides of the tomb are figures of their eighteen children, in the dresses of the time. This tomb must have been a gorgeous one, for a close inspection shows traces of gold and colour, which once adorned the principal figures. It is to be regretted that the arms of this distinguished family, like those of the Gatacre, the Beauchamp, the Talbot, the Ferrers, and some others, which, about the end of the seventeenth century adorned this church, have disappeared. Among others Mr. Eyton, in his “Antiquities of Shropshire,” gives the following:—

“Quarterly—first and fourth, Chequy * *, and * *, a crescent for difference; second and third, * * a Cross Flory * *. (‘Thomas Broke’ written over this Coat.)

“Quarterly—first and fourth, Chequy * * and * *, on a Chief * *, a Brock * *; second and third, Arg, a Cross Flory Sa.

“Brooke (quarterly) empaling—Paly of six, Or and Az, a Canton Erm.

“Quarterly—first and four, Chequy Arg and Sa; second and third, Arg a Cross Flory Sa.”

Over each of the doors, forming an entrance to, or egress from, the gardens, at the old Court House, Madeley, are massive stones, with the arms of the Brooke family, but without the crest. These correspond, too, with the arms of the Rev. John Brooke, of Haughton, near Shifnal, who represents another branch of the family of the Brookes, of Claverley. They are as follows:—

Parted per pale first Chequy * * and * *, second, Paly of six * * and * *, a Canton Ermine.

Parted per pale first Chequy * * and * *, second * * a Chevron, * * between three Helmets.

Arms on Ceiling of Chapel.—Quarterly—first and fourth, Chequy * * and * *, second and third, * * a cross Flory * *.

Shield of Arms in what was originally the large Dining Hall below.—Quarterly—first Chequy, * * and * *, second * *, a cross Flory * *, third * *, a fess Chequy * * and * *, between ten Billets * *, fourth * *, a fess * *, thereon three Bugle Horns * *, stringed * *, garnished * *, between three Bucks’ Heads cabossed * *.

Crest: Ostrich.

There are also coats of arms over the gatehouse of the Brooke family, [37] those over the window and doorway being—

Party per pale. First Chequy * * * and * * *. Second paly of Six, and a Canton Ermine.

On the right tower—

Paly of Six * * * and * * * with Canton Ermine.

On this tower also is an heraldic rose, and on the left * *, a Cross Pommee, * *.

The first entry of an interment in the register at Claverley, the vicar tells us, is that of a Brooke, and the second entry in the register at Madeley is also the interment of a member of the same family.

Subsequent and more detailed examinations of the arms in various parts of the Court House and adjacent buildings throw a doubt upon the statement in a previous page, as to the proprietorship or occupation at one time of the Ferrers family. These arms differ, it will be seen, as may be expected, from marriages and inter-marriages, but we are not sufficiently acquainted with the arms of other old families of the time to say with what or whose arms they were incorporated, and it would be overloading our pages with genealogical lore to go into details. A family, some of the members of which had two wives and eighteen children, would naturally soon spread itself about the country.

The Rev. C. Brooke, of Brackley, Northants, as these pages are going through the press, writes to say:—

“From the similiarity in the arms it would seem that there was a connection between Robert Brooke of Madeley Court, and Brooke of Blacklands, whose arms are given by Dr. Plot, in his ‘History of Staffordshire,’ as ‘Chequy, arg. and sable;’ but it does not appear to be so by the pedigree in the Visitation taken 1623, or by the pedigree of Brooke of Blacklands, compiled by Mr. Eyton, for the Rev. J. Brooke, from original deeds at Haughton, which he did as well as the scanty records would allow.”

A contributor to “Salopian Shreds and Patches” (Feb. 9, 1876) says one of the bells of Church Stretton church has the following inscription:—

“Donatum pro avi Edwardo Brooke de Stretton Generoso. 1711.”

And adds—

“Assuming that this is a correct reading of the abbreviated words on the bell, the following is a literal translation:—‘Given for luck by Edward Brooke, of Stretton, gentleman. 1711.’”

The Rev. John Brooke, of Haughton, unwilling that one of the family should have been supposed to have associated the word “luck” with things so sacred, writes to say:—

“On referring to the copies of the Claverley registers, as I have, I find that ‘Avis’ was the Christian name of one of his wives, 1636; therefore, after all, Edward Brooke probably gave the bell in memory of either his wife or a daughter of that name.”

One of the Brookes, residing or having property, or both, at Coalbrookdale, went to Ireland, taking the name of the place with him, and calling it “Colebrook.”

In a work published on distinguished Shropshire families is the following, which is interesting from its bearing upon an important historical fact:—

“Robert Brooke Miles married three wives; one, Anne, d. and heir of Michael Warringe de Salop. He died 1558.

↓

John B. died 1598, aged 60. + Anne, d. of Francis Shirley, of Staniton, co. Leicester.

↓

Sir Basil Brooke Miles, 1623, died 1646. + Etheldreda, d. and sole heir of Edmund Boudendil.”

Sir Basil was one of the sporting friends whom Giffard of Chillington drew around him at his housewarming on the border of Brewood Forest, a house which subsequently gave shelter to the Earl of Derby and King Charles the First. It was built nominally as a hunting-seat, but really for purposes of concealment; and the site on the bolder of two counties, deep in the recesses of woods, traversed by no public roads, was exceedingly suitable. It is said that on the completion of the building the owner invited a few friends to dinner, to celebrate the occasion, and amongst them Sir Basil Brooke, of the Court House, Madeley, who had recently returned from Italy, and who on being requested by his host to supply a name for the place, suggested Boscobel, or Bos co Bello; and this was considered so appropriate, from the prospect it commanded of the beautiful woods around, that it is said to have been at once adopted.

It will be seen from what we have previously stated that the family of Brooke continued to reside at Madeley till 1706, when, according to the benefaction-table in the church, Basil Brooke by will bequeathed the sum of £40, and for a further sum of £30, paid him by Audley Bowdler and eight other parties, sold three several cottages or tenements, with gardens and yards, at Madeley Wood, for the use of the poor. [40]

The next tenant of the Court appears to have been the first Abraham Darby, for we find that he died there, after which time we find no tenants of more importance than the Purtons and the Triggers, who were farmers, and held the land around.

Thus early, even in Madeley, did the great owners of the soil—who merely tilled the surface, and scarcely that—give place to miners and ironmakers who knew how to win wealth from beneath.

With regard to this fine old mansion itself, having about it the symbols of ancient and distinguished Shropshire families, and associated at still earlier periods with the history of the wealthy monastery of St. Milburgh, it is fast going to decay. The last of the long and distinguished line of Wenlock priors lived and died here, as did the first great Shropshire ironmaster, the first Abraham Darby, afterwards, and one almost regrets that the wish of the late James Foster, who purchased the property, to repair and restore it, was not carried out. The temptation to get the mines underneath it, however, proved too strong: the whole has been undermined, and from attacks below and above, with all the usual elements of decay at work, must ere long disappear, rich as it is in associations of the past.

It is one of that class of buildings the country can ill afford to spare, for it speaks not to the antiquarian or the historian merely, but to all who take an interest in the manners, customs, and domestic arrangements of the past. It is difficult to say which are the original portions, but the vaults and cellaring, and some other parts appear to have belonged to a building which has undergone many changes. The windows, walls, and doorways of that portion of the building occupied by Mr. Round, and the substantial foundations that gentleman found beneath the surface in cutting a drain in the same direction, with a well 15 yards deep, indicate pretty clearly an extension of the buildings formerly on that side.

On going inside, and descending a spiral stone staircase to the basement story of the building, visitors will have opportunities of seeing how substantially the walls are built. They are a yard and a half in thickness, and have narrow openings, each growing narrower towards the outside, every two converging towards a point similar to what the reader has witnessed in many a fortress of byegone times, and designed no doubt for the same purpose, for defence. This staircase did not then as now terminate in what was the large hall, but in the adjoining apartment, now used as a brewhouse. The partition, too, which shuts off the entrance to another pair of stairs near the coat of arms on the north did not exist, nor the stairs either. The room is now 38½ feet long; then it would be 40, by 22 feet wide, and 14 feet high. Beneath these arms, on a daias, probably, the head of the house would sit dispensing hospitality. The chief staircase was near the other end of the hall, and composed of immense blocks of solid oak. The spiral stone staircase from the base of the building to the chapel at the top of the house was for the use, it is supposed, either of the dependents or the officiating priest. A further examination of the arms on the ceiling and a comparison with those in other parts of the building show them to be those of the Brooke family. An oak screen divides the chapel, which is wainscoted to the ceiling with oak. On the eastern side of this screen is a piscina, which has been cut out of the solid brickwork, and which at a subsequent period must have been concealed by the wainscoating. In the western division, behind the wainscoating, is a secret chamber, a yard square; probably for concealment in times of danger. It is communicated with by a panel in the wainscoat just large enough to admit a man, who, once inside, had the means of bolting and barring himself in behind the oak panel, which would look in no respect different to the others. This is called king Charles’s hole, but there is no evidence or well-founded tradition that he occupied it. There are a number of other curious nooks and small chambers which might have served purposes of concealment in troubled times, and probably did so, when the votaries of the two dominant religions, fired with a zeal inspired by their positions, alternately persecuted each other, as in the times of James, Mary, and Elizabeth. It is an error however, and one which Harrison Ainsworth among others appears to have fallen into, to suppose that the unfortunate king Charles either came to the Court House or was secreted in it. It is probable enough that, from the well known loyalty of the owner, the house would be searched by the Parliamentarians for the king, and the fact that they were likely to do so would lead to more discretion in selecting a place of concealment. The fine old wainscoating is falling from the rooms, and the whole place presents a scene of utter desolation.

From the upper portion of the building a pit, said to be without a bottom, and leading to a subterranean passage to Buildwas Abbey, may be seen. There is of course no ground for either tradition: a house which belonged to the priors of Wenlock would want no communication with a rival monastery, which was looked upon with jealousy, and the more abstemious habits of the inmates of which were in some measure a reflection upon their own. The pit or well has no bottom, inasmuch as it slants when it gets below the building in the direction of the pool in which it terminates.

Outside the building are some of the grotesque, nondescript stone figures which builders of the Gothic age indulged in. On this side, too, is a handsome stone porch, which, like some other portions of the same building is more modern than others. The gate-house, like the porch, is both more modern, and more Elizabethan than the other. It is a well-proportioned and beautiful building, exciting the admiration of all who see it. It possesses several heraldic embellishments, relating to the Brooke family.

It is a pity that the memorials of a family so ancient and distinguished, and so connected with the early history of Madeley, have not been better preserved. There must, one would think, have been mural monuments of a costly kind in the old church, seeing that the family lived at the Court for two centuries and a half at the least.

The stone of which the house was built was quarried near the spot, but the shelly limestone covering for the roof must have been brought from Acton Burnell, or somewhere near. It is from the pentamerous beds of the Caradoc sandstone. The house is supplied with spring-water by pipes from an ancient reservoir on the high ground near where the stone used was probably quarried.

King Charles’s Visit to, and Concealment at, Madeley.

The first indication we find at Madeley of the troubled times which ushered in the most remarkable episode in the history of the 17th century is an entry in the church register, under date of April 14, 1645, informing us that on the above date one William Caroloso was buried, the church at the time being garrisoned by a Parliamentary regiment, commanded by Captain Harrington. A page of history was being written which in all future times would be read with interest; agencies, the growth of centuries, had been developed; struggles for political and polemical equality had disturbed the stagnation of ages. The injustice of the courts, the persecutions, pillorings, and beheadings of reformers and standard-bearers of truth, and the weakness and insincerity of monarchs, had culminated in revolution, and six years later the weak vacillating monarch, Charles II., after the battle of Worcester, where 3,000 of his army had been left upon the field, came a fugitive to Madeley. The story of his flight, his disguise, and of his lodging in “Wolfe’s bam,” is an episode in history that illustrates the vicissitudes of life, affords a startling lesson to royalty, and brings into relief the devotion and faithfulness of those in humble spheres to others when in misfortune. Having ridden in hot haste from Worcester, and fallen in with the Earls Buckingham, Derby, Wilmot, and others, “I strove,” he tells us, “as soon as it was dark, to get them to stand by me against the enemy, I could not get rid of them now I had a mind to it, having, afterwards slipt away from them by a by-road when it was dark.”

The story of his retreat through Kidderminster, where Richard Baxter describes the balls flying all night, and the hurried northward flight under the trusty scout, Master Walker; then the second pause of terror on Kinver Heath; the stolen and breathless flight through Stourbridge; the short and poor refreshment at Kingswinford; and the long gallop to the White Ladies;—the whole flight being certainly forty miles—has been so often told as to be familiar to the reader.

These and other incidents of the flight have been worked up in a drama, in five acts, by Mr. George Griffiths, of Bewdley. Scene 2 is laid at the White Ladies (nine miles from Wolverhampton and one from Brewood, now occupied by Mr. Wilson).

“Enter Col. Roscarrock, Richard Penderell, of Hobbal Grange, Edward Martin, a servant, and Bartholemew Martin, a boy in the house.

“Col. Roscarrock (to the boy Martin): Come hither, boy, canst thou do an errand, And speak to no one on the road to Boscobel?

“Boy.—That I can, Sir, without reward or fee; Trust me, I will not say one word To any he or she, so tell me what’s my duty.

“Col. Roscarrock.—Go off to Boscobel the nearest road, And one that fewest folks do travel by. Tell William Penderell to hasten hither, Without a minute’s stopping, And should he ask thee why and wherefore, Tell him Good Master Giffard wants him here Without delay, and see thou com’st back with him; And shouldst thou meet or pass folks on the road, Say nought unto them as to where thou’rt going Or what thy errand is. Haste, and some coin Shall warm thy pocket if thou mind’st my words.

“Boy.—Aye, aye, sir, humble boys have sharpish wits. Because their simple food keeps them in health; I’se warrant the Squire’s son, though so well fed, Cannot leap gates like I, or ride a horse Barebacked across the hedges of our farm. Aye, aye, sir, I can keep my counsel, too; I know a hay-fork from a noble’s sword, And I do feel that with my harvest fork I could defend a king as stoutly As those who carry golden-handled swords. I go, and no man, no, nor woman either, Shall coax one word from off my faithful tongue.

[Exit.

“Col. Roscarrock.—See now, how this young varlet guesses all, His eye alone told all I thought unknown; Well, trusty friends dwell oft in rustic hearts With more sincerity than in the breasts Of those who fill the highest offices.”

Boscobel was selected upon the suggestion of the Earl of Derby, who, defeated and wounded on the 25th of August, 1651, at the battle of Wigan, by the Parliamentary forces under Colonel Lilburn, found his way hither whilst seeking to join Charles at Worcester, and who, after four or five days rest here, went on, and reached Worcester on the eve of the famous battle.

Boscobel, so named, as we have seen, by Sir Basil Brooke, of the Court House, Madeley, on account of its beautiful and well-wooded situation, and built ostensibly as a hunting-lodge, but in reality as a hiding-place for priests, amid the sombre forest of Brewood, was often used for the purpose for which it was designed, as well as a shelter for distressed Cavaliers.

The story of the disfigurement of Charles, and his crouching wet and weary in the woods, has been often told in prose and verse. We quote Griffiths again:—

“W. Penderell (to the King).—Sire, disguise is your first need, henceforth your title must not pass Our lips; here in this chimney rub your hands And then transfer the blackness to your face. We must in, and clothe you in a rustic suit Of green, with leathern doublet and a noggain shirt For we have heard that troops have come to Codsall But three miles off, under the traitor Ashenhurst. Haste! Haste! and when your rough disguise is donned We must take shelter in the thick Spring Coppice, The darkest covert Boscobel doth claim.

“Scene 4. Richard Penderell’s house at Hobbal Grange. Enter the King, old Mrs. Penderell, and her son Richard.

“The King.—We must not stop here long, the air is full of spies, The night now favours us; no moon nor stars Shine out to show us to our enemies. Let’s hence to Wales, fidelity lives there More than on English soil. Oft have I read Of their unvarying faith to those they served, What straits and stratagems they felt and wrought, To save misfortune’s sons from grievous fates.

“R. Penderell.—We must disguise you more; Rub well your hands in the wet dirt, Here, take this bill, a woodman you must be, And for a name let William Jones suffice; Shew no dread, but speak few words, For fear they should betray your better teaching. Come, let’s away, I have a friend at Madeley, Wolfe by name, faithful and trusty.”

William Penderell acting as barber, the king was eased of his royal locks, his hands and face were toned down to that of a country labourer, and he sallied forth, wood-bill in hand, in the direction of Madeley, with “a country-fellow,” whose borrowed suit he travelled in. To understand his majesty’s toilet the reader must conceive the royal person in a pair of ordinary grey cloth breeches—“more holy than the wearer”—rather roomy in the slack; a leathern doublet, greasy about the collar; hose much darned; shoes that let in dirt and wet to the royal feet—ventilators in their way; and above all a sugar-loaf hat, rain proof by reason of grease, turned up at the sides, the corners acting as water-spouts. Thus disguised, the rain pouring in torrents, on a dark night, along a rough by-road, “guided by the rustling sound of Richard’s calf-skin breeches,” through mud and mire, over ruts, plunging now and then into swollen streams, the king and his guide travelled in the direction of Madeley. Slamming the gate at Evelyth bridge, in the middle of the night, brought out the miller, who ordered them to stand, and raised an outcry of “Rogues, rogues.” Foot-sore and weary, resolving sometimes to go no farther, then plucking up their spirits and trudging on, the house of Mr. Wolfe, who had “hiding holes for priests,” was reached, where the king slept in a barn.

Hearing from Mr. Wolfe’s son, who had escaped from Shrewsbury, that every bridge and boat were in the possession of the Roundheads, so that escape in that direction was hopeless, it was decided to advise his majesty to return. Mr. Wolfe, according to Pepys, persuaded the king to put on “a pair of old green yarn stockings, all worn and darned at the knees, with their feet cut off, to hide his white ones, for fear of being observed;” and Mrs. Wolfe having again had recourse to walnut-juice for the purpose of deepening the tone upon the royal face, he again set out in the direction of Boscobel. The king, in the diary above quoted, is made to say:—

“So we set out as soon as it was dark. But, as we came by the mill again, we had no mind to be questioned a second time there; and therefore asking Richard Penderell whether he could swim or no, and how deep the river was, he told me it was a scurvy river, not easy to be past in all places, and that he could not swim. So I told him, that the river being a little one, I would undertake to help him over. Upon which we went over some closes to the river side, and I, entering the river first, to see whether I could myself go over, who knew how to swim, found it was but a little above my middle; and thereupon taking Richard Penderell by the hand, I helped him over.”

They reached Boscobel at five o’clock on the morning of Saturday, September 6th. Penderell, leaving the king in the wood, went to the house to reconnoitre. All was secure, and he found Colonel Carless, who was also hiding at Boscobel. He had been an active soldier throughout the war. His presence cheered the tired and wandering monarch, who now for the first time was brought into the house, and sitting by the fire was refreshed with bread and cheese and a warm posset of beer, prepared by W. Penderell’s wife, Joan, who also brought him warm water to bathe his feet, and dried his shoes by placing in them hot embers. After a short slumber the king was aroused by his anxious attendants, he not being safe in the house in the daylight. With Colonel Carless he then climbed into an oak tree that stood a few yards from the house, at some distance from the other trees. It had been lopped or pollarded, some years before, and in consequence had grown very bushy, and afforded a good hiding-place. They took provisions for the day with them. Screened from view, the king, resting his head on the knees of Carless, slept soundly for some time. The king, in his narrative, as recorded by Pepys, says:—“While we were in the tree we saw soldiers going up and down in the thickets of the wood, searching for persons escaped, we seeing them now and then peeping out of the wood.”

Saturday evening brought darkness, of which the fugitives availed themselves by going into the house, and Penderell’s wife, Dame Joan, provided a dainty dish of roast chickens for the king’s supper. That being over, the king retired to a hiding-hole at the top of the stairs, where a pallet was laid ready, and there he passed the night. On Sunday morning the king arose refreshed, and passed the day partly at his devotions, partly in watching, and partly reading in the garden. We must not forget to mention that he cooked his meat, frying some collops of mutton. Meanwhile, John Penderell had gone in search of Lord Wilmot, whom he found at Moseley Hall with Mr. Whitgreave, and in the evening he returned, bringing tidings that the king could be received at Moseley. Whereupon Charles, taking leave of Carless, set out on Humphrey Penderell’s (the miller’s) horse, attended by the five Penderells and their brother-in-law, Yates, well armed with bills and pike-staves, as well as pistols. The king complained of the rough motion of the horse. “Can you blame the horse, my liege,” said the honest miller, “to go heavily, when he has the weight of three kingdoms on his back?” At Moseley Hall the king remained from Sunday night till Tuesday evening, when Colonel Lane came from Bentley, bringing a horse for him. Being dressed in a suit of grey hose, and with the name of Jackson, he acted as serving-man to Miss Jane Lane, rode before her, and eventually embarked for France, which country after many narrow escapes, he reached safely on the 16th of October.

To Mr. Wolfe, of Madeley, the king presented a very handsome silver tankard with the inscription, “Given by Charles the Second, at the Restoration, to F. Wolfe, of Madeley, in whose barn he was secreted after the defeat at Worcester, 1651.” The tankard is now in the possession of W. Rathbone, Esq., of Liverpool, but a print of it hangs in the old house. The tankard has upon the cover a coat of arms: the crest is a demi-wolf supporting a crown. In the hall there is an old panel, which was cut out of the wainscoating of the dining-room, with the initials, thus:—

F. W. M. 1621.

In the church register we find the burial of Barbara Wolfe, January 13th, 1660; of Ann Wolfe, September 19th, 1672; of Francis Wolfe, December 7th, 1665; and of Sarah Wolfe, late wife of Francis Wolfe, January 10th, 1698.

The house is a very old one, and Mr. Joseph Yate, of the Hall, close by, says he remembers his father telling him that in former times it was “a house of entertainment.” The barn which is not more than twenty feet from the house, afterwards became the Market House, the butchers’ shambles being still discernible. The upper portion was rebuilt, or cased, a few years ago, but the old timber skeleton remains.

It is pleasant to find that Charles, at the restoration, further remembered his preservers, and settled pensions on their survivors; but not till 1675 was permanent provision made. Certain rents from estates in Stafford, Salop, Hereford, &c., were intrusted to Sir Walter Wollesley, John Giffard, of Black Ladies, and Richard Congreve, of Congreve, to pay the yearly proceeds to the Penderell family, the sum amounting to about £450 per annum, thus:—

£100 a-year to Richard Penderell or his heirs,

£100 a-year to William or his heirs.

100 marks, or £66 13s. 4d. a-year to Humphrey or his heirs.

100 marks to John or his heirs.

100 marks to George or his heirs.

£50 a-year to Elizabeth Yates or her heirs.

The surviving trustee is John Giffard, of Black Ladies, and his lineal descendants, the present squire of Chillington, who is now sole trustee. [54]

The Great Fire of London.

Another notable event noticed by an old book in the vestry of Madeley Church already quoted, is the Great Fire of London, September, 1666, sixteen years subsequent to the stirring drama previously recorded. It comes before us in a house-to-house visitation, by the vicar and churchwardens, for the purpose of raising subscriptions “in aid of a fund to relieve the sufferings by the Great Fire.”

In this account nine sugar-refiners are said to have lost £20,000; but, notwithstanding the house-to-house visitation, only £1 2s. 10d. was raised, which speaks little for the sympathy or wealth of the inhabitants at that time.

Assessments in Madeley, and Abolition of the Chimney Tax or Smoke-Penny.

The Smoke-Penny, Chimney Tax, or Hearth-Money, previously alluded to, so oppressive to the poor, and so obnoxious generally, by exposing every man’s house to be entered and searched at pleasure, had become so unpopular that one of the earliest proceedings of the first Parliament of William and Mary was to substitute a grant in “aid,” of £68,820 per month, for six months, payable in proportions; the entire assessment for Shropshire being £1203, and those for the several parishes in the allotment of Madeley, at 12d. in the £, as under:—

£ s. d.

Madeley 17 02 04

Little Wenlock 10 04 06

Huntington 03 11 10

Beckbury 05 09 02

Badger 03 13 06½

£40 01 7½

The principle ever since continued of specific annual grants to the king by votes of Parliament, partially acted upon by Charles II., but wholly disregarded by the Parliament of the succeeding reign, was now fully established.

The Law of Settlement.

From an order given to the constables of the parish of Madeley in 1690, we get an insight of the laws of Settlement which imposed such restrictions upon our ancestors, compelling a labourer to remain in the place where he was born to the end of his days, and preventing him bettering his condition. The order was that whereas Thomas Richardson had endeavoured to make a settlement in Madeley contrary to the law, &c., that they, the constables, bring his body to the serjeant’s house, Much Wenlock, to answer all matters brought against him by the overseers of the poor of the parish of Madeley. The constables were also to bring John York, smith, before some justice of the peace to give sureties for his own and his wife’s good behaviour.

Vagrants and Sturdy Beggars.

Paupers having been created by restraints preventing them seeking employ where work was to be had, of course became troublesome. Hence the serjeant-at-mace orders the constables at Madeley upon oath to report what felonies have been committed, and what vagrants and sturdy beggars have passed through.

The same constables were to ascertain how many persons of the age of sixteen absented themselves from church, and for how many Sabbaths. Also who destroyed hawks, hares, pheasants, &c.; and who bought by greater and sold by lesser weights.

The Oaths of Supremacy.

In the fifth year of William and Mary (1691) constables were to give notice to all above sixteen and under sixty, whom they believed to be disaffected, to appear before the serjeant-at-mace to take the oaths, &c.: but a goodly number of the Madeley and Little Wenlock allotment appear to have been guilty of contempt, and were ordered to pay the sum of 40s. by them forfeited. Having been guilty of further contempt, the constables are ordered to seize and bring the bodies of the delinquents. (See Appendix.)

The Poll Tax.

In the same year, 1692, constables are instructed to look-up all loose seamen and watermen, and bring them before one of the justices of the peace; and to collect 4s. in the £, towards carrying on a vigorous war with France. An order (September, 1693), signed “George Weld, Bart.,” addressed to Mr. Brooke, of Madeley, calls upon the constables to summons the Militia to appear at Shrewsbury &c., &c. Under the act passed for collecting 4s. in the £, for carrying on the war, constables were instructed to charge papists and all who had not taken the oaths of supremacy double.

Assessment for carrying on a Vigorous War.

The assessment for Madeley for three months, on the allotment of Little Wenlock by the commissioners, towards the raising of £1,651,702, as granted by Parliament to the king for carrying on a vigorous war against France, was £8 2s.

Press Laws.

In the same year constables were commanded to make diligent search for all straggling seamen and watermen who were of able bodies, fit for service at sea, and, to impress them, giving them one shilling. The assessment in Madeley of 4s. in the £, for 1694, produced, on land, works, &c., £149 1s. 4d., “one pound having been abated on the lime-works.”

Tax upon Marriages, Births, Burials, &c.

In 1695 the Madeley constables were to collect duties upon “marriages, births, and burials, and upon bachelors and widows,” for carrying on the war with France, according to the rank of the individuals.

In 1696, and 1697, we find constables have various duties assigned them; and in 1698, they are required to carry out an act for preventing frauds and abuses in the charging and collecting, and paying of duties upon marriages, births, and burials, bachelors and widows. Also for collecting a quarterly poll for the year.

In 1702 instructions are given to constables to present all papists, Jesuits, and all others that have received orders from the see of Rome. Also all popish recusants and others that do not come to their several parish churches within the divisions.

In 1703 they were to collect subsides for her majesty (Queen Anne), for carrying on the war with France and Spain, and to charge those who had not taken the oath of allegiance double.

In 1708 constables were to ascertain what masters or servants gave or took greater wages than were allowed by law.

Our account of instructions to constables continues to 1714, but nothing to merit comment occurs. Many names of old Madeley families occur, which we shall notice hereafter.

Rent and Value of Lands in the Lordship of Madeley, in 1702.

Demesne lands in Madeley, (537a. 3r. 33p.) or those attached to the Court House, with the 770 trees upon it, valued at twenty years purchase, was said to be £6,459 10s. 4d.; yearly rent, £289 13s. 6d. The whole acreage of Madeley, including the above, was 2073 acres, the yearly value of which was £1,021; trees, 3369; loads of wood, 160; purchase, £17,366 9s. 4d. For names of proprietors, see Appendix.

We find from a survey of the lordship of Madeley, that the demesne lands of the Court in 1786, belonged to Richard Dyett, Esq., one of an old Shropshire family, from whom it was purchased by William Orme Foster, Esq., about the year 1830.

The Coal and Iron Industries of Madeley.

During the period events previously recorded were being enacted, the coal and iron industries now employing so many hands, and which have brought so much wealth to individual proprietors, were being developed. Francis Wolfe, who gave shelter to King Charles, is supposed to have been a shareholder in some ironworks at Leighton, and probably at Coalbrookdale, from the fact that an iron plate, bearing date 1609, has the initials “T.R.W.,” and another with the date 1658 (the latter removed here from Leighton), also bears a “W” among other initials. We read also of a clerk of a Shropshire ironworks being the first to convey the news of the disastrous defeat of the royal army at Worcester. We find, too, that as early as 1332 Walter de Caldbroke obtained from the Wenlock monks license to dig for coals at the outcrop at the Brockholes. We also learn from Fuller, who lived and wrote in the seventeenth century, that what he calls “fresh-water coal” was dug out at such a distance from the Severn as to be easily ported by boat into other shires.

Iron, too, was made as we have seen from the Patent Roll, 36 Henry VIII., part v., where the grant of the manor of Madeley to Robert Brooke, Esq. is expressly said to include “the rights attached to the whole of the place and buildings that go under the one name of the Smithy Place, and Newhouse called Caldbrooke Smithy, with its patronages in the aforesaid Madeley.”

The First Ironworks.—The Reynoldses.

The first ironworks were of course of a very humble description; the outcrop of the mines did not then determine the situation so much as the presence of a powerful stream which supplied a force to work the leathern bellows which blew the fires. The first Abraham Darby came to the Dale in 1709, and in 1713 the make was but from five to ten tons per week. In 1712 he used coal in smelting iron. He died at the Court House, Madeley, in 1717, and was succeeded by his son, the second Abraham Darby, who in 1760 is said to have laid the first rails of iron for carriages with axles having fixed wheels. The third Abraham Darby effected another great achievement, the casting and erecting the first iron bridge, for which he obtained the medal of the Society of Arts. The credit of having laid the first iron rails is claimed for Richard Reynolds, who succeeded the second Abraham Darby in the management of these works in 1763, and who, according to Sir Robert Stephenson, who examined the books of the works, cast six tons of iron rails for the use of the works in 1767. It was at these works, too, that the brothers Cranege anticipated Henry Cort by seventeen years by the discovery of the process of puddling in a reverberatory furnace, by the use of pit-coal, in 1766, under the management of Mr. Reynolds.

Mr. Reynolds also took a warm interest in the success and introduction of the steam engine, which he adopted in 1778. “For no one,” observes his daughter, “did he entertain sentiments of more affectionate esteem than for James Watt,” with whom, as well as with Wedgwood and Wilkinson, he was associated in several public movements of the time. Being a Friend he was opposed to war and refused Government orders for cannon; and he was stung to the quick when Pitt’s ministry proposed to lay a war tax upon coal. The country had been carrying on wars—wars everywhere, and with everybody, and to meet the lavish expenditure, the popular minister of the day, on whom Walpole tells us, “it rained gold boxes” for weeks running, “the pilot that weathered the storm,” sought to replenish the exchequer by a tax of 2s. per ton, to be paid on all coal without exception raised to the pit’s mouth. The iron-masters of Shropshire, Staffordshire and Yorkshire, as well as those of other English and Scottish counties were alarmed; it was felt to be an important crisis in the history of the trade. Deputations and petitions were sent up, but the wily premier had so carefully yet quietly surrounded himself with facts, that he knew of every pound of iron made and of every ton of coal that was raised. Pitt received the gentlemen connected with the trade with the greatest freedom and affability; bowed them in and out; appointed hours and places to meet their convenience, and left them dumbfounded at his knowledge of details of their own business. Mr. Reynolds entered the field in opposition to the tax, gave evidence before the Privy Council, and by petitions to the House and letters to members of the Cabinet, materially aided in defeating the attempt. The gravity of the occasion is, perhaps, even more evident to us, on whom the advantages of a cheap and plentiful supply of iron have fallen. We can better measure the consequences that must have followed. A tax upon coal at that period would have paralysed the trade, checked its development in this country, and thrown into the lap of others benefits we ourselves have derived; would have disendowed the island of advantages in which it is peculiarly rich,—upon which it is mainly dependent for its wealth, its progress, and its civilization. A tax upon coal would have been a tax upon iron, upon the manufacture of iron, upon its consumption, and its use in the arts and manufactures of the kingdom,—a tax upon spinning, weaving, and printing,—a tax upon the genius of Watt and Arkwright, whose improvements it would have thrown back and thwarted,—upon the extension of commerce at home and abroad. The immense advantages possessed by the manufacturers of the New World would then have given them the lead in a race in which, even now, it is as much as we can do to keep up. Our energies, just at a time when the iron nerves of England were put to their greatest strain, would have been paralysed, and we should have been deprived of our railways, our locomotives, our steam-fleets, and much of our commerce, and prosperity. Mr. Reynolds saw the evil in prospective, and in a letter to Earl Gower, President of the Council, dated the 7th month, 1784, takes a very just review of the past history of the trade and the improvements then about to be adopted. He says:—

“The advancement of the iron trade within these few years have been prodigious; it was thought, and justly, that the making of pig iron with pit coal was a great acquisition to the nation by saving the woods and supplying a material to manufactories, the make of which, by the consumption of all the wood the country produced, was unequal to the demand; and the nail trade, perhaps the most considerable of any one article of manufactured iron, would have been lost to this country, had it not been found practicable to make nails of iron made with pit coal; and it is for that purpose we have made, or rather are making, the alterations at Donnington-Wood, Ketley, &c., which we expect to complete in the present year, but not at a less expense than twenty thousand pounds, which will be lost to us and gained by nobody if this tax is laid on our coals. The only chance we have of making iron as cheap as it can be imported from Russia, is the low price of our fuel, and unless we can do that there will not be consumption equal to half the quantity that can be made, and when we consider how many people are employed on a ton of iron, and the several trades dependent thereupon, we shall be convinced the Revenue is much more benefited even by the consumption of excisable articles, &c., than by the duty on a ton of foreign iron; nor will it, I believe, escape observation that the iron trade, so fatally affected by this absurd tax, is only of the second, if indeed, on some account, it is not of the first importance to the nation. The preference I know is given, and I believe justly, as to the number of hands employed, to the woollen manufactory; but when it is remembered that all that is produced by making of iron with pit coal is absolutely so much gained to the nation, and which, without its being so applied, would be perfectly useless, it will evince its superior importance, for the land grazed by sheep might be converted with whatever loss to other purposes of agriculture or pasturage; but coal and iron stone have no value in their natural state, produce nothing till they are consumed or manufactured, and a tax upon coal, which, as I said, is the only article that in any degree compensates for our high price of labour, &c., or can be substituted in the stead of water for our wheels, and bellows, would entirely ruin this very populous country, and throw its labouring poor upon the parishes, till the emigration of those of them who are able to work shall strengthen our opponents, and leave the desolated wastes, at present occupied by their cottages, to the lords of the soil.”