COUNTY SESSIONS RECORDS.

The Sessions rolls, now in the custody of the Clerk of the Peace, consisting of recognizances, presentments, informations, memorials, grand jury bills, &c., commence with 1600, but the order books do not go further than 1693. From the latter it appears that a great portion of the county business was transacted at inns and private gentlemen's houses. The Talbot, in Sidbury, for a great number of years enjoyed the magisterial patronage, adjournments being regularly made from the Guildhall (where the County Assizes and Sessions were then held) to that respectable old hostelry, where no doubt the magnates compensated themselves for the dry and tedious work in hand by generous and stimulating potations, as was the custom with the city authorities. Several Sessions were adjourned to Hooper's coffee-house at the Guildhall, which is first mentioned in 1767 as being kept by Lucy Hooper, and also to the Trinity Hall (an old building occupied by various trading "companies" or "guilds," on the site of which now stand Messrs. Freame's warehouses near St. Swithin's church). A committee of magistrates were ordered to inspect this hall in 1796, to consider the propriety of purchasing it and converting it into an office for the Clerk of the Peace; but this seems to have fallen to the ground. The Talbot, Claines (Tything), was preferred for some time, the Star being occasionally used; then the Crown inn was chosen in 1792 by a formal vote of the bench; and in the early part of the present century the Hop-pole came in for its share. During all this period, however, on many occasions, adjournments were made to other towns and villages. The Earl of Coventry was frequently visited in this way at Croome; the Hon. H. Herbert, at Ribbesford (1710); Rev. Dr. William Lloyd, at Ripple; William Hancock, Esq., at Bredon's Norton, and the Bishop's Palace at Hartlebury (1715); Lord Herbert, at Ribbesford (1721); and in 1723 a circuit seems to have been taken on many consecutive days to the Crown, Evesham; Crown, Blockley; George, Shipston; Angel, Pershore; Talbot, Feckenham; Crown, Bromsgrove; George, Bewdley; Lion, Kidderminster; Talbot, Stourbridge; Bush, Dudley; Hundred House, Witley; Crown, Tenbury; the house of Mrs. Collins, Shelsley; and the Sun, Upton. By the statute 9th George I, chap. 24, all persons who were Papists, and all persons who had not taken the oath for securing the throne to the House of Hanover, were to do so before the 25th of December, 1723, in one of the courts at Westminster or at the Quarter Sessions. This was no doubt the cause of the adjournments of the Quarter Sessions in that year. In modern times it often occurs that the Quarter Sessions are adjourned to different places in the county for the convenience of newly-appointed magistrates being sworn into office. In the year 1809, Sir Harry Lippincott, Bart., was appointed a magistrate for Gloucestershire, and he was sworn into office at an adjournment of the Gloucestershire Quarter Sessions—the Sessions being adjourned to the White Lion, the principal inn at Berkeley (now the Berkeley Arms), the late Earl of Berkeley taking the chair, and administering the oaths to the hon. bart. In 1697, Lancelott Jewkes, the Worcester county gaoler, was fined £20 "for not attending this court to do his duty, the court having had several occasions for him." It was ordered in 1716, "that the Sheriff for the future do not return any freeholders within the burrough of Bewdley to serve on jurys for the County Sessions, they having Sessions of their own." Another order was made in 1723, "that there be an advertisement in the Worcester newspaper, to give notice to people lyable to serve on jurys not to give money to the bayliffe to excuse them, and that the treasurer doe pay for the advertisement four weeks successively." The following is a table of fees ordered in 1753 for justices' clerks, in pursuance of an act of the previous session:

s. d.

"Swearing every high constable 1 0

Swearing every petty constable, tythingman, &c. 0 6

Every common warrant 0 6

Every warrant to search for stolen goods 1 0

Every warrant of the peace or good behaviour 2 6

Every supersedeas 2 6

Signing every pair of parish indentures 1 0

Every license to sell ale, the fee to the clerk of the peace for filing ye recognizance, stamp and paper included 5 0

Every recognizance for peace or good behaviour 2 6

Every warrant for the highways 1 0

Swearing the surveyors to their presentment and receiving it 1 0

Every hue and cry 1 0

Every warrant for appointing overseers of the poor 1 0

Signing a warrant to distrain for the poor's levy 2 0

For a warrant to disturb inmates 1 0

An order and copy for removing a person from one parish to another 2 6

If drawn by another and only signed by you 1 0

Signing a certificate from one parish to another 1 0

Making and signing every original pass. 0 0

Signing every other pass 0 0

Every mittimus 0 0

Taking examn. of a settlement or bastard 1 0

Drawing an order for adjudging the reputed father of a bastard child 2 0

Signing the same order 1 0

Warrant to levy every penalty or forfeiture 1 0

For a summons for conveaning Quakers, &c. 0 6

Every order thereon 1 0

A warrant upon refusal 1 0

For a summons for a master who refuses to pay his servants' wages 0 6

For the discharge of a servant from his master 1 0

A warrant to distrain for servants' wages 1 0

Allowing overseers' or constables' levys 0 0

Signing freeholders' lists 0 0

For every warrant to the collector of the land tax for taking up a deserter. 1 0"

In 1753, William Cooper, of Shipston, was fined £5 for taking money of William Taylor, of Armscot, to excuse his serving upon the jury at Sessions. The only remaining item under this head is an order made in 1789, "that at all future Sessions, business be conducted only by counsel, and not by attorneys as heretofore; but that in testimony of the respect due to Wilson Aylesbury Roberts, Esq., for his integrity and abilities, as well as for the regularity of his attendance and the assistance this court has received from him through a series of years, he is from henceforth received and heard as our advocate or counsel, as if he was a barrister, and as if the said order had been never made."

Witchcraft.

Our county records do not contain evidence of the existence of this superstition to a great extent, owing to the fact that witchcraft cases were usually tried at the Assizes. The first instance occurring in the Sessions rolls is in the year 1601, when Edward Buckland "exhibited articles complaining of John Genifer, to whom he had lent money," and when Buckland's "poor wife" asked for it, Genifer used shocking language, and "charged her with being a witch, and had deserved burning seven years sithence, and if she was a midwife was not fitt to bringe a —— to bed, much less a woman."

In 1633 the recognizance of widow Bellett, of Stony Morton (?) was taken, to appear at the next Sessions, to answer charges brought by William Vaughan, of Inkberrow, and others. This document is in some places scarcely legible, but it appears that the principal charge was "for the evil artt that shee useth with the —— wich, and she gives —— to finde out goodes lost, and using the name of Peter and Paule therein in profane manner, beinge sayde to be —— of that sleight ——." I found no account of her trial.

In May, 1660, the examination of Elinor Burt was taken before Gervase Bucke and William Collins, Esqrs., and "being examined whether she hath not taken upon her to cure several persons afflicted with several diseases and distempers in their bodyes, ansheareth and saith, that shee did not take upon her soe to do, but confesseth that when diverse had come to her that hath aches in their heads and other infirmities, she had and hath a gifte from God, by good prayers and laying her hands upon their heads or faces, oftentimes to recover and heal them of their diseases; and being examined what other means she useth to recover sick persons, saith, noe other means but good prayers; and further doth not materially confess." As the Sessions order book does not commence till 1693, there is no means of ascertaining the result of this and other cases prior to that date which are mentioned in this abstract of the records; but in the same year (1660) it is stated that "Joane Bibbe was bound for good behaviour for beinge of evil fame, and suspected for wychcrafte, butt not as yet charged." This is undoubtedly Joan Bibb, of Rushock, who (as stated in a MS. note-book of Mr. Townsend, of Elmley Lovett, who was a county justice at that time) "was tyed and thrown into a poole, as a witch to see whether shee could swim." But she brought her action against Mr. Shaw, the parson, for his share in this transaction, and recovered £10 damages, and Mr. Townsend compounded for her and others with Mr. Shaw for £20. The same MS. records the bringing of four other persons from Kidderminster that year, and ducking them in the Severn at Worcester, but the details of their cases have already been published by Nash.

Elizabeth Ranford, of Great Comberton, widow, lays an information before the magistrates on the 26th of September, 1662, "that she heard Joane Willis, wife of Thomas Willis, of Great Comberton, say that shee will take her oathe that shee, the said informant, is a witch, and bewitched to death one Thomas Right's wife and one Robert Price's child, both of Comberton aforesaid; and that shee behegged one of the said Joane Willis her children; likewise the said informant informeth, that shee, the said informant, was gooing to one Margaret Willis her house, in Comberton aforesaid, about her business, and the said Joane Willis came violently upon her and gave her several blows with a staffe, and ripped her quaife of her head, and prophanely did swear, blood and wounds shee would kill her."

In the month of August, 1666, Ann Powell, spinster, of Kington, lays an information that "upon St. James's Day last she and one Elizabeth Daffye, widow, having discours together concerning Mary, the wife of Anthony Slater (being this informer's dame), the said Elizabeth then told this informer, in the presence and hearing of others of the neighbourhood, that shee had late before had a heifer strangely amisse, and supposing shee might be bewitched, she went to a telster or wise woman (as shee termed her), who told her, the said Elizabeth, that the said Mary, the wife of the said Anthony Slater, had done the said heifer harm, meaning, as this informer conceaveth, that the said Mary had bewitched the said heifer; and further this informer sayth, that by reason of the speaking of the said wordes, her said dame hath been much scandalized in the neighbourhood, and several quarrels and fighting between her and others of her neighbours have ensued thereupon." Although unable to give the result of this charge, the information will be sufficiently interesting of itself, as affording us an insight to the state of society at that time. Joseph Orford, of Oldswinford, nailer, was presented in the year 1687, "for being a common disturber, and for charging Thomas Barnes, a person of good repute, with being guilty of witchcraft, and that he hath boasted that he would have the said Barnes and his wife duckt for witches, and he would procure one John Johnson, a drummer, to be present at the doing it, to make the more sport." But here comes a case with more curious detail.

At the Midsummer Sessions of 1698, Martha Farmer, of Astley, deposed before Mr. James, a magistrate, that Margaret Hill, of Shrawley, came to deponent's house about Midsummer three or four years ago, during her absence, and required her child, who was only seven or eight years old, to sell her some oaten meal, but as the child would not do so in her mother's absence, "shee pluck'd the child to her and hurt her finger, causing blood to come from it. In the morning the child fell ill, and continued in a sickly manner for some days, till a strange woman came to the dore and told her the child was bewitched; and Margaret Hill was sent for to come and pray over the child. She at first refused, but at length being prevailed on, shee said her prayers and the child recovered; but after some time it relapsed into its former sicknesse, and lay screeching and crying." Margaret Hill was sent for the second time, but would not come till after she had been "threatened by Farmer that if the child died she would have life for life. Then shee prayed by the child, which recovered, and continued well." During the child's illness Hill's daughter came to the deponent's house and offered to go for a doctor, and returned the same day, bringing some water in a bottle to cure a surfeit which she said the child had, and desired her not to be angry, for if her mother had injured the child she was sorry for it. Ann Farmer also deposed that when she went to fetch Margaret Hill "the latter called her a Judas b——, and told her she should not be well whilst she lived, whereupon she fell lame, and continues to be soe, beinge fairly persuaded that Margaret Hill was the occasion of her lameness." Mary Wall made oath that "Margaret Hill came to her house and begged for butter-milk, but she had none, and the same afternoon the cow which gave the milk fell ill, and they sent for a man skilled in distempered cattle, who told her that the cow was bewitched; whereupon they sent for Margaret Hill, who came and prayed over the cow. My husband went to a wiseman at Worcester, who said his cow would be dead before he got home (and it was soe), and told him to keepe all suspected persons out of his house. Some time before the cow died, Margaret Hill came and asked witness whether her husband was gone for help for the cow, although they had not informed her of his going." Margaret Powell gave evidence that "7 or 8 years ago Margaret Hill came to buy half a qtn. tobacco, and was refused to trust her, when shee asked witness if shee had any piggs; and going where they were, the piggs began foaming and tumbling about and died." Catherine Jones deposed that the accused "also came to her house 3 years ago to buy a peck of corn, but could not agree as to price, and presently afterwards deponent had a calf fell ill, lingered, and dyed." So damning a body of proof, it may fairly be presumed, was too much for poor Mrs. Hill, but I find no record of the result, the case having probably been tried at the Assizes, the rolls of which court, I suppose, are in London. More particulars respecting witchcraft in this county will be found further on in this volume.

Crime.

From the earliest period to which the county rolls refer, the constables and churchwardens were charged to present in the Sessions all persons who regularly absented themselves from the service of the church and would not receive the sacrament, all innkeepers who made charges above the scale allowed, all tipplers and houses where tippling was allowed during divine service, to report whether due watch and ward was kept and all vagabonds duly punished; besides a variety of other returns. The beerhouse nuisance was even at that time the most fertile generator of crime. In 1602 one Edward Pearce was charged for that, "in November last past, he with one other of his companions were eatinge of fresherings with two women in an alehouse in Inkberrow, and when they had done, Pearce went to his chamber and did set a candle lighted in his window, and when he returned he said that he had done as the scollers in Oxforde did when they meant to doe aney exployt, to light a candle, that they might be thought to be at their book; and thereupon he and his companion in the night went abroade into the field with the two women very suspiciously;" it was also alleged that they set some corn on fire, and "riotously drew drink in kettles and drank it with apples;" and that Pearce drank so long and so hard that a catastrophe occurred which cannot be mentioned here; lastly, that about the same time he went into an alehouse and called for drink, and because the landlady did not make haste he laid her on the fire. A memorial signed by nineteen inhabitants of Bayton was sent to the Sessions in the year 1612, setting forth "that John Kempster and Thomas Byrd do not sell their ale according to the law, but doe sell a pynte for a penny, and doe make ytt soe extraordynarye strong that itt draweth dyvers ydle p'sons into the said alehouses, by reason whereof sondrye assaults, affrayes, blodshedds, and other misdeameanors, are there daylie comytted by idle and dronken companie which doe thither resort and there contyneue in their dronckenes three dayes and three nights together, and also divers men's sonnes and servants do often resort and contineue drinking in the said houses day and night, whereupon divers disorders and abuses are offered to the inhabitants of Bayton aforesaid, as in pulling down styles, in carrying away of yertes, in throwing men's waynes, plowes, and such like things, into pooles, wells, and other bye places, and in putting their yokes for their oxen into lakes and myery places," &c. A nice picture of young England in the seventeenth century. In the same year (1612) Henry Cartlage was presented "for hanging a pair of horns at the door of Kenelm Gritt, at Bromsgrove, insinuating that he was a cuckold," and for other bad actions. It was a very general custom in the middle ages to signalize the unhappy husbands of false women by means of horns. The origin of the custom has always been a matter of dispute. In an old ballad, called "The Merry Humours of Horn Fair," are these lines:

The Corn Market in Worcester was the usual scene for whipping and using the pillory, as well for county as city prisoners, and from twelve to two o'clock on the market day (Saturday) the time generally chosen, for the sake of publicity. Mary and Elizabeth Squire, alias Skamp (!) were ordered to be whipped there in 1710; and the regular instructions, for women as well as men, were "to be whipped on their backs till they be bloody." On some occasions these floggings took place through the streets, as in 1732, when John Potter was "whipt at the cart's tail from College gate to the liberty-post in the Foregate Street," for a felony. This liberty-post stood at the north east corner of Salt Lane. At other times they were whipped from the bridge to the liberty-post in St. John's. On October 7th of the same year it was "ordered that the sentence passed on Richard Baylis, John Lawer, and Edward Jones, touching their being as this day putt in the pillory, be respited till next Saturday, the Corporation of the city of Worcester having taken down the pillery, and there being not time to get one erected to putt them in the pillery this day." In 1765 two guineas were paid to Mr. Baxter, the Under Sheriff, for erecting a pillory; and in 1797, Thomas Wilkinson was sentenced to the pillory in the Corn Market "for obtaining 4s. from John Waterson, miller, of Salwarpe, on pretence that he was an inspector for printing the prices of grinding in the said mill."

At Bromsgrove, men and women were whipt in the market place; and at Upton, from the bridge to the turnpike gate leading from thence to Gloucester. At the latter town, in 1737, John Willoughby and Adam Cook were presented for removing and carrying away the prison house or gaol belonging to the town! The circumstances of this very singular charge are not detailed, but the presentment was quashed.

The Gaol.

The first mention made of the state of the county gaol was in 1616, when a petition was sent to the Quarter Sessions from the poor debtors confined therein "against various hard usages, exactions, and extortions offered to prisoners by Mrs. Moore, the keeper," and "when one of the justices took pains to amend it she obeyed him not but used more extremities." Mrs. Moore, however, commenced a cross fire, by petitioning the magistrates at the same time, alleging that her late husband had "taken the gaol upon a very great and extreme rent," and she and her husband had "given trust and credit to many poor distressed prisoners, hoping of satisfaction at their enlargement," but since the death of her husband divers persons had run into debt, and had brought false articles of accusation against her to shield themselves. Her plea was ad misericordiam—that she was "an unprotected female" since the death of her husband, and was persecuted by the very parties to whom she had shown kindness. But unfortunately the lady's allegations were not borne out by fact, for Mr. Fleete, the justice above-named, who had been commissioned to inquire into the matter, caused Mrs. Moore to be bound in £100 "to sell an ale quart of beare for a penie" from that time forward, as it appeared that she had been in the habit of selling the prisoners ale by wine measure, and otherwise so managing her retail business, that for a hogshead of drink which cost her but 12s., she received 32s. Moreover she "tormented those that were of mean condition (i.e., who could not afford to buy her ale) with double irons." So Mr. Fleete ordered this to be discontinued, and that the debtors should be separated from the felons. Nevertheless, next year (1617) out comes the following "Humble petition of the pore prisoners in the Castle of Worcester, humbly showeth unto your good worships that they are many pore men, to the number of thirty prisoners and upwards, who lye there, some upon their behavior, and the most parte of the reste upon matters of small or noe value, having nothinge but the bare allowance of a penie a day to relieve their faintinge bodyes, so that yf they should be inforced to lye longer in this miserable place wold unchristianlike be starved to death with hunger, cold, and nakedness; some of them alsoe having many pore children like to be left to the wide world. May yt therefore please your good worships to consider them, to have their present triall before your good worships, who rather desire to be out of the world than to indure the misery wherein they now are, and your petitioners will ever pray for your worships' health."

A system under which a gaoler rents his prison, and makes his profit by selling drink to the inmates at an enormous rate, reads curiously enough in these days when the science of prison discipline has so greatly advanced as to induce us to make the most costly sacrifices. It will be observed that the county prison was on the site of the ancient castle, once standing near the Cathedral precincts, but which had long been destroyed. An order was made in 1723, "that Mr. Hall, the treasurer, doe take due care that the partition be made in the women's ward, in order to keep the debtors from the felons." In 1767 the Clerk of the Peace was directed to apply to the Treasury for the grant of "a certain piece of garden ground, about five acres, lying contiguous to the public gaol of the county, and particularly serviceable to the occupiers thereof for the time being, and also the site and remains of the old castle or citadel of Worcester, which now is and hath long been used as a public gaol or prison and bridewell for the said county," and praying that the grant of the premises be made to the Earl of Plymouth, Lord Coventry, Lord Sandys, Lord Ward, and other magistrates, including the names of Lygon, Rushout, Winnington, and Dowdeswell, "in trust, for the keeping of prisoners and otherwise for the use and benefit of this county." A petition was, however, transmitted to the Lords of the Treasury, by the mayor and aldermen of the city, against the grant of the site of these fortifications to the county magistrates, and the city authorities were successful in the application. This seems to have been the first effort made towards gaol improvement, but the period was near at hand when the outraged laws of health were to vindicate themselves. The Worcester county prison, with several others in the midland counties, in the year 1783, was visited with the fatal gaol distemper, which swept the cells of their inhabitants and proved fatal to that eminent physician, Dr. Johnstone. At that period I find an order on the book "to apply to the sheriff for his concurrence to fix a temporary gaol, and endeavour by advertisement and otherwise to find one or more proper places for the confinement of felons." Extensive improvements were set on foot, in which the humane system suggested by the philanthropist Howard was introduced, and when the works were finally completed (in 1795) a sum of between £4000 and £5000—a large amount for that period—had been expended. In 1785, William Lygon, Esq., was thanked "for his great trouble in procuring the removal of a number of transports from the county gaol on board the lighters on Thames, whereby the county was saved a considerable expense and the health of the gaol was preserved." About four years afterwards, and while the alterations were still going on, an order was made not to confine any one in the dungeon of the gaol nor to confine any two prisoners in one cell. The spirit of reform, however, was not yet satisfied, for scarcely had the century closed when it was found that the great outlay that had been incurred was useless, and that the establishment was altogether insecure; William Davis, the gaoler, complaining of the escape of certain prisoners; and a "watchman or guard" was decided on. After an unprecedented opposition on the score of expense, and a protracted scene of strife and contention among the magistracy, the Court of Quarter Sessions at length resolved, in the year 1808 (but not till Lord Chief Baron Macdonald had threatened the county with a heavy fine), to build a new gaol in Salt Lane, at a cost of £18,000. The details of these transactions will be found in "Worcestershire in the Nineteenth Century," recently published, the author of which informs us that on the Sunday during or immediately following the Assizes, which used to be known as Assize Sunday, and kept as a great fair, the keepers at the (old) county gaol were accustomed to show the prisoners through the bars to the curious crowd, and collect money in a boot for pointing out those who were sentenced to be hanged! In 1814 the prisoners were removed to the new gaol; and at the very next Sessions, Mr. Wells, attorney, was requested to apply to Mr. Sandys, the architect, relative to the escape of some prisoners therefrom!! From that time to the present this ill-fated building has seemed destined to an endless sinking of capital, for the trial of new experiments and for remedying the stupidity of bygone architects and committees. About £18,000 was spent on it a dozen years ago, and now (1856) nearly £20,000 has been voted for the same purpose.

The Poor.

When the Monasteries were dissolved by Henry VIII, the first authorised parochial machinery was established for the relief of the poor and for suppressing vagrancy. An act was passed authorising the head officers of every parish to receive and keep all poor applicants, putting the able-bodied to constant labour. The necessary funds were to be derived from voluntary contributions collected by the officers, and also the proceeds of stimulating sermons in the churches. But the voluntary system proved a failure, and it was left for Elizabeth to introduce the principle of compulsory taxation for this purpose. The statute 43rd Elizabeth, chap. 2, was kept in full operation till the passing of the Poor-law Amendment Act, in 1834. In the time of Elizabeth, cottage building for the poor was an object of great jealousy to the inhabitants of towns and villages, who dreaded the location of paupers amongst them, and took immense pains to "pass on" any mendicants who happened to stray within their boundary. Officers were usually appointed to "remove intruders," and these knowing "porrochials" would not infrequently offer a bribe when no other means had availed for ejecting the obnoxious tramp from a parish. By an act (31 Eliz.) it was declared that "no cottage should be erected unless there be four acres of ground of their own freehold to be continually used therewith." The operation of this statute was often attended with great 'privation and suffering to the poor, and the Sessions Rolls of this county abound with petitions and memorials to the bench on the subject. In 1612, William Dench, labourer, of Longdon, in his petition, set forth that "being destitute of habitation, and having a wife and seven small children, William Parsons, of Longdon, in charity took him to live in a little sheepcot of his in the said towne, with the consent of the churchwardens and overseers; but because yr poor orator (the usual term for "petitioner") had not licence in open Quarter Sessions, nor under the hands and seals of the lords of the manor, and because the said sheepcot standeth on the freehold of William Parsons, and not on the waste, contrary to the act 43rd Elizabeth, chap. 2, therefore he was indicted and is sued to an outelary (outlawry), petitions for pardon and for a licence to continue in the said sheepcot."

The Worcester County Quarter Sessions, 1660, made an order that all cottages erected since the late war should be "pluckt downe" as a "greate grievance," and that no house-room should be provided for "lusty young married people," who, if they unwisely married before they had got houses, were told to "lye under an oke." A few years previously, one Corbett, a Parliamentary soldier, settled at Bricklehampton, and purchased half-an-acre of land to build a house upon. The parishioners, it seems, were content, but the lord of the manor refused. On application to the Sessions, leave was granted to build.

Two years later, in consequence of great complaints of the country being much burdened and impoverished, the magistrates ordered that the constables should cause every parish to be surveyed and inspected as to how many cottages (and under what conditions) had been erected during the last forty years. It had also been ordered that every person apprehending a vagrant, and bringing him to a constable or tithingman, should have 12d. a piece for them—this step being considered necessary in consequence of "the great charge of wandering beggars and the efforts made in other counties to reduce them." Many persons were indicted for erecting cottages without having the necessary quantity of land attached; their cottages were pulled down, and all their little substance destroyed. Poor people were driven to herd together, great numbers in one house, or to sleep in sheds and in the open air; and thus a law which was intended to suppress mendicancy resulted in great suffering to the lower classes, and undoubtedly to the engendering of filth, disease, and crime. So scrutinizing were the precautions against a liability to support the poor, that no person who belonged to that unfortunate class could travel out of his parish into another, and accept employment and a lodging there, without a certificate from the churchwardens and overseers of his own parish that in case he should ever require relief they would take him back. The following memorials are sad pictures of poverty and suffering in the seventeenth century:

"The humble petition of the poore distressed towne of Duddeley, most lamentablie complaineth and sheweth unto your good worships that whereas heretofore wee have with our willinge duetie and bounden service acknowledged our obedience unto his majestie, and in the tyme of God's visitation upon your worships' commande did compassionatelie contribute unto the citie of Worcester, may it now please you that our poore towne havinge greivous experience of sicknesse which hath continued almost for three quarters of an yeare: and our said towne standing principallie on poore handicrafts men: who are much impoverished and now themselves wante ayde who heretofore dyd contribute to the releife of the poorer sorte and likewise wee havinge att this instant seven score children by reason of this sicknesse, who either want father or mother or both and many of these besides divers: in like or greater wante. And for that the same sicknesse doth continewe and suspected to increase unto our farther impoverishment and iminent danger of famishment of many amongst us wee havinge strayned our utmost abilitie for there succour until this instant and not able furthur to sustayne there wants doe most humblie petitionate and beseech your worship to tender our miserie and considerate our neede by collection and contribution within the countie whereby the poore will be comforted and preserved and thus for God's cause. Tendringe our humble suit to the consideration of your mercifull affections, wee in all humilitie remember ye service restinge to protest and confirme the truth hereof at your worships' command.

"RICHARD FFOLEY, Mayor. "HENRY JACKSON, Vicar. "RICHARD FINCH, Bailiff. "(And a number of inhabitants.)

"Duddeley, 8th of April, 1616.

"The consideration of this petition is referred to Sir Francis Egiock and Sir Richard Grevys, knights, who are desired to take order therein accordinge to justice."

The following petition is dated 1693:

"The humble petition of ye poore inhabitants of ye Tything of Whistones, humbly showeth, that the said inhabitants, through the greatness of the several taxes and dayley increase of our poore (to whom we pay 4s. per pound) and all manner of provision so excessively dear, by means thereof most of ye contributors to the poore are reduced so low to their very small estates and mean imployments that they are not able to mayntain them aney longer unless yr worships will be charitably influenced to redress our grievances, wee being the true objects of yr compassionate consideration; your petitioners therefore most humbly pray that yr worships would be favourably pleased to consider our necessitous condition, and either to annex and joine us unto Claynes, being our parish, to which undoubtedly ye said tything is a member and thereunto belongeth, or to order us the hundred money as formerly, or as Parshore, by some adjacent parishes to help us and ease the unsupportable burden which our shoulders have and still groan under, without which timely assistance many of our poor fellow Christians will unavoidably perish and languish through miserable hunger and want."

In the parish records of Claines (now in the churchwardens' chest of that church) an allusion to this petition is entered on one of the account books, to this effect, that upon the complaint of the inhabitants of the hundred of Oswaldslow, of the great burthen of the poor of the Tything of Whistones, alleging that the same township was in the town of Claines, an examination into the facts was intrusted to the Lord Windsor, Sir E. Dineley, and others, when the inhabitants of Claines showed that the township of Whistones was an ancient township, and had "parishtionall officers" to themselves, and was not in the parish of Claines, but anciently had its own church, and that the township was never included in the parish of Claines, and that the poor there had received relief of the hundred from time immemorial—at least from the time of King James—and never from Claines; that it had been questioned in the time of King James, but could never be shown that Claines had paid to their poor. The Court thereupon would not alter proceedings observed for so long a time, and discharged Claines from the said poor, except by paying its share as a part of the said hundred.

Vagrancy—notwithstanding the extraordinary vigilance exercised for its suppression—maintained a flourishing existence. The following is one of the earliest instances of the "begging letter imposture," and a greater specimen of impudence probably was never exhibited by any member of the class who have in our own days become so notorious:

"To the Worshipful Robert Charlton.

"Though I am unknown to you, yet the report of your courteous behaviour towards all gentlemen in distress emboldeneth me to beseech you to take into your favourable consideration the sad condition which I am now in, who for my loyalty to the King was by the great tyrant (Cromwell) banished and sent into the West Indies, where I thought I had shot the very gulfe of affliction, but cominge lately from thence (in a ship bounde for London) was by tempest at sea driven into Wales amongst a salvadge people, who had noe regarde to my misery (although I am become the very object of pittie), soe that in my jorney hither I have tasted of the bitterness of adversitie, for I am in such a nasty ragged posture that I am ashamed to present myself before aney person of quallitie; yet beinge destitute of money to beare my charges to London (or acquaintance in these parts to borrow of), fame of your most noble and generous disposition gives me encouragement to presume upon your goodness, hopeing you will be pleased to accommodate me with a small sum, and if it please God that I ever come into this country againe I will repay it. Moreover you will perpetually oblige him whose ambition is to stile himself

"Your servante,

"JOHN SEAMOUR.

"Sir,—I am well known to your son, Mr. Job Charlton, and I doubt not but you have heard of me. I am that Seymour who delivered the last letter from his majesty that now is to the late king upon the scaffold, a little before he was murthered, therefore I beseech you let me receive your answer by one of your owne servants, for I am unwilling that aney base peasant should know my condition.

"May 8, 1661."

Another handwriting on the same document records that, "Upon examination of the above-named Seamour I finde nothing of truth in the above letter, neyther that he was banished by Cromwell, nor that he hath ever been in West Indies, or that he landed in Wales; but this I find that he hath been a wanderer almost all over England, and knoweth most men of any quallitie in the kingdom, and hath changed his name so oft that he hath almost forgot it. It is also reported that he hath one wife at Harford, with another at Bristol"—(the remainder of the document is destroyed).

It appears by another that Seamour informed Mr. Charlton that he had been "the king's tutor and bedfellow for seven years, and had preached the late king's funeral sermon!" The art of impudence could not much further go; and it is probable, by an information being laid at the Sessions, that the fellow received his reward, but the books containing convictions and sentences of that date are not in existence.

In 1698, however, I find on the books that "Wm. Bilson, for wandring abroad with a false letter of request, p'tending a ffire at Icomb, be publicly whipt on Saturday next." Five years later it was "ordered, for the carrying of vagrants, that the constable be allowed 2d. per mile for one horse, and by the same proportion for two or three horses, or if a teame having three or more horses, then to allow them 6d. per mile, and to allow the passengers 5d. per head for their night's lodging and necessaries." In 1714 an order "touching the settlement of Ann Guise" was quashed on the ground of "there being no such place as Leye-Shinton." The magistrates' geographical knowledge must have been somewhat limited if they were unaware of the existence of a place but five miles off. It is probable, however, there was some legal technicality in the matter, and that Leigh Sinton, which is only a hamlet or place in the parish of Leigh, had been represented as a parish of itself, which the bench could not admit. I now give an interesting document relative to the mode of proving a pauper's settlement in 1738:

"Upon the appeal of the churchwardens and overseers of the poor of the parish of Camden, in the county of Gloucester, to an order of removal of Mary Calcott from the parish of Kingsnorton, in the said county of Worcester, it appeared to this court, upon the examination of the said Mary Calcott, taken upon her oath in court, that the said Mary Calcott was, upon All Saint's Day, in the yeare of our Lord 1735, hired with John Ellis, of Camden, chapman, for a year, to spin with yarn, at the rate of 1s. 6d. a stone, and that she was to provide herself with meat, drink, washing, and lodging, where she pleased, and that she spunn for him the whole year, and lodged in her said master's house, and boarded with him at Camden, and received 1s. 6d. a stone for her work, allowing her master 2s. 6d. per week for her lodging and board. And upon her examination she said that by her said contract as aforesaid she thought she was not at liberty to work for any other master, but she thought she was at liberty to play or be absent from her work as long as she pleased, being to be paid att a certain rate for her work done. Wherfore it is the opinion of this court that the said hyring and service aforesaid was not sufficient to gain for the said Mary Calcott a settlement in the parish of Camden, and this court doth accordingly reverse the said order of removal."

A refusal to serve the office of overseer by a resident of the Cathedral precincts (in the year 1804) may be unknown to the present inhabitants of that locality, to whom it will prove interesting:

"I, Francis Stafford, one of the sextons of the Cathedral Church of Christ and the blessed Mary the Virgin of Worcester, do hereby give you and each of you, and all others whom it may concern, notice that I shall appeal to the next general Quarter Sessions of the Peace, to be holden at the Guildhall of the city of Worcester, against the nomination and appointment made by you under your hands and seals, and bearing date July, 1804, whereby you nominated and appointed me by the name and description of 'Francis Stafford, a substantial householder of the vill and hamlet of the precincts of the Cathedral Church of Christ and the blessed Mary the Virgin of Worcester, in the county of Worcester, to be overseer of the said vill and hamlet;' and be pleased to take notice, that the grounds of my appeal are—that the said precincts are not nor never were reputed to be a vill and hamlet, nor a place for which an appointment of overseer is directed by law. And further, that the said precincts are not, nor were, nor at any time have been reputed to be, a vill, village, hamlet, or township, nor a place for which an appointment of overseer is directed by law.

"Witness my hand, &c.,

"FRANCIS STAFFORD.

"T. Dowdeswell, Esq., and "Henry Salmon, clerk."

The order for the appointment was quashed at the October Sessions of the same year. Exemption from the interruption of the civil powers was what all the great monastic establishments sooner or later obtained, but that of Worcester had a long struggle with the hereditary sheriffs of the county before its immunity from their officers could be obtained. The Reformation introduced great changes, and the precincts of the Cathedral became part of the outer county, but still they remain independent of the city or county interior, being a separate district under the superintendence of the Dean and Chapter.

Social Regulations.

In no one particular does the contrast between the present times and those of which we are treating appear more marked, or the progress of society more decided, than in the interference of the ruling powers of olden times with various descriptions of trades and occupations. There were the assizes or ordinances regulating the price of bread, ale, fuel, and other common necessaries of life; they clipped or expanded servants' and workmen's wages; prohibited or encouraged by bounties the growth of various articles of consumption; adjusted carriers' charges and the numbers of horses they might use up certain hills; permitted the sale of many things only by license; and otherwise sadly dammed up the current of human progression within their own narrow channel. As regards servants' wages, it would appear that the scale allowed early in the seventeenth century was far from illiberal, for in the year 1613 the authorities of Broadway petitioned "that servants' wages be rated according to the statute in that case, for we find it a great grievance in this county the unreasonableness of servants' wages, so that they have grown proud and idle." The rates for wages for servants and labourers fixed in 1663 were as follows:

£. s. d.

"A bailie of husbandrie by the yeare 4 0 0

A cheife hynde by the yeare 3 6 8

An ordinary husbandman 2 10 0

A laborer by the day without meat and drinke from the feast of All Saints untill Candlemas 0 0 7

And with meate and drinke 0 0 3

After Candlemas vntill harvest without meate and drinke 0 0 8

And with meate and drinke 0 0 4

A mower by the day without meate and drinke 0 1 0

And with meate and drinke 0 0 6

A reaper the like as a mower.

A woman reaper without meate and drinke. 0 0 8

And with meat and drinke 0 0 4

Sawers by the hundred, without meate and drinke 0 2 4

With meate and drinke 0 1 2

A thatcher by the day without meate and drinke 0 1 0

And with meate and drinke 0 0 6

A carpenter by the day without meate and drinke 0 1 0

And with meate and drinke 0 0 6

A mason the like wages as a carpenter

A laborer with a carpenter or a mason by the day without meate and drinke 0 0 10

A made servant, by the yeare 1 10 0

A dairy maide or cheife maide servant, by the yeare 2 0 0"

In 1731 it was ordered "that printed advertisements be publicly sett upp in all publick places that the wages and rates of servants and labourers be the same as last year, except masons, who are allowed 14d. a day."

The corn trade was an object of special attention. An instance of the great want of agricultural statistics occurs in the year 1631, when the subjoined imperious missive was received by the Worcestershire magistrates from the government officials at Whitehall. This document will probably be considered confirmatory of the experience derived from history—namely, that whether a state undertakes to buy for the people what they may want for their consumption, or regulates the trade by interfering with the supply, it is immaterial as to the result. In either case the people may expect to be starved whenever corn is scarce:

"We cannot but very greatly merveile (marvel) that notwithstanding his Majesty's proclamation and book of orders and the diverse earnest letters of this Board, the price of corne and other graine is risen so high, and the same sold at such excessive rates in many places; neyther can wee conceave how this can be if the directions sent from hence had been duly executed; you are therfore to take notice that wee expect a more careful performance thereof and a more particular account then hath hitherto been given us, and accordingly wee do hereby, in his Majesty's name, expressly charge you to cause presently a diligent and exact survey to be made through all that county, what provisions of graine there is, and to returne to this Board a certificate thereof with all expedition, and likewise to see the markets well served according to the orders, and not forestalled by greedy engrossers, to the intollerable wrong and prejudice of those that are to buy, especially of the poorer sort. You are likewise to use your best care and endeavour that during the continuance of this present dearth the maltsters be not permitted to make any greater quantities of malt than may be sufficient for necessary use; that soe there may be more plenty of barley for the reliefe of the poore; and soe wee bid you hartily farewell.

(Signed by) "LONDON. "H. MANCHESTER.

"DORCHESTER. "DANLEY.

"EXETER. "E. NEWBURGH.

"LINDSEY. "J. FALKLAND.

"THO. COVENTRY. "T. COKE."

In 1715 it was ordered "that Richard Carwardine, of Castle Morton, have a licence to be a comon badger of corne for one year;" and in 1732, "that Thomas Wadley, of Hanley Castle, have a licence granted him to be a common badger, buyer, seller, and carrier, of all sorts of corn and grain in any fair or market within this kingdom of England, so that the same continue in force but for one year from the date hereof and no longer." These badgers of corn were persons who bought corn to sell again. By the statute 5th Elizabeth, chap. 12, they were compelled to take out an annual licence from the Quarter Sessions. At the present time, persons who go round to the farms and cottages in the neighbourhood of Monmouth to buy poultry and bring it for sale to the market at Monmouth are called "badgers."

In pursuance of an act passed in 1769, weekly returns of the prices of wheat, rye, barley, oats, and beans, were ordered from Bewdley, Kidderminster, Stourbridge, Dudley, and Bromsgrove; and the following persons were instructed to furnish such returns: Timothy Clare, stationer, Bewdley; John Fawcett, weaver, Kidderminster; Robert West, stationer, Stourbridge; Oliver Dixon, mercer, Dudley; and George Wall, skinner, Bromsgrove.

Towards the close of the same century many convictions took place "for selling loaves of bread without imprinting on them the letter W in Roman capital, the said loaves not being rasped either before or after the bespeaking or purchasing thereof, against the form of the statute." Ordered (in 1710) "that Wm. Dimock, of Bishampton, have a licence for a comon higler, lader, kedder, carrier, buyer, and seller, of hens, chickens, capons, eggs, butter, cheese, ffish, and all other dead vittualls, except pheasants, hares, and partridges." The Clerk of the Peace was instructed in 1730 "to give notice by public advertisement in the Worcester newspaper for all carriers in the said county to attend this Court at the adjourned Sessions, in order to settle the price of carriages, according to the form of the statute in that case made and provided." It was likewise ordered "that no common waggoner or carrier shall take for carrying any goods to or from Bewdley to London the sum of more than 7s. per cwt. till further order." And in 1752, "that every waggon or other carriage drawn up from the signe of the White Hart, Broadway, to the top of the hill, so far as in the county of Worcester, may be drawn with ten horses if the owner shall think proper." Ditto, up the Malvern Hill, with seven. Tolerably suggestive this of queer roads and stiff gradients. The rates of carriage to be charged by carriers were fixed by the Quarter Sessions under the statute 3rd William and Mary, chap. 12, sec. 24, and the number of horses by which carts and waggons were to be drawn was regulated by the statute 5th George I, chap. 12.

Large quantities of salt were from time to time lost in the Severn, as the vessels laden with that commodity were making their way down the river from Worcester, owing to strong tides and violent winds; and the rolls record frequent applications to the Court "for certificates to entitle them (the owners) to such allowance as the act of Parliament permits." These allowances were no doubt the return of a part or the whole of the very heavy duty then levied on salt.

By the 21st George III, chap. 58, and 26th George III, chap. 43, certain bounties were offered for the cultivation of hemp and flax. Nevertheless, England has never grown a sufficient quantity for its own consumption, farmers not regarding it with favour, owing to the supposed exhaustive nature of the crop. In Worcestershire, for 1782 and some following years, claims were made (and allowed by Quarter Sessions) for these bounties, by—

Jos. Cooper the elder } All Saints, Evesham

Jos. Cooper the younger }

(grown by them at Bretforton, Great Hampton, Fladbury,

Pershore, Honeybourne, Cropthorne, and the Littletons).

John Taylor of Bromsgrove.

Henry Ellins of Stoke Prior, at Rushock, Doverdale, Bromsgrove,

Stoke, and Hanbury.

Thomas Brooks, Droitwich, at Doverdale.

John Tolley of Stoke, at Tardebigg and Hanbury.

Jos. Rose, Bromsgrove.

George Dunklin, ditto.

William Moore, Tardebigg.

Jos. Downing, Bromsgrove.

James Andrews, Pershore.

John Corbyn, Tardebigg.

James Heynes, Alvechurch.

William Shepherd, ditto.

Eliz. Eaves, ditto.

Edw. Pearkes, ditto.

Thomas Overton, Tardebigg.

Jos. Duffill, Bromsgrove.

H. D. Humphries, ditto.

Jos. Rose, ditto.

William Hutchins, Wick, Pershore.

John Tolley, Stoke.

Clement Nash, Stoke.

William Tay, Kingsnorton.

Jos. Everill, Tenbury.

Jos. Downing, Belbroughton.

Thomas Brookes, Droitwich.

From 1787 to 1792 the Worcestershire claims for flax bounty amounted to £79. 8s. 10d., and these were allowed.

Tobacco also was an article of which the Court of Quarter Sessions took cognisance, and some interesting particulars relative to the growth and suppression of "the weed" in Worcestershire will be found in another part of this work.

In the year 1670 the grand jury presented Henry Sandalls, bailiff of Bewdley, "who hath toll of the market, for upholding unjust measures;" Elias Arch, bailiff of Kidderminster, ditto; Thomas Foley, Esq., "who receives the benefit of the toll of Stourbridge, for not providing a brass measure according to act of Parliament, and for not making the measures of the town according to the same; and that the justices do take into consideration the great abuse that the people of this county which resort to this city of Worcester to market do receive by unjustness of the measures, and by the jogging and shaking of the same;" and suggesting various rewards for the capture of several known offenders.

About the year 1747 a terrible distemper broke out amongst horned cattle, which all the vigilance of the authorities could not prevent from spreading. The Worcestershire Bench first ordered "that 4s. per week be allowed to the several turnpikes where it shall be thought necessary in order to have a man sitt up every night to watch the sayd turnpikes, that no horned cattle be permitted to goe through the sayd turnpikes without propper certificates be first showne, and surveyors of the severall turnpikes to appoint propper persons to watch at the said turnpikes, the expense to be paid by the county." Next year it was ordered "that Grey Devy, of Kingswinford, be appointed inspector for the hundred of Halfshire in relation to infected cattle, to take care that no infected cattle be brought into any parish of the said hundred, and persue the order of counsel made for preventing the spreading the infection amongst the horned cattle; and to be allowed 7s. a week till further order." In 1750 the distemper still raged, especially in the adjoining county of Salop, and the magistrates licensed "Edmund Lechmere, of Hanley Castle, Esq., to buy and sell cattle at any fair, market, or place, where the buying or selling of cattle is not prohibited, and to drive, sell, or dispose of them, at any other fair, market, or place, as aforesaid, tho' he shall not have obtained the certificate directed by the said court, the said Edmund Lechmere having entered into a recognizance with two suretys, according to the directions of the said act" (of the previous Session). Many other similar licenses were afterwards granted, and the constables were ordered to prevent all persons not having such licenses from driving cattle to fairs, nor was any person allowed to bring cattle into the county without a certificate of their freedom from disease. The Clerk of the Peace was also ordered to procure 600 copies of an abstract of a certain treatise on the distemper, with a prescribed method of cure, by an eminent physician in Worcester, and distribute them to the chief constables and inspectors in this and the adjoining counties of Salop and Warwick. The cordon sanitaire was relaxed in 1751, but the following year the distemper broke out in this county with great severity, and vigilance was again renewed. A meeting having been advertised for buying and selling cattle at Beoley, the Sessions ordered that the meeting be prohibited, the distemper being at Kingsnorton, and that it be advertised in the Worcester and Birmingham journals, and notice given in Beoley church. It was not till July, 1756, that the distemper entirely abated, and all orders were rescinded.

The Church and the People.

We now come to a class of items chiefly connected with ecclesiastical control over matters both secular and religious—instances of the exercise of power by the Church for the punishment of offenders against her discipline. Every reader of history is acquainted with the force and effect of excommunication in the middle ages. By a sentence of excommunication, both greater and less, the victims were excluded from the right of Christian burial, from bringing or maintaining actions, from becoming attorneys or jurymen, and were rendered incapable of becoming witnesses in any cause. Long before the Reformation the frequency and abuse of this ecclesiastical weapon proved both a scandal and a disadvantage to the Church, by bringing the practice in some degree into contempt; and in the thirteenth century many applications were made to the king complaining of the resistance of excommunicated offenders who defied the utmost that the Church could do to reduce them to submission. In 1289, John, vicar of Feckenham, was excommunicated by Godfrey, Bishop of Worcester, who appealed in the same manner for secular aid. When the nation reformed its religion, the power of excommunication was still retained by the Church, and is in force even to the present day, although modified by the 53rd of George III, chap. 127, which restricts the maximum term of imprisonment in all such cases to six months. (See more on this subject under the head of St. Nicholas' parish.) Obstinately refusing to attend divine service in the parish church, incontinency, contumacy in not appearing when cited in the Consistory Court, brawling, and scolding—these were the principal offences for the punishment of which the Church most frequently put forth her power, as also on Quakers and Popish recusants.

I am sorry to be compelled to state that the first example occurring in these rolls is that of a female scold. In 1614, Margaret, wife of John Bache, of Chaddesley, was presented to the Sessions as "a comon skould and a sower of strife and disorder amongste her neyghboures, and hath bynn presented for a skoulde at the leete houlden for the manour of Chadsley, and for misbehavyng her tonge towards her mother-in-law at a vysytacon (visitation) at Bromsgrove, April 29, 1603, and was excommunicated therefore." In 1617, one Elinor Nichols was presented "as a great scold and mischief maker, who is said to have been excommunicated and had never applied to make her peace with the Church." The usual mode of punishing this class of offenders was, however, by the cucking-stool. A valued correspondent, in commenting upon the details of the gum-stool, or cucking-stool, and other punishments mentioned at pages 110 and 111 of "Worcester in Olden Times" (in which an engraving is given of a curious instrument of torture still hanging on the wall of Worcester Guildhall), says—

"The gum-stool is evidently the cucking-stool, though it never occurred to me that Cooking Street was really Cucking Street, and had had its name spelt Cucken in old maps, as you state. The term cuckold-stool is inaccurate, as this punishment is for scolding to the common nuisance of the neighbourhood, and has no reference to conjugal infidelity. The cucking-stool is the legal punishment of the criminal offence of scolding; and if a woman had been indicted and convicted of this offence at the last Assizes, the learned judge must have sentenced her to the cucking-stool. The common scold (Communis Rixatrix)—for the law confines it to the feminine gender—is a public nuisance to her neighbourhood, and may be indicted for the offence, and upon conviction punished by being placed on a certain engine of correction called the trebucket, or cucking-stool; and she may be convicted without setting forth the particulars in the indictment, though the offence must be set forth in technical words and with convenient certainty; and the indictment must conclude not only against the peace but to the common nuisance of her majesty's liege subjects. It is not necessary to give in evidence the particular expressions used: it is sufficient to prove generally that the defendant is always scolding. The skimmington is a mock procession got up in derision of a woman who has beaten her husband. You will find it in Hudibras. When a boy, I saw a skimmington, and in it a man dressed in woman's clothes, who rode on horseback behind a stuffed figure of a man, carrying a ladle, with which the supposed woman kept beating the stuffed figure about the head. This, too, has no reference to conjugal infidelity. But in Wilts and Berks there is a mock procession that does relate to conjugal infidelity; but this is called a 'Woosset,' which is pronounced 'Oosset'. It is a rough band followed by a person bearing a long pole, with a cross-bar across it, on which is placed a shirt, and at the top of the pole is a horse's skull with a pair of bull's horns attached to it. This I have also seen. I have omitted to mention that cucking-stools were of two kinds—the one fixed, the other moveable. That mentioned in 'Worcester in the Olden Times' (p. 110), must have been of the latter kind. A lithograph of each is in No. 1 of the Magazine of the Wilts Archæological Society. The bridle for scolds still exists in several places; there is one in the Ashmolœan Museum at Oxford; another was in the magistrates' room at Shrewsbury, but has been stolen within the last few years; one is figured in one of the volumes of the Penny Magazine, under the title 'Obsolete Punishments,' and another in Plott's 'Staffordshire;' but it is very remarkable that though so commonly seen, these bridles, called 'Branks,' are nowhere mentioned in our law books, though cucking-stools always are whenever the offence of scolding is treated of or referred to."

But to return to ecclesiastical matters. In the year 1620, Robert Lucy, of Droitwich, was ordered to appear before the Sessions Court "for killinge of fleshe this Lent." By the statutes 2nd and 3rd Edward VI, chap. 19, and 5th Elizabeth, chap. 5 (an act for maintenance of the navy), the eating of flesh in Lent is prohibited under penalties; but I know of no statute which inflicts any penalty on butchers for killing in Lent.

The Sessions rolls contain some sad pictures of clerical misbehaviour in the seventeenth century—a period when the clergy, as a body, had become a plebeian class, when (as Macaulay assures us) "for one who made the figure of a gentleman, ten were mere menial servants," many of the ejected ministers during the domination of the Puritans obtaining bread and shelter only by attaching themselves to the households of royalist gentlemen. The truth of the observation (see Blount's "Reformation"), that "an indigent church makes a corrupt and canting clergy," is apparent from the history of those times. In 1628, articles were exhibited against the Rev. Henry Hunt, of Defford, "that he is a malicious and contentious person and useth scandalous speeches without regard to time or place, but even in the church, sometimes before and sometimes after divine service, hath been known to break out into violent swearing before he came forth of the pulpit, taunting and reviling Rd. Damanne, and throwing stones at him in the field to provoke him to strike him, and threatening to make him so poor with suits that he should be glad to sell his mortuary for 2d.;" also that he swore falsely at Worcester Assizes. "His mortuary" here evidently means the amount of property that he would die worth. In some parishes a sum of 10s. is still payable to the rectors or vicars on the death of each householder in the parish who dies worth £40. This is called "a mortuary." The Rev. William Hollington, of Alvechurch, was in 1641 reported as "a frequenter of alehouses, where he spendeth much time both day and night, as well upon the Saboth as other week dayes in idle and riotous company, in excessive drinking, and is a causer of much drunkenness by procuring and persuading and enforcing others to the drinking of whole cupes. He hath often drawn idle company to his own house, where they have sent for much ale, and there abusefully have spent in drunkness, quarrelling, and fighting. He is greatly defamed of incontinensie with his neighbours' wives, and one of them hath confest he did attempt her chastity, affirminge him to be as bad as Bankes his predecessor, who to prevent punishment for his unchast and incestuous living run away. That he dayley frequenteth houses much suspected of lewdnes, often accompanied with a dangerous armed Papist of idle behaviour, and assisted by him hath in the open street given out rayling and threatning words against his neighbours, calling them knaves and partisans, and hath affirmed they were not Papists that rebelled in Ireland, and that Papists were noe rebbles but honester men than Protestants. He hath been a hindrance of the taking of the protestation, and doth omit the words in the reading of the remonstrance 'and have cutt all theire throates,' to the end to obscure from the people the greatness of the danger the House of Commons was in as it is conceived in favour of the other side. A constable coming to him in execution of his office to deliver the protestations of such as were then and there present to take it, he gave him many reproachful wordes, calling him knave, blockhead, loggerhead. He is a curser and swearer, a nefarious pintious lyer, and a contentious person. He stirred up and mayntained many shutes (suits) and much trouble in the neighbourhood, hath sided and counselled with the old churchwarden to the detayning of goods and money due to the church, and threatned aney that durst question it. He hath laboured to hinder justice and to countenance delinquents, is a quarreller and fighter. He advised and aided in stealing away a widdowes daughter, the only child of his neer neighbour, not above fourteen years old, and marying her to John Price, a rude boy of idle behaviour, and noe good cloths to his back, though the friends of the girl could have made her portion £200, and hath never been heard to put up one prayer either for the Parliament or for distressed Protestants in the kingdom of Irelande except on particular times, and then it was with the limitation 'if soe that they be of the same religion as wee are on.'"

It is difficult adequately to estimate the injurious effects to society of such examples set on the part of the clergy. The judicious Hooker observes that "the examples of clergy and great men are important, as being seen afar off, like cities set on the tops of hills; but mean men's actions are not greatly inquired into except by those who live at the next door."

During the Commonwealth and the reign of Charles II, as may be expected, the religious disputes and ill-feeling existing between the Established Church and the various sects that snarled and whined and canted in the racy language of the time, are fully exhibited in these records, of which I shall give some instances. In 1654, Edward Sheldon and Nicholas Hill deposed "that upon the 20th day of August the deponents were objecting against one Mr. Spilsbury, who desired to be minister of Bromsgrove, that he had a low voyce; one Humphrey Potter then answered that if he had a low voice he had a true voice; unto which Mr. Joseph Amige, now minister of Bromsgrove (as these deponents conceiveth) answered and sayd, 'Soe have I;' unto whom the said Potter replied, 'Noe, for you have tould lies in the pulpit,' or words to that effect." Here is another curious specimen of the times: In 1656 the jury presented that Thomas Goslinge, late of Bredon, yeoman, on the 11th November, 1656, at Bredon, of purpose to defame, disgrace, and provoke one Richard Beeston, a pious and godly minister and preacher of the word of God, and to disturb the peace, certain false, seditious, scandalous, and provoking English words did put into meeter or verse, and the same as a libell did openly, maliciously, and of purpose to provoke and disgrace the said Richard Beeston, in the presence and hearing of divers honeste people of the commonwealth of Englande, with a loud voice did saye and singe—that is to saye:

Roger of Wendover tells of a party, who profanely interrupted divine service, being made to dance in the churchyard for twelve months, without the power of stopping their limbs. But it seems that the fear of supernatural punishment did not deter the brawlers of the seventeenth century. When Dr. Thomas (afterwards Bishop of Worcester) was vicar of Loughern, about the year 1644, a party of Parliament horse went to that place, and inquired whether that popish priest, Mr. Thomas, was still there, and whether he continued reading the liturgy and praying for the Queen; one of them adding, that he would go to church next Sunday, and if Mr. Thomas persevered in praying for that drab of the w—— of Babylon he would certainly pistol him. That good man, however, was not to be intimidated: he performed the usual service, and while praying for the Queen, one of the soldiers, who sat in the next pew to him, snatched the book out of his hand and threw it at his head. The preacher bore it with composure, but the soldier, it is said, was instantly seized with such compunction that his comrades were forced to carry him away. At the Midsummer Sessions of 1660 a deposition was made, that "on the 17th of June, being ye last Saboth daye, Jeremiah Hewes, servant of Mr. Bishops of Lindridge, spoke of Mr. Giles base lascivious words, for he said yt he preached in ye church nothing but lyes, and furthermore he called him ould munkke (monk) and he said ye ould monkke preached in ye forenoon, and his sunn, ye yonge munkker, did endeavour to mend it in ye afternoone; and he said he would never heere him preach again, for if he were in ye church he would goe forthe. Mr. Gyles gave a tuch concerning maypoles—what rudnes is ust (used) to be abought such games, and he wisht he had his beard to make him a flaye (?) yt he might be one of ye fore leaders; and furthermore, my brother Edward tould him yt these words did deserve ye good behaviour (recognizance to keep the peace); and he said again he did not care for never a justice's warrant in ye countie, for he saith they are all turncootes." In 1665, Edward Mutchett, of Norton-juxta-Bredon, informed against Richard Hunt, that he heard him say in his prayers "Downe with this King of Babylon, this Poperye, and this idolatrous wayes as is now sett upp, and that they may not touch Thy anointed."

The Quakers of the seventeenth century, it is pretty well known, were not the mild and gentle beings who compose the ranks of the Friends in the nineteenth. They could rail and brawl in public, would persist in following their trades on a Sunday, and their resistance to the "powers that be" was of a much more active character than that which induces a modern Friend to allow a rate-collector to seize on his tables and chairs. The Quakers met with severer treatment during the Commonwealth than any other sect of Christians. We trace them obscurely under the denomination of "Seekers," their distinguishing principle being the doctrine of an inward light. George Fox, their founder, having bade some of the justices who committed him to jail to tremble at the word of the Lord, gave rise to the term "Quakers." In this city and county they were apparently pursued with great severity after the restoration of "Church and King," which undoubtedly had the usual effect of considerably sharpening their asperity towards the established faith. In the city, they were prevented entering their meeting-house (in Friar Street), and accordingly preached in the open air, while soldiers were paid for watching them. George Fox himself was confined in Worcester jail. In an ancient library at Kingsnorton School, there are treatises against the then recently propounded notions of the Quakers. The subjoined extract will show that maypoles and long hair were not the only troubles the poor vicar of that parish had to contend against. It is taken from "Besse's Sufferings of the Quakers," vol. ii, chap. iii, p. 60, under date 1657. "Jane Hicks, of Chadwitch, was sent to prison at Worcester for some offence which the priest of King's Norton took at her speaking to him." The same writer also states that at another time she was sent to Worcester for disturbing at Bromsgrove church, and that she was placed four times in the stocks—once for a whole night and part of two days. The woman would thus seem to have been a notorious disturber; and doubtless her "speaking" to the "priest" was in the church at the time of worship—a very common custom with the Friends of that day. Viewed in this light the vicar's conduct was proper, and was a necessary precaution against unseemly interruptions. The books of the above-named library, thus viewed, become interesting to us. They are evidence in the great Quaker battle, and no doubt poor Jane Hicks was stirred up with wrath by hearing some of the arguments out of this storehouse hurled at her then noisy sect. When John Bissell, also in 1657, refused to pay the "priest" ten shillings tithe, and had "goods taken from him worth £1. 5s.," no doubt these identical volumes were at hand ready to pour forth their artillery against the poor Quaker.[3] In the County Rolls for 1662 is "A calendar of the prisoners called Quakers: Rd. Payton, convicted de premunire; Edwd. Hall, convicted for words spoken in open court, fined £5, and committed till payed; Henry Gibbs, Wm. Collins, Wm. Webb, Robert Baylis, Rd. Walker alias Weaver, Jos. Walker, Rd. Bennet, Wm. Eades, Stephen Pitway, committed the 2nd of January, 1662, for having lately assembled themselves under the pretence of joyning in a religious worship, to the great endangering of the publique peace and safetye, and to the terrour of the people in severall places of this county." In 1666 the following Quakers were "taken at a conventicle and committed by Thomas Wilde, Esq.:" Wm. Pitt, Richard Fydo, Abra. Roberts, Rich. Lewis, Edward Lewis, Edward Staunton, John Wright, Alexander Berdslye, Tho. Fitrale, and John Hoskins. Next year (1667) the gaoler's list of prisoners then in gaol included the following:

"Thomas Payton, late of Dudley, taylor, a p'fessed Quaker, taken at a conventicle of Quakers in the said towne of Dudley, a place much infested with Quakers and disorderlie p'sons, and comitted to ye gaole 10th July, xiiii Caroli, and being a stubborn and incorigible p'son, was at ye next Sessions following tendred the oathe of allegiance, which he refused to take, was indicted, and convicted of premunire. Thomas Feckenham, another leader of the same sect, was likewise apprehended about three years since, and tendred ye oathe of allegiance, and beinge still obstinate and p'verse, hath been continued a prisoner, but with some liberty now and then extended towards him, which kindness hath not as yet wrought any conformitie or submission in him. John Jenkins and William Bardoe, Quakers, excommunicated in ye consistory of Hereford, and taken by a writ De Excom. Capiend. about a year since. John Roberts, of Droitwich, p'fessed Quaker, for using his trade and calling on ye Sunday or Lord's Day, was likewise presented and excommunicated a year ago. John Tombs, of Droitwich, for the like offence, and for refusing to permit the sacred ordinance of Baptism to be administered to his children, likewise excommunicated, and taken up by the like writ. Job Allibone and William Hodges, for the same offence and refusing to come to church. All which persons soe committed are, by the overmuch indulgence of the late sheriff, under-sheriff, and gaoler, permitted to goe at liberty about their occasions, which we consider doth encourage them to persist in their contemptuous and incorrigible behaviour; and they are not to be found in prison unless for about an houre or a night once in six or eight weeks time."

This report of the state of Quakerism, it seems, was occasioned by a request from the Government that the magistrates should inquire into the subject, and furnish the names of the Quakers then in prison, and whether they were ringleaders or had been seduced into the commission of offence by others. In the chapter on the records of St. Helen's church, Worcester, in the earlier part of this work, it will be observed that the penalties paid by Quakers were converted into a charitable fund for the poor.

The William Pardoe, mentioned above, was probably the individual who was said to have been the pastor of a Baptist congregation at Worcester, where he continued in jail nearly seven years, and died in this city in 1692. A MS. account of his labours, travellings, and writings, was said to have been at Leominster not many years ago. Is it still in existence? Mr. Pardoe was excommunicated, and was buried in a garden at Lowesmoor, near Worcester, where his body, with that of his wife, was discovered some forty or fifty years ago while digging for the purpose of building. The bodies were not disturbed, and a stone was erected to their memory. I am not aware that this still remains.

We now arrive at something more stirring, and may have an interesting peep at a conventicle of "Fifth Monarchy Men" at Oldbury. This sect of religionists had for their distinguishing tenet a belief in the establishment of a fifth universal monarchy, of which Christ was to be the head; while the "saints," under his personal sovereignty, should possess the earth. They appeared in England towards the close of the Protectorate; and in 1660, a few months after the Restoration, they broke out into a serious tumult in London under their leader Venner; many of them lost their lives, some killed by the military, and others executed. In the country the sect continued for some years later. At the concluding Worcestershire Sessions of 1667, one William Cardale deposed that on the 1st of September in that year he took his wife to Oldbury to see her sister, Edward Nightingale's wife, who was lying-in; and after dinner, he being inclined to fall asleep, his brother-in-law asked him to go for a walk; they accordingly went to Oldbury chapel, which they found full of people. After a psalm had been led, the preacher, who was a stranger to him, "made a very strange prayer, praying neither for king, queen, royal familie, nor clergie," and a still stranger sermon followed, from the text "Thy kingdom come," "his doctrine beinge, that Christ hath a kingdome of rewarde for his sufferinge and workinge servants, which in his good time he would possess them, and we ought to pray for;" and he attempted to prove, from the Revelations, Daniel, and other mystical writings, that the aforesaid kingdom was to be on earth. "On the preacher proposing to show when this kingdom was to come, an alarm of soldiers was given, a horse was soon got ready for him, and throwing off his gown and perriwig, he appeared in a grey coat, and speedily worked his way through the crowd and made off." A soldier, named William Perrott, deposed that by command of his officer, Major Wilde, he with others was sent to apprehend this preacher, whose name was Steele, alias Fraser, a Nonconformist; and on arriving at Oldbury chapel they found about 2000 persons there. When the preacher had disappeared, Perrott with two others secured the doors of the chapel; shortly after which some of the congregation "looked out of the windows to see whether any more soldiers appeared, and observing none, they presently swore that three or four were not able to keepe so manye prisoners. Forthwith thereupon they broke open the doors upon us, and layd hold upon my haire, my pistolls, and cloake, and gave me severall blowes upon my head and bodye, and likewise of those soldiers that were present with me. They alsoe forced one of my pistolls out of my hande, and alsoe broake Mr. Hambden's man's pistoll about our heads. After the rest of our partye of horse appeared, most of them runn from us. Some few were took. Alsoe I observed a great many of benches as I supposed newly set upp about ye chapel to receive ye company." What became of the unfortunate prophesier of the coming kingdom doth not appear.

In the year 1669, Thomas Willmot, vicar of Bromsgrove, laid an information at the Sessions to the effect that, "being ready to attend his duty at the funeral of Jane, the wife of John Eckols, was by a tumult of Anabaptists affronted and disturbed whilst I was reading the service. They no sooner came to the grave but irreverently threw the corps thereinto, and having their hats on their heads, immediately, contrary to the orders of the Church, without the least respect to the service of the same, and without either clerk or sexton, with their feete caste in the mold and covered the corps. Amongst which tumult there was one Henry Waldron, who entring into the belman's house without his leave, took away his spade, wherewith John Price, contrary to all civility and decency, notwithstanding he was checked by the minister, with his head covered, persisted to throwe the mold in the aforesaid grave."

The last instance of open disaffection to the church service which is worth a place in this record occurs in 1692, when an information was laid against Michael Bisset, of Feckenham. It appeared that Richard Bond and one Foster having publicly praised a sermon delivered in Feckenham church by a parson named Millard, Bissett swore by God's wounds (a common oath in those days) "That there was never a true word in the same sermon, and that it was all nought and false, and that it would have been a good deede to have sett him downe out of the pulpit with a bowe and bolte (meaning the said preacher), and that he could go down in the meadows and hear as good a sermon under a hedge." Bolt is a short arrow shot from a cross-bow. Hence the saying, "A fool's bolt is soon shot." There are several specimens of these bows and bolts at Goodrich Castle.

The Toleration Act of William III gave immunity to all Protestant Dissenters, except those who denied the Trinity, from the penal laws to which they had been subjected. In the Sessions' order book, date 1696, is a "Mem. That the persons under-named in open Court of Sessions did take the oaths mentioned and appointed to be taken in and by an Act made Anno primo Willi et Marie, entitled 'An Act for abrogating of the oaths of allegiance and supremacy, and appointing other oaths;' and also made and subscribed the declaration appointed to be made and subscribed in and by an Act made Anno 25 Caroli Secundi, entitled 'An Act for preventing dangers which may happen from Popish recusants,' according to an Act made Annis 7 et Willi tertii Regis, entitled 'An Act requiring the practicers of the law to take the oaths and subscribe the declarations therein mentioned.'" The following are the names of the subscribers in this county:

John Soley, Esq. Charles Cocks, Esq.

Richard Nanfan, Henry Toye, Thomas Parker, Joshua Bradley, Richard Cowcher, John Yarranton, Richard Teynton, John Ffownes, Edwyn Eyre, Robert Bird, Thomas Partington, Samuel Grove, Thomas Hayward, Thomas Hart, William Cardale, Epaphroditus Bagnall, William Hart, Richard Norbury, Henry Hodges, Richard Herbert, Thomas Oliver, Edmund Rose, Gent.

22 Maii, 1696.

Samuel Hunt, Edward Walker, Advocate, John Price, William Bowkey, Henry Philpott, Edward Hallen, Thomas Millward, Edward Dyson, Godman Atwood, Anthony Ashfield, James Gilbert, John Morris, Robert Parr, Henry Prescott, Edward Walker, jun., James Nash, Gent.

Die eadem—the same time the persons under-named subscribed the association:

Richard Norbury, Anthony Ashfield, James Gilbert, John Morris, Robert Parr, Henry Prescott, Edward Walker, jun. Godman Atwood, Thomas Milward, Edward Hallen, Henry Philpott, John Price, Edward Walker, Advocate, William Bowkey, Samuel Hunt, Gent.

An explanation is necessary with regard to "signing the association," as stated above. In Harris's Life of William III, p. 143, under the date of 1688, it is stated that after the arrival of the gentlemen of Somerset and Dorsetshire, at Exeter, "Sir Edward Seymour asked Dr. Burnet 'Why they had not got an association, without which they were only a rope of sand, and none would think themselves bound to stick to them.' The Doctor told him 'It was for want of a man of his authority and credit to support such an advice.'" He then proposed it to the Prince, who, with the Earl of Shrewsbury and all present, approved the motion. Accordingly the Doctor did urge an association, containing "a solemn engagement firmly to adhere together in pursuance of the ends of the Prince's declaration, and in defence thereof, and never to depart from it till the religion, laws, and liberties of the people should be secured by a free Parliament; and if any attempt should be made on the person of the Prince, that it should be revenged on all by whom any such attempt should be made." This association was speedily signed there and in other places, particularly by many in the University of Oxford. Lord Herbert of Cherbury, and the principal gentlemen of Worcestershire and Herefordshire, met at Worcester, and declared for the Prince of Orange, when Sir Walter Blount and the Sheriff of Worcestershire were sent prisoners to Ludlow Castle. The declaration, I presume, continued to be signed for several subsequent years.

In the Summer Sessions of the same year "the persons under-named did take the oaths and made and subscribed the declaration of 30 Car. II:"

Thomas Cornewall

William Lygon

William Tillam

Richard Towaye

Francis Sedgwick

Henry Coupland

Samuel Wilcocks

Joseph Adams

S. Taylor

Joseph Jones

Josiah Rogers

Robert Durham

Thomas Lowe

William Sherborne

J. Harper

Henry Davis

Thomas Nash

William Grove

Thomas Dewell

William Search

Thomas Evans

Thomas Wells

Thomas Parker

J. Parker

Richard Mann

Edward Sylls

Arthur Lindsey

Richard James

Richard Smalbrooke

Edward Wheeler

Pa. Philpott

Timothy Parker

The persons next following did take the oaths and subscribe the declaration of 25 Car. II:

Thomas Cornwall

William Tillam

William Lygon

Richard Towage

Francis Sedgwick

Henry Coupland

Thomas Pearsell

Thomas Lowe

Joseph Adams

Samuel Wilcocks

Sy. Taylor

Joseph Jones

Josiah Rogers

Robert Durham

William Sherborne

J. Harper

Henry Davis

Thomas Nash

William Grove

Thomas Dewell

William Search

Thomas Evans

Thomas Wells

Thomas Parker

J. Parker

Richard Mann

Edward Sylls

Arthur Lindsey

Richard James

Richard Smalbrooke

Edward Wheeler

Pa. Philpott

Timothy Parker

The persons under-named did sign the Association:

Thomas Coventrye

Edmund Lechmere

Samuel Pytts

William Walsh

Timothy Parker

Jo. Fleetwood

Wenman Winniatt

A. Ashfeild

Martyn Ballard

James Michell

Richard Feild

Thomas Rudge

J. Packington

James Rushout

R. Dowdeswell

Chambers Slaughter

William Harris

Charles Cocks

Thomas Chetle

William Tillam

Francis Sedgwick

Richard Towaye

Henry Coupland

Stephen Marche

Henry Toye

Jo. Jevon

Jo. Harris

Samuel Grove

William Grove

Thomas Hayward

Edw. Cookes

Richard Wooley

Joseph Jones

Thomas Parker

William Rudge

Richard Cowcher

Edmund Rose

Ja. Gilbert

S. Jewkes

Rowland Battell

Thomas Yarnald

Edward Reynolds

Adam Cave

John Rudge

John Terbervile

George Lench

Richard Smalbrooke

Edward Wheeler

Pa. Philpott

Samuel Freeman

Edward Bunce

Francis Ross

Francis Maleroy

John Jeffery

F. Jeffery

Ja. Ingoldsby

Abraham Stapleton

John Dowglass

John Archer

Francis Wythes

Sampson Farley

John Baron

Francis Russell

William Bromley

Robert Wylde

John Soley

Francis Sheldon, jun.

Thomas Cornewall

Robert Foley

Higons James

Salwey Winnington

Ed. Sandys

J. Apletree

Fra. Sheldon

John Sheldon

Thomas Parrott

Pest. Sheldon

Obadiah Alforde

Thomas Bradley

Robert Bushell

John Tilsley

William Lygon

Thomas Bushell

William Hancocke

Henry Hodges

Thomas Burlton

Thomas Harris

Thomas Mackey

The mark of Thomas Segar

Thomas Savage

William Cowells

Rowland Bradstock

Jarritt Smith

William Ffreet

William Waring

Richard James

Josiah Rogers

Joseph Adams

J. Harper

Samuel Wilcocks

Thomas Nash

William Sherborne

Henry Davis

Thomas Wells

George Harris

Richard Mann

Sy. Tayler

J. Barker

Thomas Pearsall

Thomas Dewell

William Search

Thomas Evans

Thomas Theasker

Thomas Gardiner

Thomas Lowe

Robert Durham

Edward Sylls

Arthur Lindsay

William Reynolds

And divers others put the roll.

The only remaining noticeable item affecting Nonconformity is an order made in or about the year 1716, "that an indenture of apprenticeship made between John Cookes and his master, Samuel Gill, be discharged and set aside, it appearing to this court that the master gave his said apprentice imoderate correccon and alsoe employing him in another trade, viz., plateing of gunn barrells and obligeing him to goe to the Presbyterian meeting." It may be stated, in concluding this chapter, that the law enforcing attendance at the parish church on Sunday was not abolished till 1846. Other notes on Nonconformity will be found in this volume.

Dissenting Chapels and Meeting Houses.

In the first year of William and Mary an act was passed "For exempting Protestant Dissenters from penalties of certain laws, on condition only that meeting-houses should be certified to the Bishop or Archdeacon or Justices at Quarter Sessions." In 1693 (the first year of the Sessions order book) "The wallhouse in the parish of Hanbury, and in the possession of Dame Ann Rouse," was certified to be "a meeting-house according to ye new Act of Parliament." Also "a house adjoining the foldyard of Mr. Blick, at Bromsgrove." 1695. The house of Henry Hanson, of Grafton Flyford, a place for religious worship. 1696. The house of John Emes, Bishampton, a meeting-house for dissenting Protestants. 1697. The house of John Scott, of Stourbridge, and the house of William Dugard, of Dodderhill. 1700. The house of Humfrey Potter, of Bromsgrove. 1702. Samuel Windle (place of residence not stated) "upon petition is allowed to have ye word of God preached in his house;" and a house at Dudley licensed on the petition of John Stokes. 1703. Ordered that "The house of Peter Payton, at Tenbury, be set apart for the worship of God for dissenters from ye church, according to the prayer of a petition for ye p'pose." 1704. The house of Mary Greene, widow, in Little Witley, called the New-house; and the house of John Sparry, at Belbroughton. 1705. Dwelling-houses of Henry Hunt, Cradley; James Thompson and William Tilt, Bromsgrove; Thomas Taylor, Hartlebury; and John Taylor, Chaddesley. 1715. House of Samuel Cater, Stourbridge; and of Jos. Harrison, Thomas Reynolds, John Reynolds, Mary Payton, and Arthur Radnall, of Bewdley; also that of John Carpenter, jun., Bromsgrove. 1720. The house of Richard Windle, Inkberrow. 1723. The house of Ann Thomas, of Pershore, "licensed for Anabaptists." 1733. House of John Harris, of Birlingham; and "a newly-erected house at Upton mentioned in the certificate of R. Baskerville and Thomas Skey;" also "the house at Bewdley wherein Thomas Watson and William Carter now dwell." 1735. Ordered, "That the barn and court-yard thereto belonging, now in the occupation of John Williams, at Tenbury, be licensed for Quakers." 1744. The house of Thomas Baker, at Himbleton, licensed for Baptists; and that of William Sadler, at Halesowen, for ditto. 1757. House of Joshua Kettleby, Church Street, Kidderminster, for Anabaptists; and in 1760, that of James Hill Baker, Black Star Street, Kidderminster, for Presbyterians. 1773. A tenement at Bartley Green, Northfield, licensed for dissenters; and a building in the occupation of G. Parsons, Mill Street, Stourbridge; also "a chapel lately erected in the hamlet of Westencot, Bredon, certified as a place of religious worship for Baptists." 1787. The house of John Harwood, of Moseley, licensed for Baptists; and one at Birmingham occupied by Benjamin Bedford, for Protestant dissenters; also the house of William Purser, at Welland; a Baptist meeting-house in New Street, Dudley; and a building in Mill Street, Evesham. In the year 1791, Robert Berkeley of Spetchley, T. Hornyold the younger of Blackmore Park, John Baynham of Purshall Hall, clerk, Thomas Parker of Heath Green, Beoley, and Mary Williams, of Little Malvern, subscribed certificates that they had set apart rooms in their respective houses for Roman Catholic worship. 1792. A building in Gilson's Lane, Blockley, certified for dissenters. 1796. Andrew Robinson, clerk, of Grafton Manor, set apart a room for Roman Catholic worship; and Richard Cornthwaite, clerk, of Harvington Hall, Chaddesley, ditto ditto.

The Civil Wars.

The year 1643, so distressing to the city of Worcester, when a great portion of the heavy levies on the citizens, for defence against the Parliament army, could not be raised, was nearly to the same extent a cause of pecuniary embarrassment to the county at large. At the April Sessions of 1643 the grand jury ordered "that the £3000 ordered last Sessions to be paid monthly towards the payment of his majesty's forces sent and raised for the defence of this county be continued till next Sessions, and paid over by John Baker, gen. collector to Sir William Russell, High Sheriff of the county and Governor of the city." But considerable difficulty appears to have been experienced in the collection. Here follows a picture of those critical times, worth preserving: