Chelsea, in the Olden & Present Times

by George Bryan

BISHOPS SINCE THE RESTORATION OF KING CHARLES II.

1662.	George Morley, Bishop of Worcester.
1684.	Peter Mews, Bishop of Bath and Wells.
1707.	Sir Jonathan Trelawney, Bart., Bishop of Exeter.
1721.	Charles Trimnell, Bishop of Norwich.
1723.	Richard Willis, Bishop of Salisbury.
1734.	Benjamin Hoadly, Bishop of Salisbury.
1761.	John Thomas, Bishop of Salisbury.
1781.	Hon. Brownlow North, Bishop of Worcester.
1820.	George Tomline, Bishop of Lincoln.

Dr. Tomline was the last Bishop of Winchester who had possession of this ancient house, but he never resided in it.

George Morley, chaplain to Charles I., was a great scholar and an eminent divine. After the death of the king he retired to the Hague, where he attended on Charles II. At the Restoration he was made Dean of Christ Church, and in the same year Bishop of Worcester, whence he was translated to Winchester. His constant practice was to rise at five o’clock in the morning, to go to bed at eleven, and to eat but once a day. By these rules he preserved his health with very little interruption through the course of a long life. He died in 1684.

Peter Mews was born at Parscandle, in Dorsetshire, in 1618, and was educated at Merchant Tailors’ School, under the care of Dr. Winiffe, then Dean of St. Paul’s, and afterwards Bishop of Lincoln. From school he was elected scholar to St. John’s College, Oxford, and became Fellow of the same College at the commencement of the civil war. Soon afterwards he left Oxford, entered the royal army, and was promoted to the rank of captain; he served for some time, and then went to Holland.

During the Interregnum he took holy orders, and at the Restoration returned to his college, where he took the degree of D.D. On the death of Dr. Bailey he was made President of St. John’s College. In 1669 he was chosen Vice-Chancellor of Oxford, and in 1673 he was promoted to the see of Bath and Wells, which he held for about twelve years, till he was translated to Winchester. He died 1706, aged 88.

Singular Predictions.—In 1706, John Needs, a Winchester scholar, foretold the deaths of Mr. Carman, chaplain to the College, of Dr. Mews, Bishop of Winchester, and of himself, within that year, to several of his school-fellows, among others, to George Lavington. This declaration exposed him naturally to much raillery in the school, and he was ludicrously styled “Prophet Needs.” Mr. Carman died about the time he mentioned. For this event, however, he had little credit, it being said, that the death of such an old man might reasonably be expected. Within the time prefixed Bishop Mews also died by a strange accident. He was subject to fainting fits, from which he soon recovered by smelling spirits of hartshorn. Being seized with a fit whilst a gentleman was with him, and perceiving its approach, he pointed eagerly to a phial in the window; the visitor took it, and in haste poured the contents down the Bishop’s throat, which instantly suffocated him. As the time approached which Needs had prefixed for his own dissolution, of which he named even the day and the hour, he sickened, apparently declined, and kept to his chamber, where he was frequently visited and prayed with by Mr. Fletcher, second master of the school, and father of the Bishop of Kildare. This gentleman reasoned and argued with the youth, but in vain; for with great calmness and composure the patient resolutely persisted in affirming that the event would verify his prediction. On the day he had fixed, the house-clock being kindly put forward, struck the hour before the real time; he saw through the deception, and told those who were with him, that when the church clock struck he should expire—he did so!

Mr. Fletcher left a memorandum in writing to the above purpose; and Bishop Trimnell, about the year 1722, having heard this story at Winchester, wrote to New College, of which Mr. Lavington was then Fellow, for further information. His answer was, that “John Needs had indeed foretold that the Bishop of Winchester (Mews) and old Mr. Carman should die that year; but then they being very aged men, he had foretold, for two or three years before, that they should die in that number of years. As to foretelling the time of his own death, I believe he was punctually right.” Dr. Lavington gave the same account to his friends after he was Bishop of Exeter.

Jonathan Trelawney was a younger son of Sir J. Trelawney, of Petynt, Cornwall; but his elder brother dying in 1680, he inherited the title. He was educated at Christ Church, Oxford, where there is a portrait of him. He was in succession Bishop of Bristol, Exeter, and Winchester; a man of polite manners, competent learning, and uncommon knowledge of the world.

Bishop Trelawney was one of the seven prelates committed to the Tower by James II. for their efforts to maintain the Protestant cause. When the news of his probable peril of life reached Cornwall, the miners proposed coming up to London in a vast body to demand the bishop’s release. The song in every mouth was—

“And shall Trelawney die?
And shall Trelawney die?
Then twice five hundred Cornish men
Will know the reason why.”

It is said that the bishop was open, generous, and charitable, a good companion, and a good man. He died in 1721. [100]

Charles Trimnell, son of the Rev. Charles Trimnell, Rector of Repton Abbotts, Huntingdonshire, was educated at Oxford. He was consecrated Bishop of Norwich in 1707; was made Clerk of the Closet to George I., and translated to the see of Winchester in 1721. This bishop, naturally of a weak constitution, did not long survive his last promotion. He died at Farnham in 1723, aged 40. This prelate was a steady partizan of the revolution, which he defended by his pen; warm, yet temperate; zealous, yet moderate; and his piety did not prevent him from gaining a perfect knowledge of mankind.

Richard Willis, Fellow of All Souls College, Oxford, was promoted to the deanery of Lincoln, by King William; and in 1714 was consecrated Bishop of Gloucester, translated in 1721 to Salisbury, and thence to Winchester in 1723, where he resided till his death, which happened suddenly at Winchester House, Cheyne Walk, in 1734, aged 71; his wife was buried in Chelsea Church, in 1727, but he himself was buried in his own Cathedral.

Bishop Hoadly, a prelate of great merit, was the son of the Rev. Samuel Hoadly, Master of the Public Grammar School at Norwich; he was educated at his father’s school till he went to Catherine Hall, Cambridge, where he afterwards became College Tutor, and appears to have been held in high esteem throughout the whole course of his academical studies. Although he applied to study with an intensity of application that made him eminent, he acquired at the same time considerable proficiency in music. In 1698 he was ordained, and about three years afterwards he married Miss Curtis, a great proficient in the art of painting, many of her portraits exciting public attention, particularly one of Bishop Burnet.

In 1704 Mr. Hoadly obtained the rectory of St. Peter le Poor; he began writing as soon as he came to London; and in 1709 the following vote was passed in the House of Commons:—“Resolved, That the Rev. Benjamin Hoadly, having often justified the principles on which his Majesty and the nation proceeded in the late happy revolution, hath justly merited the favour and recommendation of this House. That an humble address be presented to her Majesty, that she would be graciously pleased to bestow some dignity in the church on Mr. Hoadly, for his eminent services, both to the Church and State.” A change of Ministry prevented any benefit arising to him from this address; but he afterwards had bestowed on him, by the grandmother of the Duke of Bedford, the rectory of Streatham, Surrey. Soon after the accession of George I. he was made Bishop of Bangor. From thence he was successively translated to those of Hereford, Salisbury, and Winchester, which last he enjoyed nearly twenty-seven years.

It is somewhat a singular circumstance, that when Bishop Hoadly went to Court to kiss the King’s hand on his promotion, he did not know the way up stairs, the attendants being all busily engaged at the moment, and by mistake he sat down in an outer room unobserved, and some affirm that he lost the honour of being presented on that occasion to his Majesty.

The doctrines contained in his publications gave such offence to the clergy, that they produced the famous Bangorian Controversy. On the 16th of December, 1761, having supped, he retired to bed in perfect health, but in the middle of the night he was seized with a fit of vomiting, of which the violence abated in about an hour. Medical assistance was immediately sent for, and the bishop seemed better, but about two o’clock the following even, his lady found him dead, without knowing the precise moment of his departure. As a writer, he possessed powerful talents; his greatest defect, perhaps, was in extending his periods to a disagreeable length; for which Pope has thus recorded him:—

“But, sir, of writers? Swift for closer style,
But Hoadly for a period of a mile.”

Amongst the most celebrated writers of modern times, who have possessed great argumentative powers, this “defect” is generally a natural consequence. Lord Brougham, for instance, was remarkable for the length of his periods, or final sentences, but with him it evidenced deep thought, and enabled him to impart into his writings and speeches that eloquence and force of language for which he was so highly extolled. Bishop Hoadly might have been one of those “powerful” writers.

Dr. John Thomas was born in 1696, and in 1733, being then Fellow of All Souls College, Oxford, he was presented by the Dean and Chapter of St. Paul’s, to the united parishes of St. Benedict’s and St. Peter’s, Paul’s Wharf, London. In 1742 he became Canon Residentiary of St. Paul’s, and was sworn in one of his Majesty’s Chaplains in Ordinary. He was consecrated Bishop of Peterborough in 1747, and four years after was appointed Preceptor to the Prince of Wales. On the death of Bishop Hoadly he was presented to the see of Winchester. Dr. Thomas died at his episcopal palace, Cheyne Walk, in 1781, aged 85, having sustained throughout life the character of an exemplary prelate. [102]

The Hon. Brownlow North was born in 1741, was the younger son of the first Earl of Guildford, and brother to that Lord North who became twice Prime Minister of this country, once during the American war, and, secondly, in conjunction with Mr. Fox. Mr. North was first educated at Eton, and afterwards at Trinity College, Cambridge. In 1770 he was promoted from a canonry at Christchurch, to the deanery of Canterbury. His elder brother being now Prime Minister he obtained the mitre of Lichfield and Coventry in 1771, at the early age of 30. In 1744 he was promoted to the see of Worcester, soon after which he was promoted to the rich see of Winchester. By his wife, formerly Miss Bannister, a lady previously well known in the fashionable world, he had a very numerous family, of whom both sons and sons-in-law were amply provided with valuable livings in the church. The bishop with his family went to Italy, and shortly after their return his lady died; his lordship died at his palace at Chelsea, after a long illness, accompanied with blindness, at the age of 79, July 12, 1820.

Bishop North was kind and charitable. The present writer gladly embraces this opportunity to testify to the truth of this statement. The bishop was walking in front of his palace, as was his frequent custom, when the writer, then quite a youth, fell accidentally with considerable force on the shore of the river, it being at the time “low water.” The bishop observing the accident, and perceiving the injury sustained, gave immediate instructions for his being carried home, compensating the men, and offering to pay any additional expenses. This may appear no more than an act of duty on the part of the bishop, but the writer cannot refrain from remembering it as a deed worthy of a “good Samaritan.”

Winchester Palace was of humble exterior, and displayed little of grandeur or of magnificence. It was two stories in height, and built with red bricks, without pilasters or any other architectural ornament; but, however plain in its exterior, it comprised every convenience and comfort that could be required for a large establishment. The building formed a quadrangle, and its principal entrance was in the south front, the ground floor of which comprised the great hall, kitchen, and chapel, the latter being of moderate dimensions, plainly but neatly fitted up. The great staircase at the eastern end of the hall led to three grand drawing rooms, which extended the whole length of the south front, and which, during the residence of Bishop North, were splendidly furnished. The walls were covered with beautiful paper, having gold borders, the ceilings were richly ornamented in stucco work, and the chimney-pieces composed of various coloured marbles, put up at considerable expense by the bishop after his return from Italy. The sleeping rooms, and other domestic chambers, occupied the whole north front, commanding fine views over the gardens adjoining. On the ground floor of this front were two libraries, and other apartments, bounded on the east by a great gallery, leading to the gardens.

Having been obliged in the year 1791, by the bad health of part of his family, to seek the climate of Italy, Bishop North collected there many curious articles of undoubted antiquity, of modern art, and of natural history, of which the principal were, Greek sepulchral vases, specimens of ancient marbles used in the Roman villas, mural paintings from Herculaneum, beautiful works in Mosaic, fine bronzes, splendid gems, curious china, &c. These were disposed with much taste in various apartments of the house, and some of them we will notice.

The great entrance hall was 40 ft. long, and 20 ft. wide; on a table stood an antique juvenile bust of Bacchus, which was much admired.

The grand staircase was of noble proportions, and was ornamented with a variety of objects of taste, disposed in glass cases, consisting of specimens of all the articles of domestic use among the ancient Romans. Here likewise stood a sepulchral Roman vase of white marble, ornamented with rams’ heads and elegant festoons of white flowers, with the following inscription:—

Semproniæ
Elegantiorib. choreis
Psallendoq; Præstantis
Suæ viridis in medio juventæ
E. Vivis
Per crudelia fata direptæ
Sodaliu. Sibi. Choors. Dilecta
D.O.M.
Moer. M.P.

In bloom of youth, midst sweet companions dwelling,
With elegant and tuneful arts excelling,
Fate did Sempronia suddenly remove:
Submissive to the wise behests of Heaven,
Those lov’d companions (full of hope) have given
To her this token of their loss and love.

W. B.

Near the preceding was a plaster cast of Dr. Burney, author of the History of Music, taken from the original bust by Nollekens. The three drawing-rooms were of the same dimensions as the hall; the first was ornamented with several mosaic and fresco paintings from Herculaneum, and other works of ancient arts. In the next apartments were portraits of Bishop North, and his lady. Along the gallery which led to the garden were disposed, in glass cases, a rich variety of beautiful shells, with spars and ores, and a large collection of Italian marbles. The house was also adorned with many specimens of modern art, in modelling and painting, executed by Miss North, the Hon. Mr. Brownlow North, and by others of his lordship’s family.

Winchester House was well and expensively supplied with water, conveyed by pipes from a conduit, built by Henry VIII., situated in the King’s forcing grounds at Kensington.

Upon pulling down the palace a singular discovery was made. In a small room, to the north front, and at the north-west corner, were found on the plaster of the walls, nine figures of the size of life, viz., three men and six women, drawn in outline with black chalk in a bold and animated style. Various opinions have been given respecting these spirited sketches. They displayed much of the manner of Hogarth, who lived on intimate terms with Bishop Hoadly, and it was supposed that these figures applied to some domestic incident in the bishop’s family, or to some scene in a play. His lordship’s partiality for the drama was great. A near relative, who resided in Chelsea, wrote the comedy of “The Suspicious Husband.”

The palace remained unoccupied after the death of Bishop North; for Lady Tomline, the wife of Bishop Tomline, conceived a dislike to the place altogether. His lordship, in consequence, applied to Parliament and obtained an Act to enable him to sell the premises. The Lord of the Manor became the purchaser; and subsequently the whole fabric was sold by auction.