In 1736, there was—as I dare say there is now—an old Mr. Collier in the City. He lived in Essex, and his daughter—as is generally the case with rich City men—soon got married. It was thus the Rev. Dr. Taylor, of Isleworth, in 1788, described the wedding;—“Old Mr. Collier was a very vain man, who had made his fortune in the South Sea year: and having been originally a merchant, was fond, alter he had retired to live upon his fortune, of a great deal of display and parade. On his daughter’s wedding, therefore, he invited nearly fifty persons, and got two or three capital cooks from London to prepare a magnificent entertainment in honour of the day. When other ceremonies had concluded, the young couple were put to bed, and every one of the numerous assemblage came into the room to make these congratulations to the father and mother, who sat up in bed to receive them: ‘Madame, I wish you a very good-night. Sir, all happiness to you, and a very good-night,’ and so on through the whole party. My father, who hated all parade, but was forced to submit to the old gentleman’s humour, must have been in a fine fume; and my mother, who was then but seventeen or eighteen, sufficiently embarrassed.” It is as well rich citizens don’t indulge in such a display on the occasion of a marriage in the family in our time. I don’t fancy even a Lord Mayor, however fond of antiquity, would feel himself justified in attempting anything so ridiculous now. But then it was the fashion for a well-bred youth to address his father as “honoured sir,” and not as now, as “governor.”
Another money-making family was that of the Hopes, originally from Holland. “Mr. William Hope,” says old Captain Gronow, “inherited, on coming of age, £40,000 a-year. He exhibited, alternately, extreme recklessness in expenditure, and the stinginess of a miser. He would one day spend thousands of pounds on a ball or supper, and then keep his servants for days on cold meat and stale bread. His large fortune enabled him to give the most splendid entertainments to the beau monde of Paris. At his balls and parties all the notables of the day were to be seen, and no expense was spared to make them the most sumptuous entertainments then given. It was his custom, when the invitations were issued, not to open any letters till the party was over, to save him the mortification of refusing those who had not been invited.”
If we are to believe the great poet, who mostly spent his life in London, and whose name still graces a street very much reduced from what it was in his day, Mammon-worship must have a very bad moral effect, for Mammon was the least erected spirit that fell from heaven; and even there we are told—
“His looks and thoughts
Were always downward bent, admiring more
The riches of heaven’s pavement, trodden gold,
Than aught divine or holy else enjoyed
In vision beautiful.”
Nevertheless, some of Mammon’s worshippers have found time and money for better things, and have consecrated their wealth to noble ends. In Roman Catholic times this was to be expected. A princely bequest, at the dictation of the priest, was a fitting atonement for ill-gotten wealth or an ill-spent life; but Protestantism has been equally conspicuous—and, it is to be believed, from better motives—for good works, and that charity which covereth a multitude of sins. In illustration of this, there is, perhaps, no brighter name than that of Joseph Hardcastle, of whom it is well known that, amid all his varied and extensive engagements, he maintained a character for spotless honour and unsullied integrity, which even calumny itself never ventured to assail. To him, from the very outset, belonged the reputation of the English merchant of the old school, and years served only to augment that weight of character which he bore on the Exchange, as well as in the missionary and other societies. He was one of the founders of the Sierra Leone Company, along with Wilberforce and Thornton. Also he was treasurer of the Missionary Society. In 1799, the Religions Tract Society was founded under his roof. And at his offices, Old Swan Stairs, the Bible Society was first launched into existence. The Hibernian Society and the Village Itinerary Society were aided by his purse and presence. Of the latter society he was treasurer sixteen years. As he came of an old Nonconformist stock—one of his ancestors was an ejected clergyman—Mr. Hardcastle, who lived mainly at Hatcham, was buried in Bunhill Fields.
In Plough Court, Lombard Street, there was a firm well-known and highly respected. It was a firm long remarkable for the extraordinary philanthropic activity of its practices, and for the excellence of its chemicals. Mr. Allen, the senior partner, was a lecturer in chemistry at Guy’s Hospital, a Fellow of the Royal Society, a personal and intimate friend of the Duke of Kent, the Duke of Sussex, Lord Brougham, Sir Fowell Buxton, the Gurneys, Thomas Clarckson, and many other of the leading philanthropic and public characters of the past generation. He was also a minister among the Quakers, and a prime mover in founding a host of schools, asylums, and benevolent institutions. Another partner in the firm was the late Luke Ronard, F.R.S., the eminent meteorologist, who was also a preacher among the Quakers till the last portion of his life, when he joined the communion of the Plymouth Brethren, with whom also he was an active labourer in good efforts of various kinds. A third partner of the firm was the late Mr. John Thomas, who, after his very accurate and skilful scientific researches had gained him a competency, retired from business, and devoted the remainder of his life to an extraordinary series of efforts, in conjunction with Mr. William Ewart, M.P., Mr. Barret Lennard, M.P., Mr. John Sydney Taylor, the editor of the Morning Herald, the Right Hon. Stephen Lushington, D.C.L., and the late Mr. Peter Bedford, of Croydon, for the removal of the punishment of death from the numerous offences, some of them very trivial, for which it was at one time inflicted. A writer in the Sunday at Home, in the year 1866, remarks, that it is no exaggeration to say, that the splendid triumphs of mercy, which have rendered the reign of King William IV. for ever illustrious in history, were, either directly or indirectly, largely owing to the strenuous, continuous, and truly wonderful labours of Mr. Barry and this small group of his philanthropic coadjutors. Such were the partners in the firm at Plough Court, a house frequented by all classes of men—by princes of the blood-royal, by peers and statesmen, by scientific discoverers and professors, by missionaries and preachers, by schoolmasters and authors, by reformed criminals and escaped slaves. It became a centre of conference and movement for much of the metropolitan philanthropy during the reigns of George IV. and William IV.
It is to the credit of the City that some of these money-making men have been amongst the most earnest supporters of every religious and philanthropic enterprise. Here we get a pleasant glimpse of one of them. Heard writes to Wilberforce, in 1790, of the death of John Thornton:—“He was allied to me by relationship and family connection. His character is so well known that it is scarcely necessary to attempt its delineation. It may be useful, however, to state, that it was by living with great simplicity of intention and conduct in the practice of Christian life, more than of any superiority of understanding or of knowledge, that he rendered his name illustrious in the view of all the respectable part of his contemporaries. He had a counting-house in London, and a handsome villa at Clapham. He anticipated the disposition and pursuits of the succeeding generation. He devoted large sums annually to charitable purposes, especially to the promotion of the cause of religion, both in his own and other countries. He assisted many clergymen, enabling them to live in comfort, and to practise a useful hospitality. His personal habits were remarkably simple. His dinner-hour was two o’clock; he generally attended public worship at some church or Episcopalian chapel several evenings in the week, and would often sit up to a late hour in his own study, at the top of the house, engaged in religious exercises. He died without a groan or a struggle, and in the full view of glory. Oh, may my end be like his!” He was the Sir James Stephen in the Edinburgh Review for 1844, “a merchant renowned in his generation for a munificence more than princely.” Mr. Thornton was an Episcopalian, and it was owing to him that the venerable John Newton became pastor of St. Mary Woolnoth. His benevolence was as unsectarian as his general habits; and he stood ready, said Mr. Cecil, to assist a beneficent design in any party, but would be the creature of none. It was thus he was mainly instrumental in founding, and supporting for a while, a Dissenting academy at Newport-Pagnell, which was placed under the care of the Rev. Josiah Bull. Also he extended his patronage and pecuniary assistance to the institution at Marlborough, under the direction of the Rev. Cornelius Winter, and was thus brought into connection with Mr. Jay, towards whose support he contributed while passing through his academic course. Mr. Thornton spent myriads of pounds in the purchase of livings for evangelical preachers, in the erection and in enlargement of places of worship, both in the Church of England and among Dissenters, in sending out Bibles and religions books by his ships to various parts of the world, and in numerous other ways. Nor was his beneficence exclusively confined to religious objects. Mr. Newton says—“Mr. Bull told my father, that while he (Mr. Newton) was at Olney, he had received from Mr. Thornton more than £2,000 for the poor of that place. He not only,” continued Mr. Bull, “gave largely, but he gave wisely. He kept a regular account—not for ostentation, or the gratification of vanity, but for method—of every pound he gave in a ledger, which he once showed me. I was then a boy, and, I remarked, on every page was an appropriate text. With him giving was a matter of business.” Cowper, in an elegy he wrote upon him, said truly—
“Thou hadst an interest in doing good,
Restless as his who toils and sweats for food.”
It is needless to add that he lived at Clapham, and had Wilberforce for a nephew. His son, Henry Thornton, M.P. for Southwark, followed in his father’s steps to a certain extent. One day, when he was at Bath, he desired Jay to bring with him Foster, the essayist, to dinner. The attempt was a failure. Jay writes—“Mortifyingly he (Foster) again showed his indisposition to talk; and our most excellent entertainer was not much favoured to make his company easy and free and communicative, for his manner was particularly cold, distant, and reserved. Foster said—yet I think very untruly—that he sat as if he had a bag of money under his arm; but at this time Mr. Foster had a silly kind of prejudice against persons of affluence, however their wealth had been obtained.”
Let us recall the memory of Mr. John Poynder. As an East Indian proprietor he spoke much in favour of the abolition of Sutteeism, and against the monstrous tax arising from the idolatrous worship of Juggernaut. His publications were numerous, and chiefly on religious subjects—the evangelisation of our East Indian dominions, the paganism of popery, the sanctification of the Lord’s day. He was a staunch Tory and churchman; “but,” writes Jay, of Bath, “never was there a warmer advocate of evangelical truth and the doctrines of the Reformation; never was there a more determined enemy to popery and its half-sister, Puseyism; never did man more strive to serve his generation by the will of God.” A name that should be dear to Dissenters is that of Mr. William Coward, who was the friend of Doddridge, and who supplied the funds for his college for the training of Congregational ministers, first at Daventry, and afterwards at Wymondley, and now in Torrington Square, when the students were entered at University College. Coward College is now incorporated in the New College, St. John’s Wood. Mr. Coward was rather an eccentric in 1732, Dr. Jennings first intimated Mr. Coward’s idea to Doddridge, and recommended him not to comply with Mr. Coward’s idea to come and live at Walthamstow, where the latter lived; adding, “that the likeliest way to keep it in the worthy old gentleman’s good graces, is perhaps, not to be quite so near him.” In a note, the editor of the Doddridge correspondence adds—“William Coward, Esq., was a zealous Nonconformist, having accumulated a large fortune as a merchant. It may be said,” adds the editor, “that Mr. Coward still continues a generous benefactor to the cause of Nonconformity, as he left about £20,000, the interest of which is, in accordance with the provisions of his will, distributed in its service by four trustees, whose number must always be maintained, and who have hitherto conducted their important duties with so much propriety that their conduct has not in any instance been questioned.” Mr. Coward seems to have defrayed the expenses of a volume of sermons published by Dr. Doddridge. Mr. Coward had a will of his own, and some of his regulations may seem to us not a little whimsical. One was to receive no guest at his mansion after the hour of eight. The Rev. Hugh Farmer had a comical experience of this when, about that hour, he knocked for admission in vain. Mr. Farmer, after repeated raps at the floor, began to feel uncomfortable. While involved in this dilemma he was observed by a footman of Mr. Snell’s, who was passing near on his way home, and who reported to his master that a strange gentleman was trying to gain admittance at Mr. Coward’s beyond the hour. The hospitable Mr. Snell immediately sent to say that his door was open; and from that evening the celebrated Mr. Farmer—he was a favourite pupil of Dodderidge, and was thought in many respects to resemble him—became a permanent member of Mr. Snell’s family circle. Mr. Coward seems to have had a keen eye for orthodoxy, and complained of Dr. Watts that he was a Baxterian. He is also reported as growing cold to Dr. Guyse and Dr. Jennings, and falling most passionately in love with Dr. Taylor. Mr. Coward seems to have died in 1738. In 1818, there was a wealthy stock-broker—the late Mr. Thomas Thompson, of Pondsfort Park, who was deeply grieved with the destitute condition of the seamen in the port of London. In the February of that year a meeting on the subject was held in the London Tavern, to form a provisional committee to purchase and prepare a ship. At a subsequent meeting, it was announced that the Speedy, an old sloop-of-war, had been purchased of the government, and fitted up at a cost of nearly £3,000, to seat 750 hearers. The opening services on board the floating chapel were held on May 4th, when three sermons were preached—that in the morning by the Rev. Rowland Hill. Mr. Thompson called on the reverend gentleman, stated the neglected condition of sailors, and the plans in contemplation, and begged him to consent to preach the opening sermon on board the floating chapel. Mr. Hill heard all, rang the bell in silence, and his old servant appeared. “John,” he said, “fetch my pocket-book.” Mrs. Hill, who had hitherto been a quiet listener, now interposed, asserting that his engagements were already too numerous, and that he would wear himself out. Stroking his chin and shaking his head, with his characteristic habit, he replied, “My dear, I must preach for poor Jack.” Thus was the first floating chapel for sailors happily launched, and the Port of London Society for the Spiritual Benefit of Sailors brought into active operation. To the ship, and the general objects of the society, Mr. Smith contributed, from first to last, about £3,000. Another society, called into existence by Mr. Thompson’s activity and Christian devotedness and liberality, was the Home Missionary Society, which was inaugurated at the London Tavern on August 11th, 1819. At that time Mr. Thompson resided at Brixton Hill, and on week-day evenings held religious meetings amongst the neglected poor of that district and of Streatham. Gas-lights and police being then unknown, Mr. Thompson’s family were thankful when he came home from these charitable peregrinations safe and sound. It must be remarked here that Mr. Thompson was one of the founders, in 1827, of the Merchant Seamen’s Orphan Asylum. The first election was for five boys only, but it soon became a large and flourishing institution. Though a Dissenter, the Pastoral Aid and Special Services Aid Societies owed him much. As his daughter truly writes of him—“Mr. Thompson was one of those who helped to mould the benevolent character of the age in which he lived.”