7. 8. John de Wentworth and Bartholomy Petipas. They are not here coupled or joined together because they were friends for no two men could well be further from that, but rather because they were foes, and the heads of two hostile factions, by which the town was kept in a state of constant distraction for a great length of time. It seems impossible now to ascertain the ground, or cause of that deadly animosity which those two factions, or these two men entertained against each other. Lollardism, we know, did then much agitate the kingdom, but we cannot say that it was the occasion of this discord at Lynn. Nor can we say that it was a mere political broil, or, contest between the partizans of the episcopal feudal prerogatives and their opponents, though this may seem more probable, as it appears from pages [365] and [559] of this volume, that Petipas was on good, and Wentworth on bad terms with the bishop. However this was, it is pretty evident that these two were mighty men and men of renown here in those days.
9. Thomas Miller, or Milner. He was the leading man among our ancestors in the reign of Henry VIII. being governor of the town, and mayor also one time for four successive years; and he served that office afterwards twice, if not more; so that he was mayor of Lynn six or seven times, which is not known to have been the case with any other. But what made him the most memorable was his successful contest, or law-suit with the bishop, during the former part of his mayoralty, about their respective claims to have the Sword carried before them. This legal decision established the mayor’s independence upon the bishop.
Having now paid our tribute of respect to the memory of our eminent men of those times, we shall here close this chapter, which brings us down to the era of the reformation.
End of Part III.
SUPPLEMENT
TO THE HISTORY OF THE ROYAL TOUCH.
See page [326].
Since the section on the royal touch has been printed off, a paper has appeared in the Monthly Magazine, under the signature of I. Bannantine, which casts some further light upon that subject. As it is presumed it will not be unacceptable to the reader, we take the liberty of inserting here the substance of it.—
“It does not appear (says that writer) that any of the House of Brunswick have asserted this royal function; at least, it has not been publicly announced, as was formerly the practice: but were his present majesty to resume it, such faith is yet put in the assertion of a king, that all the courtiers and the great body of the ignorant multitude would not hesitate to believe its infallibility. The last sovereign who appears to have exercised this miraculous gift was queen Anne. In the royal gazette of Mar. 12. 1712. appears the following public notice: “It being her Majesiy’s royal intention to touch publicly for the Evil the 17th. of this instant March, and so to continue for sometime, it is her Majesty’s Command, that tickets be delivered the day before at Whitehall, and that all persons bring a certificate, signed by the minister and church-wardens of their respective parishes, that they never received the royal touch.”
He further adds, that Wiseman, Sergeant Surgeon to Chas. 2nd, in a treatise on the Evil, speaks of the royal touch in the following terms:
“I have myself been frequent eye witness of many hundreds of cures performed by his majesty’s touch alone, without the assistance of chirurgery, and those many of them such as had tired out the endeavours of able chirurgeons before they came thither. It were endless to relate what I myself have seen, and what I have received acknowledgement of by Letters, not only from the several parts of the nation, but also from Ireland, Scotland, Jersey, and Germany.”