Cursory remarks on the Restoration—its memorable effects—great joy manifested here on the occasion—several remarkable rejoicings at Lynn in the course of this period.
The Restoration was one of those revolutionary events which occur in the history of this country. It was effected, says one of our historians, “without any effusion of blood.” But what is more to be wondered at, is, that whereas so much blood had been spilt to compel Charles I. to come to terms with his people, towards which it is certain he at last made large concessions, Charles II. should be received without any conditions at all. Upon this bishop Burnet, in the History of his own times, observes, that Hale, afterwards lord chief justice, did move that a Committee might be appointed to look into the propositions that had been made, and the concessions that had been offered by the late king, and from thence digest such propositions as they should think fit to be sent over to the king. As such a motion was foreseen, Monk was instructed how to answer [or overrule] it. He accordingly told the House, that he had information of such numbers of incendiaries still in the kingdom, that if any delay was put to the sending for the king, he could not answer for the peace either of the nation or army: and as the king was to bring neither army nor treasure with him, either to fright or corrupt them, propositions might be as well offered to him when he should come over; so moved for sending commissioners immediately. This was echoed with such a shout all over the House, that Hale’s motion was no more insisted on. To the King’s coming without conditions, says the bishop, may well be imputed all the errors of his reign. [792a] To allow him so to return and ascend the throne was certainly a flagrant proof of the folly and pusillanimity of the convention parliament, and of the baseness of that spirit which then predominated among out ancestors.
Such a tide of extravagant joy overspread the nation upon the king’s arrival, as in the end very much hurt and debased the morals of the people, and introduced an almost universal dissoluteness of manners, which was encouraged and propagated by the ill example of the king and the court. From the enthusiasm and fanaticism, which prevailed in the former period, the nation fell now into the opposite extreme of licentiousness and immorality; one or the other of which extremes being always the consequence of men’s not governing themselves by reason. [792b] Thus the country had no great cause to congratulate itself on the blessed effects of the restoration of royalty, or the revival of the old order of things. No nation in Europe could be more depraved and licentious than the English in the reign of Charles the second.
Much pains were taken, before his majesty’s arrival, to represent his character in the most favourable and respectable light. Though the first born of profligacy and scoundrelism, he was reported, by his faithful and thorough-paced agents, as the very mirror of wisdom, of virtue, and of piety. These reports were not more industriously or artfully circulated than they were readily and generally believed, so that we need not wonder if the country in general looked upon the arrival of Charles as the commencement of the golden age, or of the reign of a heaven-born prince. Such seems to have been actually the case. The confidence the people had in the king, says Kimber, from the extraordinary good opinion they had been prepossessed with in his favour, and their transports of joy at being delivered from the late confusions and distractions, by means of his restoration, will account for the excessive complaisance that was shewn to the court at the beginning of this great event, so that the parliament could scarce deny the king any thing. To the ill use made of this confidence is to be imputed the opposition which the court met with afterwards.
Our ecclesiastical historian Neal, speaking of the restoration, says,
“Here was an end of those distracted times which our historians have loaded with all the infamy and reproach that the wit of man could invent. The puritan ministers have been decried, as ignorant mechanicks, canting preachers, enemies to learning, and no better than public robbers. The universities were said to be reduced to a meer Munster, and that if the Goths and Vandals, and even the Turks, had overrun the nation they could not have done more to introduce barbarism, disloyalty, and ignorance. Yet in these times, and by the men who then filled the university chairs, were educated the most learned divines and eloquent preachers, such as the Stillingfleets, Tillotsons, Bulls, Barrows, Whitbys, and others, who retained a high veneration for their learned tutors after they were ejected and displaced. The religious part of the common people have been stigmatized with the character of hypocrites, their looks, their dress and behaviour, have been represented in the most odious colours; and yet one may venture to challenge these declaimers to produce any period of time since the reformation, wherein there was less open profaneness and impiety, and more of the spirit as well as the appearance of religion. Perhaps there was too much rigour and preciseness in indifferent matters; but the lusts of men were laid under a visible restraint; and though the legal constitution was unhappily broken, and men were governed by false politicks, yet better laws were never made against vice, or more rigorously executed. The dress and conversation of people was sober and virtuous, and their manner of living remarkably frugal. There was hardly a single bankruptcy to be heard of in a year, and in such a case the bankrupt had a mark of infamy upon him that he could never wipe off. Drunkenness fornication, profane swearing, and every kind of debauchery, were justly deemed infamous, and universally discountenanced. The clergy were laborious to excess in preaching and praying, and catechising youth and visiting their parishes. The magistrates did their duty in suppressing all kinds of games, stage-plays, and abuses in publick-houses. There was not a play acted on any theatre in England for almost twenty years. The Lord’s day was observed with unusual reverence; and there were a set of as learned and pious youths training up in the university as had ever been known. So that if such a reformation of manners had been obtained under a legal administration they would have deserved the character of the best of times.”
“But when the legal constitution was restored, there returned with it a torrent of debauchery and wickedness. The times which followed the restoration were the reverse of those that preceded it; for the laws which had been enacted against vice for the last twenty years being declared null, and the magistrates changed, men set no bounds to their licentiousness. A proclamation indeed was published against those loose and riotous cavaliers, whose loyalty consisted in drinking health and railing at those who would not revel with them: but in reality the king was at the head of these disorders, being devoted to his pleasures, and having given himself up to an avowed course of lewdness; his bishops and chaplains said, that he usually came from his mistresses apartments to church, even on sacrament days.”
Yet he was, on earth, the supreme head of the church, and that church the best constituted in the world. It must need, surely, be well, extremely well constituted (and so must any body) not to be contaminated, disordered, or distracted with, or by such a head.
“Nothing was to be seen at court but feasting, hard drinking, revelling, and amorous intrigues, which engendered the most enormous vices. From court the contagion spread like wild fire among the people, in so much that men threw off the very profession of virtue and piety, under colour of drinking the king’s health: all kinds of old cavalier rioting and debauchery revived; the appearances of religion which remained with some, furnished matters of ridicule to libertines and scoffers. Some, who had been concerned in the former changes, thought they could not redeem their credit better than by deriding all religion, and telling or making stories to render their former party ridiculous. To appear serious, or make conscience either of words or actions, was the way to be accounted a schismatick, a fanatick, or a sectarian; though if there was any real religion during the course of this reign, it was chiefly among those people. They who did not applaud the new ceremonies were marked out for presbyterians, and every presbyterian was a rebel. The old clergy who had been sequestered for scandal, having taken possession of their livings, were intoxicated with their new felicity, and threw off all the restraints of their order.—Such was the general dissoluteness of manners that attended the deluge of joy which overflowed the nation upon his majesties restoration.” [796a]
As to Lynn, at and subsequently to the restoration, it appears to have largely shared the general joy and other effects produced by that memorable event. When we consider the extreme rigour of the former government or governors of this town, [796b] in attempting fines and imprisonment to restrain the tippling and other vicious and licentious propensities of the inhabitants, we cannot much wonder at the excessive joy which the restoration excited here, as it was very natural to expect that that event would effectually remove those severities, and introduce a more lax and indulgent system. How long the first transports of joy lasted we are not able exactly to ascertain; but that they were at their height on the first royal birth day, the 29th of May 1660, we may very reasonably presume. On that day the town was all festivity and triumph. Among the curiosities that graced that memorable carnival were 300 young maids, or lasses of the town, dressed all in white, and parading through the principal streets. [797] Whether this may, or may not be considered as an emblem of the predilection of the sex for Charles, or that of Charles for the sex, we will not take upon us to say. That it was a whimsical contrivance seems very evident; and that it was peculiar to this town appears more than probable, as we do not recollect having heard of any thing like it elsewhere on that day, or on that occasion.
This was certainly one of the most gladsome seasons that Lynn ever witnessed: but it was not the only season of that description that occurred here during the period now under review. There are others of the same kind that ought here not to pass unnoticed. One of these was in the spring of 1680, on account of the arrival of the duke of York from Scotland, and the discomfiture of the Whigs or petitioners, (or the king’s rejection of the petitions of the people for the assembling of parliament,) and, of course, the success and triumph of the Tories or court party, then called Abhorrers, as they professed to abhor such petitioning, and approve of the king’s governing without parliaments. On these interesting accounts there was much rejoicing at Lynn; and