Of the transactions and occurrences that constitute the history of Lynn for the first twenty years of this reign we know of none that can be deemed very interesting or important. Some of them, however, are no less so than many of those that have been already related, and therefore cannot be silently passed over, or omitted, without departing from the plan which has been hitherto pursued. In regard to this period, as well as the preceding ones, it is much to be wished we could throw some further light on the internal state of the town, or what relates to the domestic character, social habits, or lives and manners of the inhabitants. Here, however, our materials have always proved very scanty; and the same has been generally the case with other historical writers. This work, accordingly, often appears as a history of the corporation; rather than of the town at large, or of the whole community; because our materials relate chiefly to that chartered body, placing all the rest far in the back ground, and often quite out of sight. This is to be regretted.

Among the memorable events which took place at Lynn about, or soon after the commencement of this reign, was the falling of the tower or steeple of South Lynn church. This happened, according to one of our MS. narratives, during the second mayoralty of Walter Robertson, which commenced at Michaelmas 1761. This is said to have been a strong square tower, about 82 feet high, with stone battlements; having thereon a shaft and vane 30 feet high. It had in it also, as Parkin says, five tuneable bells: and it appears to have in its fall demolished a good part of the west end of the church. The damage, as to the church, was soon repaired, but the tower was never afterwards rebuilt. South Lynn makes now a much humbler appearance than it did in former days, when it was adorned with two lofty towers; that which we have now mentioned, and that of the Carmelite convent, which stood a little way off, adjoining to that convent, in what is now called The Friars. This tower is said to have fallen in 1690: so that the tower of the parish Church stood above 130 years longer; owing, perhaps, to its being kept in better repair; though it may be supposed to have been, like the other, neglected afterwards.

Much about the time of which we have been speaking, another remarkable event occurred within our municipal or admiralty jurisdiction. This was the taking of a large whale, near Beverley creek, according to one account, or near Darsingham, according to the Norfolk Remembrancer; which further says, that it was 56 feet 9 inches long, and 34 feet 4 inches in girth; and moreover, that it was taken on the 27th. of March 1762. If we are not mistaken there was some dispute about it between our mayor of that time and Mr. Styleman, or some other gentleman of the vicinity of the place where it was taken. But we believe that the former’s right to it was, in the end, established. There have been other instances of whales being taken on this coast, though it happens but rarely.

On December 2nd. 1763, a dreadful high wind and tide made great ravages here: many ships were wrecked on the coast, and an incredible number of cattle and sheep were drowned in Marshland, &c. Among other sufferers, a Mr. Barrell and a Mr. Corfe, of Snettisham, lost 800 sheep each, as we find in the Norfolk Remembrancer.—In the following year, during the second mayoralty of Philip Case, the town, according to one of our MS. narratives, was served a trick which could not possibly redound to the credit of our rulers. “Purfleet Fleet was then cleaned, from the bridge to the clough adjoining to Kettle Mills river; and the filth and mud carried away by boats into the haven, to the great annoyance of the harbour and the forming of a bar there.” This was certainly bad enough, but the worst is still behind. The charge of scouring or cleaning the Fleets, it seems, belonged to the corporation: but, in this instance, it was contrived to throw it on the inhabitants, who were accordingly subjected to an assessment, or tax, which amounted to a sum of no less than 2000l. This, to say the least of it, seems to have been a very shabby affair; but some will think it much less so than our famous paving jobb.

In the third mayoralty of John Cary senior, which commenced in 1765, a shocking murder was committed here by one John Rudderham, (commonly and ironically called honest John) for which bloody and horrid deed he was soon after tried, condemned, and executed. Such, it has been said, was the deplorable depravity and ignorance of this unhappy wretch, that he appeared not to have any sense of moral evil, or any idea of the existence of a Supreme Being, and of a future state. Though born and brought up in a christian country, and even deemed a member of a christian church, yet he was utterly ignorant of every thing belonging to christianity, as appeared from the first conversation he had with a person who attended him while under sentence of death. Being asked by that person, if he had ever heard of the Lord Jesus Christ? He seriously answered that he could not positively say whether he had or not: “and yet (said he) I do rather think that I have really heard something of such a gentleman, though I cannot now remember what it was.” It is to be feared there were a great many more here at the same time in a similar predicament, or equally ignorant. Yet, if we are not misinformed, a motion made, about that period, to establish here a school for the instruction of poor children, was actually negatived, as a needless and useless measure, and what might prove inimical to social order, and destructive of all intellectual distinction between rich and poor, gentlemen and plebeians. It is pleasing to contemplate that our higher powers were actuated by better and nobler ideas latterly, when the Lancasterian school was proposed and established. May this prove the dawn of a more liberal and brighter day.

In 1768, during the mayoralty of Charles Turner, which commenced the preceding year, the town was much agitated by a very violent contested election, chiefly between Sir John Turner bart. and Crisp Molineaux Esq; for the honourable Thomas Walpole Esq. the other candidate, was apparently pretty sure of gaining his election. He was accordingly returned, and Sir John along with him, owing, as one of our MS. narratives suggests, to the bribing exertions of a certain eminent merchant, who expended 7000l. and upwards on the occasion. It was, however, the last time Sir John was returned for this town: Molineaux was returned along with Walpole at the next general election. After all, it seems to have been a very foolish business; for this same candidate does not appear to have been a person of any character, or who was endowed with such talents or qualifications as could recommend him for a senator in preference to Turner. Such has been, however, too often the case in our contested elections.

This is supposed to have been the greatest of all our Contested Elections, except that very memorable one in 1747, which probably far exceeded every thing of the kind ever known here. As the particulars of it were little known to the present writer, till his observations on the preceding reign had been printed off, he hopes the reader will excuse his giving some account of it here, though somewhat out of place. The opposition was chiefly aimed against Sir John Turner, the same, seemingly, that was opposed in the last mentioned contest, and father of the present Lady Folkes. His opponent was William Folkes Esq. father of the present Sir Martin. He is said to have been a very respectable man, though he was charged on this occasion with breach of a promise made to Lord Orford, not to stand candidate at that time for this town. What foundation there was for such a charge, or how the case really stood, it may be now difficult, or, perhaps, impossible to determine.

Though the prejudice against Turner was strong and extensive, and the opposition fierce and violent, yet he gained his election; but he was thought to owe it less to his own interest and management than to the favour and influence of the Walpoles, who were supposed to have greatly befriended him in that instance. At the close of the poll the numbers were—for Walpole 199; for Turner 184; for Folkes 131. The following Extract of a Letter written at that very time by a person of much wit and shrewdness, and who was an eye witness of the whole scene, will give the reader a striking, and we presume a just idea of the state of this town during that turbulent contest. Whether or not we are still capable of the like excesses, or extravagances, is a question that may not be unworthy of very serious consideration. It is to be wished it might he answered in the negative.

“Since you left us,” (says the Letter-writer alluded to,) “we’ve had a Contested Election, and perhaps as violent an one as any in England where the affair was not carried to bloodshed. I will be very particular in my account of it because ’twill amuse you.—The sudden bringing on the Elections all over England was a wise thing. As soon as ’twas known here that members were to be elected in about 3 weeks time, people of the lower sort got together in the Evenings in clusters, talking, how little good *** did to the town, &c.—This set a spirit agoing, and in 2 or 3 nights, they met about xxxv of ’em, at an alehouse, with C— P—t drunk at the head of them, whom they would fain have for a m—r of p—t. C—s treated the company, and the next morning gave them a whet, met ’em again in the evening, and the next evening, and then had shewn spite enough to *** whom he hates, to make it necessary for them to look about ’em. But where should they look? *** was in Gl—rshire with his wife, who was every moment expecting to cry out, and had sent a Letter, hoping to be chosen without coming at all. L—d O. was at H—n and his cousin H—’s son being the person that was to stand with S—r J—, my L—d was applied to, by our gentlemen, to let him know that the people grew rude and clamorous, and that unless somebody appeared, and care was taken of them, they feared Mr. F—s might be induced to give ’em some trouble, by becoming a candidate. My L—d told them there was no fear of that, for he had a Letter from Mr. F—s the post before, utterly disclaiming any design of that sort, which Letter he shewed them. So they all came away satisfied. Notwithstanding their satisfaction, and the good grounds any body would have thought they had for it, within 4 days after this F—s came down, and was introduced by A. T—, Dr. B—, H. F—, J. F—, J—n M—r, and several more, in coaches, chaises, &c. several 100 horsemen, Flags, Guns, Drums, and all the Racket that could possibly be made. Neither T— nor W— were here, and all were in distraction. Expresses were sent. L—d O. got here that night. S— J— could not possibly get here of two days and half. So on the Saturday night he came, and the Election was to be on the Monday. From the time of F—s setting out from London, the Public Houses were opened, and continued so; so that here was nothing but men and women and children drunk, old women especially, wallowing about the streets, and half of ’em with their backsides exposed to public view, and fellows a clapping of ’em.”

By this time every one must clearly see what a Bedlam of a place Lynn was, during this electioneering bustle. Our Letter-writer, no doubt, gives a pretty faithful and correct picture of what then occurred; on which account some of our readers will be desirous of hearing him further: but as his description now occasionally becomes somewhat coarse, if not indelicate, we shall place the remainder of the extract below, that those who wish to see more of it may have an opportunity to gratify themselves. [950] We shall now return from this digression, and resume the thread of our history.