Peace was restored among all the belligerent powers in 1783, when the independence of the resisting colonies, now called the United States of America, was acknowledged and confirmed. The American war ended, as all such unjust wars ought to end, in the disappointment and discomfiture of the aggressors. But had our government, and our nation possessed a proper degree of virtue, or conscience, they would certainly have expressed both shame and remorse, after the contest was over, and when they had time calmly to reflect upon the part they had acted in that most unjustifiable and detestable business. Nothing however of that kind did appear. On the contrary we sat down very demurely and composedly, without the least apparent feeling of contrition, sorrow, or self-reproach; like Solomon’s adulterous woman, who eat, and wiped her mouth, and said, “I have done no wickedness.” [959]
The impenitent spirit which our government and nation manifested at the close of the American war, could furnish no reason to hope that it was the last scene of folly and iniquity in which our rulers would engage: and if any did actually cherish such a hope, they must long ago have been convinced that it was altogether vain and groundless. All our subsequent wars, state policy, and maxims of government have but too plainly indicated that we have acted ever since, almost invariably, under the guidance of that same Evil Genius that so eggregiously misled, befooled, and governed us, during the whole American dispute and war, and which had before involved us in the guilt of exterminating the poor hapless Caribbs, as well as in that of other unjustifiable and criminal deeds previously to those events.
Some of our pretended longsighted, as well as long-headed politicians affected to foresee and foretell a very long season of uninterrupted tranquillity succeeding the peace of 1783. But it proved all a dream: for we have been most of the time since at war; and such a war too as we never experienced before. It has proved most miserably unsuccessful and disastrous; and is now in a fair way of saddling upon us at last an unexampled debt of a thousand millions! [960a]—Such an enormous sum as the whole coinage of the universe could not discharge.—This is a frightful prospect; but we will now turn to other objects.—But before we quit the year 1783 we may just observe that a most atrocious robbery was then committed on a Jew lad, about 16 years old, of the name of Isaac Levi, on the road between Lynn and Westwinch, by one Robert Fox, whoso ill treated the poor Jew as to leave him apparently dead; for which the robber was sometime after, (September 7th.) hanged on Hardwick common, near the place where the villanous and shocking deed had been perpetrated. [960b]
In 1784 we had here another contested Election, which, however, in point of violence was much inferior to those of 1768 and 1747. Mr. Fountaine of Narford was now the new candidate, whose character, certainly, was no way inferior to that of either of his opponents. But he lost his election, though he had a respectable number of voters, and the old members, Walpole and Molineux were again returned, than whom no two men had perhaps less distinguished themselves in the preceding parliament, or appeared less worthy to be re-elected. But they suited the taste and humour of the majority of their constituents, and especially of some two or three or few men who had the chief share or influence in their appointment. Our parliamentary representation is a very fine thing in theory, but in practice it is often found far otherwise.
But though this Election was conducted with decency and moderation, in comparison with those of 1768 and 47, yet it was attended with circumstances not a little disgraceful to the dispositions and characters of some of the leading actors, particularly on the victorious side. The aristocratic spirit and malignant passions were but too apparent; and not a few of the minor or unsuccessful party were made long to feel the resentment and vindictiveness of their powerful opponents, who were not much disposed to suffer the infallibility of their judgment to be questioned, or allow any with impunity to disapprove the objects of their choice or nomination. But this intolerance, and especially resentment and vindictiveness, must, most assuredly, be highly criminal and iniquitous on such occasions, since every voter, even the very poorest, has an undoubted right to give his voice freely for the candidate or candidates whom he deems most worthy of his suffrage. Whoever deprives a freeman of this privilege uses him worse than a highwayman.
Not only the electors of the poorer sort, who had voted for Mr. Fountaine, and lived in the town, suffered in consequence of having exercised their just rights on that occasion, but even the richer ones did not entirely escape: for those of them who held lands of the corporation were now deprived of the same, as well as of every other privilege which lay in the power of their revengeful opponents. This was carrying things with a high hand. After all, it may be no great wonder that our corporation should be still tenacious of having the representatives of their town to be men of their own nomination and choosing, considering that no one formerly, or till within these 170 years, except those of the Hall, appear to have had any share or concern in the appointment or election of those who represented this borough in parliament. [962]
It is, indeed generally supposed that matters are now here on a much fairer and more rational footing; but that, perhaps, will not appear very clearly when we advert to the well known truth and fact, that out modern members for the most part, owe their senatorial honour and elevation solely to the will and pleasure, or power and influence of some two or three families or individuals. Such, however, is but two often the practical character of our boasted system of parliamentary representation.
That of 1784 was the last contested election that has taken place here; though some faint attempt is said to have been made for something of this kind a few years ago, in favour of one of our military aldermen, who was supposed not to have been very much taken with the compliment, or, at least, did not choose to be very active in promoting his own election; not, however, that he was at all incapable of great, and even extraordinary electioneering feats in behalf of his friends, of which he is understood to have given, before now, unequivocal and convincing proof. In short, it would seem as if he were, (in cases of that kind especially,) more ready to serve other people than himself; which, to say the least of it, is a conduct not a little unusual in this degenerate and selfish age: and it may serve as a proof that generosity and disinterestedness are not yet become totally extinct among us.
From the year 1785, when our volunteers were disbanded, till 1788, we recollect no very remarkable event that related to this town. [964] In the last mentioned year, one of the Annual Registers of that period relates a most singular accident which then befel a captain Cook, master of one of our greenland-ships. The account is as follows—“August 1788: Friday last arrived at Lynn in Norfolk, the Archangel, from Greenland, captain Cook, with two fish. It was with much difficulty she got safe there, having received a deal of damage in a gale of wind, which drove her against a field of ice. When this ship was in Greenland, captain Cook, the surgeon, and mate, went on shore, when the captain was seized by a monstrous bear, which immediately hugged him with his paws. The captain called to the surgeon to fire at the creature, though at fifty yards distance, which he did, and fortunately shot the bear through the head, which instantly killed it, and captain Cook was by this means saved from being torn in pieces.” [965] We cannot vouch for the absolute correctness or authenticity of this anecdote, which certainly savours somewhat of the marvellous. It is inserted here entirely on the authority of the periodical work alluded to. But it is certain that there was here a greenland captain of the name of Cook, about that period.
The 5th. of November 1788 was observed at Lynn, in commemoration of the landing of king William, and of the glorious revolution that ensued, by a party of the friends of civil and religious liberty, among whom were the late reverend and worthy William Warner, and the writer of the present work. The party spent the evening at one of the Inns, where they supped together, and passed the time in the most perfect harmony and conviviality, and no way unworthy of the occasion, or of the great, glorious, and interesting event which they were then commemorating. Holkham, the princely mansion of Mr. Coke, was the only other place in West Norfolk, as far as the present writer has ever understood, where the centenary of the revolution was thought worth celebrating. That great event was there celebrated by a grand fête, ball and supper, display of fireworks, &c. All in a manner worthy of the patriotic character, revolution principles, and noble munificence of the renowned master of the mansion.