UN! VERS 1 H
COLLEGE HCTOWES
QUEEN
Q-7/
xft
President White Library.
CORNELL UNIVERSITY.
A, irony
7/t/not
Cornell University Library
LF235 .G77
The Queen's college of St. Margaret and
olin
3 1924 030 651 925
COLLEGE
HISTORIES
CAMBRIDGE
QUEENS' COLLEGE
*$2tt*L*l
Cornell University
Library
The original of this book is in
the Cornell University Library.
There are no known copyright restrictions in
the United States on the use of the text.
http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924030651925
Bnibcrsitg of ©amfiriOge
COLLEGE HISTORIES
THE QUEENS' COLLEGE
OF ST. MARGARET AND ST. BERNARD
IN THE UNIVERSITY OP CAMBRIDGE
BY
J. H. GRAY, M.A.
FELLOW AND DEAN OF QUEENS 1 COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE
LONDON
F. E. ROBINSON
20 GREAT RUSSELL STREET, BLOOMSBURY
1899
to - feg - l g V>T2 *
K. iioi\,
Printed by Bali.antynk, Hanson &* Co.
At the Ballantyne Press
"Afc,
#
HERBERTO EDWARDO RYLE, S.T.P.
COLLEGII REG1NAL1S PRAES1DJ5NTI
HUNC QUALEMCUNQUE LIBELLUM
DEDICAMUS
PREFACE
This little book has laid me under great obligations. My
heaviest debts are to four works, viz., the Rev. W. G, Searle's
" History of the Queens' College of St. Margaret and St.
Bernard in the University of Cambridge/' Part I. 1867,
Part II. 1871; Messrs. Willis and Clark's " Architectural
History of the University of Cambridge," 4 vols. 1886";
Mr. J. B. Mullinger's " History of the University of Cam-
bridge," Vol. I. 1873, Vol. II. 1884 ; and the late Mr. C. H,
Cooper's "Annals of Cambridge," 4 vols. 1842-52. Mr.
Searle has been my chief guide as far as his work extends,
viz., to 1662, and a very large proportion of my materials
has been derived from him. I hope that he may be
induced to continue his History down to the present time :
finis coronet opus. " The Architectural History " has been
my authority for almost all that concerns the buildings of
the College, while to its editor, Mr. J. W. Clark, Regis-
trary of the University, I am indebted for his kindness in
allowing me to consult him. From Mr. Mullinger's
volumes I have derived much information up to the year
1625, where his work at present stops; if I may venture
to say so, it is a work which should not be allowed
to end there. To study the history of the University
during the period which follows 1625 under Mr, Mullin-
ger's able guidance would be a delightful task. " The
Annals of Cambridge " have brought within my reach
much that I might otherwise have sought in vain. When
my information has been , drawn from this book, I have
usually referred to it directly. To refer to the authority
viii PREFACE
cited by Mr. Cooper, often some rare report or some for-
gotten pamphlet, would be, I think, unfair to that inde-
fatigable collector, and would be claiming for myself an
amount of research to which I make no pretensions. Of
other books Thomas Fuller's "Church History" and
" History of the University of Cambridge " are perhaps
most often cited. And it is appropriate that Fuller should
be quoted in a book which deals with the history of his
own College.
I have to thank Mr. R. Bowes, of the firm of Messrs.
Macmillan and Bowes, for permission to reproduce the
ground-plan of the College from Messrs. Atkinson and
Clark's "Cambridge Described and Illustrated." The
illustrations are from photographs taken for me by Mr.
J. Palmer Clarke. The notes on the Library I owe to
Mr. F. G. Plaistowe, Librarian and formerly Fellow of
Queens' College. My warmest thanks are due to Dr. Ryle,
the President, and to Mr. Wright, the Tutor of Queens'
College, for revising the book in proof.
I fear that, at the best, the book is not at all worthy of
" the royal and religious foundation," which in this present
year has attained the venerable age of four hundred and
fifty. The work has been a labour of love. I could wish
that it had also been a labour of leisure. Such time as I
had at my disposal has been most willingly given to the
work, but a really adequate History of Queens' College,
more than of most other Colleges, would require an amount
of time, and also of knowledge, historical, antiquarian and
architectural, which it is wholly out of my power to com-
mand. I am conscious of many shortcomings ; I fear there
may be many others of which I am ignorant, " quas aid
incuriafudit aut humana parum cavii natura."
J. H. GRAY.
Qceens' College, Cambridge.
Dec. 8, 1898.
CONTENTS
CHAP.
PREFACE
CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE .
I. THE FOUNDATION OF QUEENS* COLLEGE
II. THE EARLIEST BUILDINGS
III. EARLY DAYS
IV. THE DAYS OF FISHER AND ERASMUS
V. THE PERIOD OF RELIGIOUS CHANGE
VI. SOME ELIZABETHAN DIVINES .
VII. THE ROYALIST PRESIDENT
VIII. ELECTION BY ROYAL MANDATE
IX. UNDER THE GEORGES
X. "WITHIN LIVING MEMORY" .
APPENDIX
INDEX
PAGE
vii
xiii
i
17
24
4i
70
104
i53
199
333
276
300
305
ILLUSTRATIONS
LOGGAN's VIEW (C. 1688) REDUCED FACSIMILE
Frontispiece
GROUND PLAN (FROM ATKINSON AND CLARK'S
CAMBRIDGE) Facing page 17
GATE TOWER AND EAST FRONT ... „ 24
ERASMUS' TOWER AND SOUTH SIDE OF
CLOISTERS „ 41
GALLERY AND NORTH SIDE OF CLOISTERS . ,, 70
INTERIOR OF GALLERY LOOKING WEST . ,, IO4
NORTH-WEST CORNER OF LODGE AND BRIDGE ,, • 332
INTERIOR OF NEW CHAPEL .... „ 876
CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE
1446 (Dec. 3). First foundation of St. Bernard's College.
1447 (Aug. 21). Second foundation of St. Bernard's College (trans-
ferred to the present site).
Petition of Queen Margaret to Henry VI.
1448 (March 30). Charter for the foundation of the Queens' College
of St. Margaret and St. Bernard.
(April 14). Contract for wood-work of part of first Court.
(April 15). Queen Margaret's letters founding the College.
(April 15). The corner-stone of the Chapel laid by Sir John
Wenlock.
1449 (March 4). Gift of /200 by Henry VI.
(March 6). ,Contract for wood-work to complete the first Court.
1450. Gift of £220 by Marmaduke Lumley, Bp. of Lincoln.
1454 (Dec. 12). The Chapel licensed by Wm. Gray, Bp. of Ely.
1460. W. side of Cloister Court built.
1465. Queen Elizabeth Widville becomes Patroness.
1468. Visit of Queen Elizabeth Widville.
1475 (March 10). The first k Statutes given_by Queen Elizabeth
Widville.
(Oct. 6). The ground W. of the river acquired from the town.
1477 (April 10). Endowment by Richard, Duke of Gloucester.
.1484 (July 5). Second endowment by Richard of Gloucester, now
King — " resumed by Henry VII."
(Nov. 4). Death of Andrew Dokett.
The " Magnum Journale " commenced.
1495. N. and S. sides of Cloisters built.
1505 (April). Election of Bp. Fisher as President.
Visit of the Lady Margaret.
1506 (April 22). Visit of Henry VII. and the Lady Margaret ; first
visit of Erasmus.
xiv CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE
1508 (June). Resignation of Bp. Fisher -
1510. Return of Erasmus, who resides 1511-1515.
Erection of Gallery or Ambulatory, i.e., the old Study.
1519. Visit of Catharine of Aragon.
1520. Visit of Cardinal Wolsey.
1522. Visit of Henry VIII.
1529. The Statutes confirmed by Pope Clement VII.
1530. Sir Thomas Smith elected Fellow.
1537 (?)The Gallery built.
1538. The Carmelites surrender their site, which is finally acquired
1544.
1542. Sir Thomas Smith Regius Professor of Civil Law, Vice-
Chancellor 1543-1544.
1546. The Commission of Henry VIII.
1549. The Commission of Edward VI.
1557. The Commission of Mary ; the Statutes of 1529 restored.
1559. The Commission of Elizabeth ; the Edwardian Statutes
restored.
1564. Visit of Queen Elizabeth.
Erection of the building in Pump Court.
1577. Death of Sir Thomas Smith.
1618. Erection of Walnut-Tree Court building.
1642. The College Plate sent to the King.
1643. The Chapel disfigured by William Dowsing.
1644. Edward Martin, President, and the Fellows deprived by the
Parliament.
1652. Death of John Smith.
1660. Dr. Martin restored.
1661. Restoration of the Chapel.
1685. Planting of Erasmus' Walk.
1705 (April 15). Visit of Queen Anne.
1732. Hall wainscoted and covered with flat ceiling.
1749-50. Wooden Bridge built over river.
1756. Erection of Essex's building.
1772. Library enlarged.
1773. Alterations in Chapel; flat ceiling introduced.
1778-82. Walnut-Tree Court rebuilt after fire,
1819-22. Oriel of Hall ornamented with arms of Foundresses, &c.
1845. Flat ceiling of Chapel removed.
1846. Flat ceiling of Hall removed.
CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE xv
1854. Oriel of Hall restored and Windows altered.
1858. First Victorian Statutes.
Complete restoration of Chapel commenced.
1861. Fireplace of Hall decorated.
1875. E. Front restored and decorations of Hall finished.
1882. The Second Victorian Statutes.
1886. Friars' Buildings commenced.
1891 (Oct. 13). New Chapel dedicated by Lord Alwyne Compton,
Bp. of Ely.
1892 (Sept. 27). New Organ opened.
1896. Renovation of President's Lodge.
1898. Friars' Gate built.
CHAPTER I
THE FOUNDATION OF QUEENS' COLLEGE
" Quarta vides nostris quae surgunt proxima ripis
Moenia ? Regina domus haec auctore superbit :
Margaris, Henrici coniux, haec condidit olim,
Dum melior fortuna fuit, necdum aspera frustra
Aspera captivo pro coniuge bella moveret."
Giles Fletcher, 1633.
It is a curious fact that when the system of Non-
Collegiate Students was inaugurated in 1869 the step
was not a new departure, but was a reversion to the
original type. In the early days of the University all
students were " unattached." But before 1869 for three
centuries every member of the University had been
attached to some College or Hall, so that the sup-
porters of the Non-Collegiate system were "putting
back the clock " some three hundred years.
The mediaeval University was not a Universitas
studiorum, but a corporation or guild of teachers,
possessing certain privileges and associated together
for purposes of teaching and with the object of pre-
serving their rights. They admitted no one as a
member of their body without proof of his ability.
This proof was given by public disputation, and " the
degree " was a licence to teach. Students who desired
to hear the teachers took up their residence in the
2 QUEENS' COLLEGE
University town, and attended the lectures in the
schools. But the University as a body had no con-
cern with the life of the students beyond the fact that
its officers exercised a superintendence over the houses
in which they lodged, and assumed a care over public
morals. The taxors and the proctors 1 were the only
University officials who were in any sense charged with
the well-being of the students.
This is practically the state of things which still
exists in all Universities save Oxford and Cambridge.
These two Universities are differentiated from all others
by the Collegiate system. The College in its original
form was a foundation for the lodging and mainten-
ance of deserving students. It was in the main elee-
mosynary in character, and was designed to provide for
the residence of students whose lack of means would
otherwise debar them from the advantages of the
University. Once the system was started it speedily
carried everything before it. The student of the College,
well fed, well clothed, well taught and properly looked
after, had advantages incomparably greater than the
solitary student, who was left to riot or to starve in
his lodgings. The Colleges gradually absorbed all the
students of the University, although Hostels existed
in considerable numbers as late as the middle of the
sixteenth century ; indeed, Dr. Caius laments as an evil
effect of the Reformation the fact that the Hostels had
become depleted and were gradually being closed or
swallowed up in the Colleges. In the end the College
1 A good account of the Proctors and Taxors will be found in
Mr. S. M. Leathes' Introduction to " Grace Book A " (Cambridge
1897).
THE FOUNDATION 3
prevailed, every official of the University was a member
of a College, and the University itself an aggregate of
Colleges.
This conception of the University as a literary
republic, of which the Colleges are, so to speak, the
constituent states, is peculiar to the two great English
Universities. How unintelligible it is to the foreign
mind will be obvious to any one who has tried to ex-
plain it to some " distinguished stranger." A University
requires as its local habitation a senate-house, a library,
and schools or lecture-rooms. These the University of
Cambridge possesses, but they constitute a very small
part of the buildings shown to the stranger who is
paying a visit to the University. There is a story of
some learned foreigners who were much perplexed by
this anomaly, as it appeared to them. They were taken
from building to building and College to College, but
always reverted to the question, " But where is the Uni-
versity?" Again and again the question came up:
" Oh, yes ! I understand: this is Trinity College, this is
St. John's College,'" or whatever it might be; " but where
is the University? " At last, when their guides were in
despair of making themselves understood, the then
Secretary of the Local Examinations, without whose aid
few things were attempted in Cambridge, opportunely
issued from the Library, and one of the conductors
pointed to him in triumph, " There is the University."
The foreigners were silenced : whether they were satisfied
or not the story does not explain.
The Collegiate system is due in Oxford to Walter de
Merton (1265 a.d.). In Cambridge it is due to Hugh
de Balsham, the founder of Peterhouse (1284 a.d.), who
4 QUEENS' COLLEGE
followed closely the statutes drawn up by Walter de
Merton for his College. How speedily the conception
spread is seen from the dates of the existing Colleges.
Within little more than half a century after the
foundation of Peterhouse we have Clare (1326), Pem-
broke (1347), Gonville and Caius (1348), Trinity Hall
(1350), and Corpus Christi (1352). And the number
might be increased if we took into account such
foundations as those of Michael-House (1324), and
King's Hall (1337), which were afterwards absorbed
into the great foundation of Trinity College.
For a time there was a cessation of activity. Then
the zeal for founding broke out again, and, practically
within little more than half a century, no fewer than
six of the existing Cambridge Colleges sprang into
being. They are King's College (1441), Queens' (1448),
St. Catharine's (1473), Jesus (1496), and the two founda-
tions of the Lady Margaret, viz., Christ's (1505) and
St. John's (1511). It is with the second College in this
second group that we are concerned.
The true founder of Queens' College was Andrew
Dokett. 1 In the words of the Commemoration-Service :
"First of all I must mention with most grateful
memory Andrew Dokett, Rector of St. Botolph's, Prin-
cipal of St. Bernard's Hostel and our first President, to
whom is due the merit of the design of founding the
College, and to whose zeal, ability, liberality and prudence
1 Or perhaps more correctly Doket. In " Grace Book A," p. 9, the
name is spelt Doget. Fuller (see p. 11) gives Ducket, which
approximates to the modern spelling. Sir George Duckett has
recently presented to the College the seal used by his ancestor
Andrew Dokett.
THE FOUNDATION 5
the successful establishment of this Foundation is mainly
to be attributed."
It is tantalising that we are able to glean but little about
the early life of this remarkable man. He was a Friar
(Fuller, " Univ. of Camb.," v. 33). He appears as Princi-
pal of St. Bernard's Hostel, which was one of the many
lodging-houses for non-collegiate students then existing
in Cambridge. St. Bernard's Hostel was situated in
Trumpington Street, on the north side of St. Botolph's
churchyard, and adjoining Benet, now Corpus Christi,
College, by which it was subsequently absorbed. The
advowson of St. Botolph's at that time belonged to
Corpus Christi College, and Andrew Dokett was pre-
sented to the living by that society before the year 1439,
when his name appears as Vicar of St. Botolph's. He
became Rector October 21, 1444, when the great tithes
were restored to the living by Corpus Christi College
(Lamb, " Hist, of C. C. C," p. 305 ; Searle, p. 49). He
was subsequently made a Prebendary of the free chapel
of St. Stephen (founded by Edward III. 1347) within
the Palace of Westminster, but exchanged this prefer-
ment in 1479 with Dr. Walter Oudeby, Provost of the
College of Cotterstoke or Cotterstock, near Oundle, in
the county of Northampton. Andrew Dokett also
became Prebendary of Ruiton in the Church of Lich-
field, July 22, 1467. This he exchanged in 1470 for
the Chancellorship of the same church, an office which
he resigned July 6, 1476. The rectory of St. Botolph's
he resigned in 1470. He lived until November 4, 1484.
Andrew Dokett obtained from King Henry VI., on
December 3, 1446, a charter of incorporation for a Col-
lege under the title of the College of St. Bernard. The
6 QUEENS' COLLEGE
site on which it was intended to place this building lies
to the east of the present College. It was a strip of ground
extending from Trumpington Street on the east to
Milne Street, the present Queens' Lane, on the west.
The ground did not extend as far south as Smallbridges
Street, now Silver Street. Then some dwelling-houses lay-
between the site and this street, and on the north were
other dwelling-houses, which with the site itself after-
wards became the property of St. Catharine's College.
The original Society consisted of the President and
four Fellows. They seem to have found the chosen
site unsuitable for their purpose, and by the King's per-
mission returned the charter, praying that in its stead
he would accept a new piece of ground near the river,
which, together with four tenements acquired by them,
they made over to the King. The greater part of this
new site was a messuage and garden conveyed to Dokett,
July 24, 1447, by John Morys of Trumpington and
Elizabeth his wife. This ground extended from Milne
Street on the east to the river on the west, and the four
tenements with their gardens, which formed its south-
west corner, belonged conjointly to John Morys and
John Battisford of Chesterton. These were acquired
July 26, 1447, and were conveyed to the King by the
same deed. The present site also includes a piece of
ground which then belonged to Corpus Christi College,
a house, the property of Thomas Forster, and the
corner-house of John Morys, which were shortly after-
wards acquired by the College.
In the deed of surrender they pray for a new charter
refounding the College on this site next to the Car-
melite Friars, as a site more favourable to the prospects
THE FOUNDATION 7
of the foundation, and offering more scope for its
expansion. This is clear from the words of the King's
charter : " pro placabiliori situ ac elargatiane edificiorum
et habitatkmis huiusmodi collegii?
On Aug. 21, 1447, the King acceded to the request of
the Society, revoked the former charter, and refounded
the College of St. Bernard on the new site. The
charter gives the names of the President and the first
four Fellows, "John Lawe, Alexander Folkelowe,
Thomas Haywode, and John Carewey, clerks,'" and the
statutes are to be made by John Somerset, Chancellor
of the Exchequer, Richard [Cawedray], Peter [Hirford],
John Sperhauk, Hugh [Damlet], and Thomas Boleyn.
The charter is quoted in full, Searle, pp. 8-15. Ap-
pended to the charter is the Great Seal of England.
At this juncture Margaret of Anjou, the Queen of
Henry VI., petitioned the King to allow her to found
and name the College. The document is preserved
among the College muniments. It runs as follows:
" Margaret,
" R. H.
" To the King my souverain lord.
" Besecheth mekely Margaret quene of England youre
humble wif, Forasmuche as youre moost noble grace hath
newely ordeined and stablisshed a collage of seint
Bernard in the Universite of Cambrigge with multitude of
grete and faire privilages perpetuelly appartenyng unto
the same, as in your lettres patentes therupon made more
plainly hit appereth, In the whiche universite is no collage
founded by eny quene of England hidertoward, Plese hit
therfore unto your highnease to yeve and graimte unto
your seide humble wif the fondacoh and determinacoh of
8 QUEENS' COLLEGE
the seid collage to be called and named the Quenes
collage of sainte Margarete and saint Bernard, or ellis of
sainte Margarete vergine and martir and saint Bernard
confessour, and therupon for ful evidence thereof to have
licence and pouoir to ley the furst stone in her owne
persone or ellis by other depute of her assignement, so
that beside the mooste noble and glorieus collage roial of
our Lady and saint Nicholas founded by your highnesse
may be founded and stablisshed the seid so called Quenes
collage to conservation of oure feith and augmentation of
pure clergie, namly of the imparesse [empress] of alle
sciences and facultees theologie. . to the ende there accus-
tumed of plain lecture and exposicoh botraced [buttressed]
with docteurs sentence autentiq' performed daily twyes by
two docteurs notable and wel avised upon the bible afore-
none and maistre of the sentences afternoone to the
publique audience of alle men frely, bothe seculiers and
religieus, to the magnificence of denominacon of suche a
Quenes collage and to laud and honneure of sexe feme-
nine, like as two noble and devoute contesses of Pembroke
and of Clare founded two collages in the same universite
called Pembroke hall and Clare hall, the wiche are of
grete reputation for good and worshipful clerkis, that by
grete multitude have be bredde and brought forth in
theym, And of youre more ample grace to graunte that
all privileges immunitees profites and comodities con-
teyned in the lettres patentes above reherced may stonde
in theire strength and pouoir after forme and effect of the
conteine in theym. And she shal ever preye God for
you."
The date of this petition is between August 21, 1447,
and March 30, 1448. The Queen, as a royal personage,
puts her name at the top, and the letters R. H. are the
THE FOUNDATION 9
King's sign-manual, by which he countersigned it on
returning it to the Queen granted.
The motives which induced the young Queen — she
was only eighteen — to become the patroness of the
College are thus given by Thomas Fuller (" Univ. of
Camb.," v. 31) :
"As Miltiades' trophy in Athens would not suffer
Themistocles to sleep, so this Queen beholding her
husband's bounty in building King's College was restless
in herself with holy emulation until she had produced
something of the like nature, a strife wherein wives
without breach of duty may contend with their husbands
which should exceed in pious performances."
And, so far as the Queen was concerned, we need not
doubt that the explanation is true. Margaret was
brilliant and ambitious, her high abilities and her great
position had already made her, rather than her gentle
consort, the leading personage in the realm. She would
naturally be eager to associate her name with such a
work. Nor is it without significance that Cardinal
Beaufort, who had brought about her marriage with the
King, appears as one of the earliest benefactors of the
College. We may infer that he would readily encour-
age his royal mistress to accept the position offered her.
At the same time we can hardly doubt that the far-
sighted Dokett had found reason to seek the Queen's
patronage for his foundation. "Whether Andrew
Dokett " (says Mr. Searle, p. 16), " finding the King too
busy with affairs of state and the management of his
own two foundations, King's College and Eton College,
contrived to engage the Queen's interest in a similar
10 QUEENS' COLLEGE
work, there is no evidence to show. 1 '' But it is not a
very hazardous guess that the Queen's patronage was
due as much to Dokett's prudence as to her own
ambition.
And so St. Bernard's College disappeared. The
Queen became patroness, the charter was returned to the
King a second time to be revoked, with a petition that
the King would grant the lands conveyed by the charter
to Queen Margaret with a licence to found " another
College in honour of the glorious virgin St. Margaret
and of St. Bernard, on the ground late of John Morys
of Trumpington, Esquire." In accordance with these
petitions, letters patent under the Great Seal were
issued March 30, 1448, granting to Queen Margaret
the lands of St. Bernard's College and licence to found
a College. 1 In the exercise of the power thus given
her, the Queen, by a document dated April 15, 1448,
reciting the King's licence of March 30, and repeating
its provisions in her own name, proceeds, " in the name
of the Holy and Undivided Trinity, the Father, Son
and Holy Ghost, and of the glorious virgin Mary and
of saint Margaret and saint Bernard, by power and
authority of the King's licence given and granted us in
this matter by the letters specified above," to found a
College for one President and four Fellows, "to the
praise, glory and honour of Almighty God," by the
name of the Queen's College of St. Margaret and St.
Bernard {Collegium Regmale Sancte Margarete et
Sancti Bernardi).
In these two charters of Henry and Margaret the
President and Fellows are the same as in the charter for
1 The charter is transcribed by Mr. Searle, pp. 18-26.
THE FOUNDATION 11
St. Bernard's College. " They were to form a corpora-
tion able to sue and to be sued, with a common seal and
having licence to hold property in mortmain to the
amount of i?200 a year " (Searle, p. 28). The statutes
were to be framed by William Booth, Bishop of Lich-
field and Coventry, John Somerset, Richard Cawedray,
Peter Hirford, Hugh Damlet, Thomas Boleyn, and
William Millington, clerks. Mr. Searle collects what
is known about these persons (pp. 82-36). But there
is no evidence that any statutes were framed for the
College during the reign of Henry VI. Probably the
outbreak of the Wars of the Roses rudely interrupted
such works of peace. In the quaint words of Fuller
("Univ. of Camb., ,, v. 33):
"The child thus come to the birth, there was no
strength to bring forth, had not the skill of the midwife
supplied the want of strength in the mother. I mean
Andrew Ducket [Dokett], for fourty years first Master
of this House, formerly a Fryer, Rector of S. Buttolph's
in Cambridge, Principale of St. Bernard's Hostel, who
gathered much money from well-disposed people, to
finish this Colledge, and accounted by some, though not
by his purse by his prayers, the Founder thereof. A good
and discreet man, who with no sordid but prudentiall com-
plyance so poised himself in those dangerous times betwixt
the successive Kings of Lancaster and York, that he pro-
cured the favour of both, and so prevailed with Queen
Elizabeth, wife to King Edward the fourth, that she
perfected what her professed enemy had begun. A good-
natur'd Lady, whose estate (whilest a widow) being
sequestred for the delinquency of her husband (things,
though not words, then in fashion) made her more
merciful to the miseries of others."
12 QUEENS' COLLEGE
It will be in keeping with Fuller's description of
Elizabeth Widville as " a good-natur'd Lady," if we
credit her with other motives than that of outdoing
what her predecessor had done, when she became the
patroness of the College. Elizabeth herself had strongly
sympathised with the Lancastrian party. She had been
a lady-in-waiting to Margaret of Anjou, and her
husband had fallen in battle for the Lancastrian cause.
When Margaret was finally defeated, Elizabeth miti-
gated the rigour of her imprisonment. We may
suppose then that she was rather completing the work
of her mistress than trying to supersede a rival. In
Mr. Mullinger's words (" Univ. of Camb., 11 i. p. 316) :
" It is not improbable that sympathy with her former
mistress, then passing her days in retirement in Anjou,
may have prompted her to accede to the prayer of
Andrew Dokett, the first President of the Society, and to
take the new foundation, henceforth written Queens'
College, under her protection."
The present position of the apostrophe after the ' s '
not inadequately corresponds to the facts of the case.
It gives Queen Elizabeth due credit without derogating
from the claims of Queen Margaret. History may
recognise the claims of both without disparaging the
claims of either. We may think of Elizabeth as
loyally following in the footsteps of the Queen whom
she had known and served before the strange chances
of destiny had brought her the prospect of a crown.
"The example of Queen Margaret was followed by
Elizabeth, Queen Consort of Edward IV., after the
accession of the House of York. In the year 1465 she
THE FOUNDATION 13
became patroness of the College, and in the year 1475
she gave us our first statutes, in which she is declared to
be ' the true Foundress.' " (Commemoration Service.)
The ground conveyed by Dokett to the Crown forms
not much more than a third of the site upon which the
College stands. It may be convenient here to complete
the history of the steps by which the whole property
was acquired. The northern portion of the site, on
which the Walnut Tree Buildings, the Friars' Buildings
and the New Chapel now stand, as well as the ground
occupied by the President's Garden and the Fellows'
Bowling-Green, belonged to the Carmelites, or White
Friars, who had been located first at Chesterton, then
at Newnham, finally, since 1292, in the parish of
St. John, Milne Street. Between the College property and
the\property of the Carmelites there was a ditch and a
wall, and a lane extended from Milne Street in the direc-
tion of the river. The wall, with the ground on which
it stood, was sold by the Friars to the College on
February 12, 1537, for ^1 3s. 4d. Eighteen months
later (August 8, 1538), when the dissolution of the
religious houses was imminent, "perhaps under the
impression that better terms would be obtainable
from the College than from the Crown " (Willis and
Clark, ii. p. 3, q.v.), the Carmelites surrendered their
property to the President (Dr. Mey) and Fellows of
Queens' College. It will be noted that this surrender
takes place between the Act of 1536, which suppressed
the smaller houses, and the Act of 1539, which vested in
the King all such monasteries as had been or should be
afterwards surrendered. " The Pilgrimage of Grace "
14 QUEENS' COLLEGE
had been put down, and a new visitation appointed, by
which the larger monasteries were being coerced or
bribed into surrender to the Crown. This deed sets
forth that
" We George Legat, prior of the howse of friers Carmelites
in Cambridge, commonlie called the White Friers, and the
covent of the same howse . . . gladly ffrely and willynglie
do give and graunt and surrender in to the hands of the
right worshipfull Mr. William Mey, docf. in law civill
... all that owr howse and grownd called the White
friers in Cambridge, with all and singular the appertin-
ences therof and themnto belonging. And we also by
these presents do testifie that, when we shal be required
therunto, we shall depart from the seid howse and grownd
and give place unto them, and also shal be redie at all
tymes to make writyngs, and seale to all such wrytyngs
as shal be devised by ther learned cownsell to he in us for
the confirmation and assuraunce of this owr gift and dede
towards them : so that this owr fact and dede be nothyng
preiudiciall, but alowed and approved of and by owr most
dred and soueraigne lord the Kyng, In whose graces
power and pleasure, beyng the supreme hed of this
catholik churche of Englond, we confesse and acknow-
ledge that it is to alowe or disalowe this owr fact or
dede."
However, the transaction was not " alowed and approved
of and by owr most dred and soueraigne lord the Kyno-,"
for a royal commission was issued on August 17, 1538
to Dr. Daye, Provost of King's College, Dr. Mey, Presi-
dent, and two of the Fellows of Queens' College, directing
them that
THE FOUNDATION 15
"repayring unto the said howse [of the White Friars]
immedyately uppon the receipt hereof, ye shal receve of
the priour ther, in our name and to our use, such sufficient
writing under the convent seale of the said howse, as by
your discretion shal be thought mete and convenyent for
the surrendre of the same ; The which surrendre so made,
we wooll that ye shal take possession of the said howse,
and soo to kepe the same to our use tyll further know-
leage of our pleasour, taking a true and perfite Inventory
of all the goodes of the saide howse, the which our
pleasour is ye shall send unto us incontynently, to thentent
our further mynde may theruppon be declared unto you
with more speed and celeritie."
These instructions were obeyed. The deed of sur-
render was made August 28th, an inventory of the
Friars' goods taken September 6. On November 28,
1541, Dr. Mey purchased from the King's officers the
stone, slate, tile, timber, iron and glass which had
belonged to the Carmelites for -£%0. The site was
granted by the King to John Eyre of Bury, Sep-
tember 12, 1544, who sold it to Dr. Mey, and it was
transferred to the College November 30, 1544.
This brought into the possession of Queens' College
the whole property on the east side of the river. The
ground on the west side, then an island, had been
acquired previous to this date. Letters patent were
sent on behalf of the College to the mayor, bailiffs and
commonalty of the town of Cambridge by King
Edward IV.j Queen Elizabeth, and their son Prince
Edward in 1475. On October 6 in that year, "on
contemplation of the honourable letters of our most
dread lord the King, the most excellent Princess our
16 QUEENS' COLLEGE
lady the Queen and the illustrious and most mighty
Prince, 11 the borough, in consideration of 40 marks,
granted to Andrew Dokett, the President, and the
Fellows and their successors for ever this land on the
west side of the river. It is described as
" a parcel of the common land or soil of the town,
between the common river running down from the King's
Mill and the Bishop's Mill on the east, and the river
running down from Newnham Mill on the west, and from
divers bounds called 'Stakis' placed on the north part
of the street leading from the town of Cambridge to
Newnham, between the two bridges called the Smale
Brigges, distant from the said street on the east part
28 ft. and towards the west 63 ft."
The College undertook to lengthen " the Smale Brigge
next the College by twelve feet," and to widen " the river
on the east of the said soil " to the breadth of fifty-one
feet. Leave was likewise given the College to throw a
bridge over the river on the east part of the soil, so
that the arch of such bridge stretched as far as the arch
of the bridge of King's College. The condition of the
island and the position of the streams that surrounded
it are shown in Hammond's Map of Cambridge, 1592.
A plan reduced from this map is given by Willis and
Clark, ii. p. 5.
We may now proceed to trace the history of the
buildings erected on the east side of the river.
From Atkinson and]
GROUND PLAN OF COLLEGE
[Clark's "Cambridge
CHAPTER II
THE EARLIEST BUILDINGS
" Kings shall be thy nursing fathers, and their queens thy
nursing mothers."
Queen Margaret's charter of foundation was dated
April 15, 1448. It had heen her intention to lay the
first stone in person, but, as she was unable to do this,
perhaps on account of the plague then prevalent in
Cambridge, she commissioned Sir John Wenlock, her
chamberlain, to act for her. The stone was laid on the
very day on which the charter was given.
" Sir John Wenlock Knight laid the first stone of this
Colledge in the East end and South side of the Chappel,
in the name of Queen Margaret, Aprill 15, 1448, who
caused this inscription to be engraved thereon : ' Erit
DomiruB Nostras Reginas Margaretce Dominus in refugium, et
lapis iste in signum.' The Lord shall be for a refuge to
the Lady Margaret, and this stone for a signe. Indeed,
poor Queen, soon after she needed a sanctuary to shelter
herself when beaten in battel,, and the aforesaid (since
Lord Wenlock) slain at Teuksbury."
So, characteristically, Fuller (" Univ. of Camb.," v. 32).
But according to a brief MS. history of the foundation
of the College, written about 1470, the inscription borne
u
18 QUEENS' COLLEGE
by the stone was " Erit domine nostre Regime
Margarete dommivm in refugiwm et lapis iste in
signum? meaning probably, as Mr. Searle suggests
(p. 44), " The power of our Lady Queen Margaret shall
be our refuge and this stone (laid in her name) the sign
of her protection."
By this time the Collegiate plan had been fully
developed. It followed the lines not of a monastery,
but of the normal type of large country-house. In
the case of Queens 1 College this resemblance to the
accepted type of country-house is found both in the
original buildings and in the additions soon afterwards
made to them. The result is that the general plan of
Queens' College bears a most striking likeness to the
plan of a house such as Haddon Hall. This has been
fully worked out, Willis and Clark, iii. Appendix.
Two conntracts for the earliest buildings are still
extant. The first of these contracts, dated April 14,
1448, the day before the laying of the stone, between
the President and Fellows of the College on the one
part, and John Veyse, draper, and Thomas Sturgeon,
carpenter, of Elesnam (Elsenham), Essex, on the other
part, is a contract binding these latter to put up the
woodwork of part of the first Court for the sum of
£100, to be paid in three instalments. They are to
provide all the timber needful for the roof, the " midel-
walles " (partitions), stairs and floors, and this timber is
to be oak. The house is to be 240 ft. long and 20 ft.
broad (Searle, pp. 38, 39). The building here pro-
vided for comprised the whole of the north and east
and the eastern half of the south side of the first Court
—i.e., the Library, the Chapel, the Great Gate and
THE EARLIEST BUILDINGS 19
three staircases containing rooms for Fellows and
students. The length of these buildings, excluding the
Gate, is rather more than 240 ft. The point on the
south side where this work ended is still plainly dis-
cernible in the brickwork both inside the front Court and
in Silver Street. As the last instalment of the money was
to be paid to the contractors on Michaelmas day, it is
clear that the building was expected to be finished by that
date, and the work was certainly completed before the
spring of the folio wing year. OnMarch 4, 1449, Henry VI.
contributed i?200 towards the cost of this building.
" It is shewed unto us by our welbeloved the President
and Felowes of the College of Saint Margarete and Saint
Bernard in our universite of Cambrigge, which is of the
foundation of our most dere and best beloved wyfe the
Quene, how that, for as much as the seid president and
felowes have not wherwith to edifie the seid College in
housing and other necessaries but only of almesse of
Cristes devout people therto putting theire hands and
dedes meritorye, nor that the seid edification is not to be
perfourmed at any wise withoute that the supportation of
our moste noble and benygne grace be shedded unto
them in this partie — we have yeven them CO'."
The second contract, between the same parties, dated
March 6, 1449, binds Veyse and Sturgeon to find all
the timber for the roof of the Hall for the sum of i?80
(Searle, pp. 39-41). The money is to be paid " the fest
of the nativite of our Lord next followyng. 1 ' The Hall
is to be 50 ft. long and 22 ft. broad. The contract
covers also " the rofes of botry [buttery] pantry and
kechen with the fibres to them longyng with all the
20 QUEENS' COLLEGE
midil walles and greses [stairs] to the said houses per-
teynyng." " The wich howses extenden in lenketh from
the hall into the hei way with a return of the chambers
ich of ham conteyning in lenketh xxv foote and in
brede xx." This "return of the chambers'" is the
western portion of the south side of the Court.
It is further stipulated that all the timber "that
shall nede to the seides howses shall accord wyth the i i
other syde the wich is now redy framed next to the
freres " — i.e., that the south side shall correspond with
the north side, which lay nearest to the property of the
Carmelites, had been included in the former contract
and was already built.
These indentures for the woodwork are the only
records remaining for the building of the front Court.
This Court (99 ft. E. to W., by 84 ft. N. to S.) was
completed before the Wars of the Roses broke out.
'■' It is of excellent architecture, in red brick, with a
noble gateway, flanked by octagonal turrets, and it has a
square tower at each external angle of the court. The
effect of these towers is greatly increased by the care with
which they are diminished upwards. The employment of
the towers is a peculiarity which offers presumptive
evidence that the architect of the other two royal colleges
of was King's and Eton employed to design the buildings
of this smaller foundation" (Willis and Clark, ii. p. 11).
From the imperishable nature of the materials used
this Court remains almost as it was when it was first
built. The only changes are that the cusps have been
scraped from the windows, that battlements have been
substituted for the eaves, which still existed at the time
THE EARLIEST BUILDINGS 21
when Loggan's print was made — about 1688 — and that
a wooden belfry has been erected above the entrance to
the Chapel. "It is," says Mr. J. W. Clark, "the
earliest remaining quadrangle in, Cambridge that can
claim attention for real architectural beauty and fitness
of design.'" By an arrangement common in Collegiate
buildings, the Chapel and Library occupied the north
side of the Court, and the Hall, Buttery and Kitchen
the west side, while the remaining sides contained
rooms for the members of the College. The tower
above the gateway formed the Treasury. The President
was housed in the N.W. corner between the Library
and the Hall. From the gable wall which finished the
N. side of the building it appears that the original
building did not include the Combination Room nor
the President's Chamber over it. Otherwise the same
roof would have been continued. As it is, there is a
small space at the angle of the Court, in which there is
a window from the Combination Room and another over
it from the President's Lodgings. The buildings of this
Court, except the Chapel and the Hall, are in two storeys
with attics.
The Society must have been greatly helped in
these buildings by a munificent gift, of £98,0 from
Marmaduke Lumley (Chancellor of the University
1427-28, Master of Trinity Hall, 1429, Bishop of
Carlisle, 1429-50). Bishop Lumley was translated
from .Carlisle to Lincoln 1450 and died soon afterwards.
If he is correctly described as " Lincoln, episcopus, 11 his
benefaction must belong to the year 1450.
The Chapel, which had a vestry in the N.E. corner
and a tower in the N.W. corner, was licensed for Divine
22 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
Service by William Gray, Bishop of Ely, Dec. 12, 1454.
He gives authority for the celebration of the divine
offices " in Chapels and Oratories suitable and seemly,
duly arranged for divine worship, situated within the
College and the Hostel of St. Bernard,''' reserving the
customary rights of the parish churches (Searle, p. 45,
Cooper, " Ann.," i. p. 206). The authorities of a College
were anxious to have a Chapel of their own as soon as
it was possible : otherwise it was necessary that the
younger students should be constantly escorted to the
parish church. When a College was provided with its
own Chapel, its younger members at this date seldom
quitted the precincts, save when they were conducted by
their seniors to attend the Schools.
The first addition made to the original buildings
was the range along the river-front, which now forms
the west side of the Cloister Court. The date of this
building, which contained students' chambers, is about
1460. The ground floor is partly occupied by a cloister-
walk 6 ft. wide. "This cloister consists of plain
four-centered arches of brickwork, of three chamfered
orders. The arches are fenced below by a low side-wall,
with the exception of the central one, which is open to
the grass " (Willis and Clark, ii. p. 14). The windows
in this building correspond in style with those in the front
Court, and this edifice with its cloister was completed
before the side cloisters N. and S. were built. An
examination of the cloisters makes this plain. The last
arch of the cloisters on these two sides merely abuts
against the arch of the W. building, and though the
arcades N. and S. are of the same form as those on the
W. side, they are in two orders only of chamfered bricks,
THE EARLIEST BUILDINGS 23
instead of in three like the W. side. It is conjectured
that these two sides were added in 1495. There is no
mention of a cloister (claustrvm) in the accounts 1484-
1494, but after that date the word is of frequent
occurrence. And large quantities of lime and sand are
bought for "the cloister" at this time ("Magn. Journ.," i.
92). The Cloister Court thus completed is irregular in
shape. The west side measures 75 ft. 9 in., the east
side 66 ft., the north side 102 ft. 4 in., and the south
side 79 ft. The Hall and Combination Room occupy
the east side. The building on the west side was
originally some 130 ft. in length, but some 25 ft. of the
work was pulled down in 1756 to make way for Essex's
building (see chap. ix.). This was as far as the buildings
had been carried at the time of Erasmus' residence,
1511-15. The turret at the S.W. angle of the ,main
building, which was included in the rooms occupied by the
great scholar, is still commonly spoken of as Erasmus 1
tower. Loggan's view shows that the centre of the
Cloister Court was originally a garden. One tree still
remains in his time. There was a door leading from
this Court into the lane between the College and the
Carmelites. A key " for ye gate by ye Cloisters into ye
freares " is mentioned several times in the accounts.
CHAPTER III
EARLY DAYS
" High potentates, and dames of royal birth
And mitred fathers in long order go :
* * * *
And Anjou's heroine, and the paler rose,
The rival of her crown and of her woes." — T. Gray.
Presidents : Andrew Dokett, 1448-1484 ; Thomas Wilkynson,
1484-1505.
It would appear that Andrew Dokett kept the accounts
of his College himself. The Bursar's book known as
the " Magnum Journale " commences only after his death.
Hence, at this time, when the growth of the College
was marvellously rapid, the materials for its history are
comparatively scanty. The record of these early days
is little more than a recital of the benefactions by which
the College was gradually established and enriched. To
enter into the details of these gifts is beyond the scope
of the present work. And to do so is the less necessary,
in that Mr. Searle has gleaned all the information that
can be obtained and embodied it in his first volume
(p. 60 ff). Here we can only note very summarily the
most important benefactors, with some few particulars
where they are specially interesting.
To the personal interest of Queen Margaret in her
From a photograph by]
[J. Palmer Clarke, Cambridge
GATE TOWER AXD EAST FRONT
EARLY DAYS 25
College may be ascribed the King's gift of ,£200 already
mentioned. The Queen was an open-handed princess,
and the fact that no record remains of any direct bene-
faction from her is probably to be explained by a
cautious fear of making a parade of her patronage, when
the tide of civil war flowed strongly in favour of the
House of York. Many of Queen Margaret's friends
appear among the earliest benefactors of the Society,
and there can be no doubt that her influence was freely
used in favour of the new College. As instances of
persons closely connected with the Queen, who promoted
the establishment of the College, may be mentioned
Sir John Beaumont, Lord of Bardolf, her steward, Sir
John Wenlock, her chamberlain, and Lady Margery
Roos, a lady of the bedchamber, a munificent benefac-
tress. Passing by the benefactions of Thomas Barrie,
citizen of London (,£100 in 1454), Richard Wither-
merch, gentleman (40 marks, 1458), William Lasby,
clerk, Richard Andrewe or Spycer, burgess of Cam-
bridge (who gave houses, &c, in the town, 1459,
Cooper, " Ann.," i. p. 210), William Syday and John
Marke, 1470, we may note that in 1459 the patronage
of St. Botolph's Church was acquired by Queens' Col-
lege for the sum of 80 marks from Corpus Christi
College, who sold at the same time a small piece of
ground in Smale Brigges Street, on which Andrew
Dokett's almshouses first stood (Searle, pp. 66-68).
Edward IV. married Elizabeth Widville May 1, 1464.
The new Queen, the eldest daughter of Sir Richard
Widville and Jacquetta, duchess dowager of Bedford,
had married Sir John Grey, afterwards Lord Ferrers of
Groby, in 1453. An old manuscript at Drummond
26 QUEENS' COLLEGE
Castle preserves some delightful extracts from her diary
(see Church Times, Feb. 11, 1898), recording Elizabeth's
meeting with her future husband.
"Ten o'clock. Went to dinner. John Grey, a most
comely youth ; but what is that to me ? . . . John ate but
little and stole many tender looks at me — said, women
would never be handsome in his opinion, who were not
good-tempered. I hope my temper is not bad, nobody
finds fault with it but Roger, and he is the most disorderly
man in the family. John Grey likes good teeth. My
teeth are of a pretty good colour. I think my hair is as
black as jet ; and John, if I mistake not, is of the same
opinion. Eleven o'clock. Rose from the table : the com-
pany all desirous of walking in the fields. John Grey
would lift me over every stile, and twice squeezed my
hand with great vehemence. I cannot say I should have
any objection to John Grey ; he plays at prison-bars as
well as any of the country gentlemen : is remarkably
dutiful to his parents, my lord and lady; and never
misses church on Sundays. . . . Nine o'clock. The com-
pany fast asleep — these late hours very disagreeable.
Said my prayers a second time — John Grey disturbed my
thoughts too much the first time. Fell asleep and dreamed
of John Grey."
Who could doubt the happiness of the marriage after
this ? " Bona cum bona nubet alite virgo? But
Elizabeth's words, " My hair is as black as jet," are
somewhat disconcerting. Her pictures represent her as
fair-haired, in contrast to the dark-haired Margaret of
Anjou. And Hall's general description of her in his
chronicle quite agrees with her portraits.
EARLY DAYS 27
" She was a woman more of formal countenance than of
excellent beauty, but yet of such beauty and favour, with
her sober demeanour, lovely looking and feminine smiling
(neither too wanton nor too humble), beside her tongue so
eloquent and her wit so pregnant."
However, this is a digression. Elizabeth had been a
maid of honour to Queen Margaret. She received from
the Queen, on her marriage, a portion of £200, and
continued to attend as one of the ladies of the bed-
chamber. Her husband commanded the Lancastrian
horse at the second battle of St. Albans, Feb. 17, 1461,
but was wounded, and died of his wounds Feb. 28.
Elizabeth then lived in retirement at Grafton. But
King Edward, who was negotiating at the time for the
hand of Bona, daughter of Louis of Savoy, met her :
" captajferwm captorem cepit" and the Yorkist King took
the Lancastrian lady as his Queen.
It may be assumed that Elizabeth's personal con-
nexion with Queen Margaret had made her fully
acquainted with the foundation of Queens' College, and
that not improbably she knew Andrew Dokett. At all
events, when it was suggested to her that she should
complete her predecessor's work, she willingly under-
took the task. The MS. account of the foundation of
the College already quoted gives a statement of the
facts, which is probably more correct than the Latin in
which it is contained.
" But because by the opposition of fortune and by the
leave of God, the Queen in question [Margaret] so lost her
high position that she could not finish what she had
egun, hence Elizabeth, the Queen and wife of the most
28 QUEENS' COLLEGE
illustrious King Edward IV., as the true foundress by light of
succession, brought to completion what her predecessor had
commenced but had not finished, put forth statutes and
obtained many privileges from the King, procurante semper
eodem presidente Andrea Dokett, cuius iam opera manifesta
sunt" (see Searle, pp. 71, 72).
The activity of Dokett in obtaining the Queen's
patronage is here plainly shown, and the words "as
the true foundress by right of succession " are highly sig-
nificant, as embodying a view of Elizabeth's position
which was entertained both by the Queen and by her
royal husband, and, indeed, if we are not mistaken, by
the succeeding monarch, Richard III. For in King
Edward's letters, March 5, 1473, granting permission
to the Lady Joan Burgh to endow Queens' College, the
College is described " as existing by the patronage of
Elizabeth, Queen of England, our beloved consort";
and in Richard III.'s licence to the College, March 25,
1484, the wording runs, "Be it known to all that of
our special grace (to the praise, glory and honour of
Almighty God and of the most blessed and immaculate
Virgin Mary, mother of Christ, and of saints Margaret
Virgin and Bernard Confessor, besides to the ' singular
contemplation 1 (ad smgularem contetnplationem) of
Anne Queen of England, our most dearly loved consort,
we have granted and given licence, &c, ... to
the President and Fellows of the Queens' College of
saint Margaret and saint Bernard in our University
of Cambridge, which exists by the foundation and
patronage of our aforesaid consort," as if Anne also had
" by right of succession " inherited the position of the
two preceding Queens. It would be interesting to know
EARLY DAYS 29
whether Andrew Dokett had succeeded in inculcating
this most convenient view of the case, that the College
was not so much the personal foundation of Queen
Margaret as the special object of patronage ex officio of
the Queens of England. If only the sentiment had
held its ground throughout the course of history, what
a great and wealthy foundation this would have been !
Indeed, if only the College had been allowed to hold
what it did hold on the day of Bosworth Field, it
would perhaps have been superfluous to desire for it a
continuance of royal patronage ! It is stated (Cooper,
" Mem.," i. 280) that in this same year, 1465, Elizabeth
" appropriated a part of her income to the completion
of this College." Yet there is no record of any gift
from the second foundress, though she is commemor-
ated with other members of the House of York, whose
interest and liberality are very possibly to be ascribed
to the Queen's good offices. In 1468 Queen Elizabeth
visited Cambridge, and saw for herself the progress her
College had made (Cooper, " Ann.," i. 216).
The Lady Margery Roos, mentioned above as lady
of the bedchamber to Queen Margaret, gave money
wherewith were purchased the manors of Horsham Hall,
Mone Hall, Cromes Hall and Hampsted Hall, together
with land at Abbotslay, the whole property producing
an income sufficient to endow five priest Fellows, who
were to pray for the soul of Lady Margery and her two
husbands, with a stipend of 10 marks (£6 12s. 4<d.)
apiece, that being the regular dividend of a Fellow at
the time. Horsham Hall was purchased October 5,
1469, which gives us the date of the benefaction.
Lady Margery also presented the Chapel with plate,
30 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
vestments and books. In her will (Searle, p. 73) she
directs that she should be buried in the Chapel, " in the
choir on the north side under her window of St.
Margaret and St. Bernard." A Fellowship, with similar
conditions attached to it, was founded soon afterwards
by Dame Alice Wyche, and on March 5, 1473, the
King allowed Lady Joan Burgh to give to the College
the manor of St. Nicholas Court, Thanet, then of the
yearly value of 13 marks (Searle, pp. 81-83). To the
following year, 1474, belongs a curious document which
illustrates one method of procuring funds adopted by
Andrew Dokett.
" This endenture made betwene maister Andrew Doket
president of the Quenes college in the universite of Cam-
brigge and the ffeliship of the same college on the one
partie, and Robert Rocheford grocer and Robert Carvell
mercer, citizens of London, on that other partie wit-
nesseth : that the seid president and ffeliship have receyved
the day of the date of these presentes [March 3rd, 1474]
of the seid Robert and Robert for the soule of Edmund
Carvell, late citizen and grocer of London now dede,
XX" sterling to thentent that the seid Edmond shall be
taken and receyved as benefactour of the forseid college
and to be made partener of all the suffrages masses and
alle other merytory dedes that shall be seid and doon
w'ynne the same college for other benefactours of the
same, And also that the soule of the same Edmond shall
be remembered among other benefactours of the same
college atte Dirige and masse of Requiem to be seyd for
them wons in every year w'ynne the same college. ..."
Poor William Sautre, the first victim of the Statute of
1401, had maintained that it was more pleasing to God
EARLY DAYS 31
to spend money on the poor than on pilgrimages. But
the " Supplication of Beggars " was not written until
1528, and even then no less enlightened a person than
Sir Thomas More wrote the " Supplication of Souls "
in reply.
The first Statutes, which continued in force till 1529,
were given " for the founding and establishing of the
College " by letters patent of Queen Elizabeth, March
10, 1475, " at the humble petition and special requisi-
tion of Andrew Dokett the first president "" and by the
advice of the royal counsellors assembled for that pur-
pose. The preamble states that
"the duties of our royal prerogative require, piety
suggests, natural reason demands that we should be
specially solicitous concerning those matters whereby the
safety of souls and the public good are promoted, and
poor scholars, desirous of advancing themselves in the
knowledge of letters, are assisted in their need."
The foundation is enlarged from a President and
four Fellows to a President and twelve Fellows, and
they are all to be in priest's orders. A Fellow upon
election is to devote himself to philosophy or to theology.
On becoming a master of arts he may teach in the
triviwm (grammar, logic, rhetoric) and quadrivium
(arithmetic, geometry, music, astronomy) for three years
at a fixed salary from the College. Teaching is optional,
provided that the Fellow devotes himself to liberal
sciences or to the philosophy of Aristotle.
" On the completion of these three years, if a Fellow
should have no desire to study theology or to proceed in
32 QUEENS' COLLEGE
that faculty, he is permitted to turn his attention to
either the canon or the civil law ; but this can only be by
the consent of the Master and the majority of the Fellows,
and the concessive character of the clause would incline us
to infer that such a course would be the exception rather
than the rule" (Mullinger, "Univ. of Camb.," i. p. 317).
To this year 1475 belongs the purchase of the land
W. of the river narrated in a previous chapter.
No member of the reigning House showed such
princely generosity to the College as Richard, Duke of
Gloucester, afterwards Richard III. On April 10, 1477,
the King permits his brother to grant to the President
and Fellows of Queens' College the manor and advowson
of Foulmire, Cambridgeshire, to found four Fellowships
with stipends of £8 per annum for priests, who were to
be called the four priests of the Duke of Gloucester's
foundation, and were to " pray satisfactorie for the
prosperuse astates of Richard the sayde duke of Gloucef
and dame Anne his wife " and for their issue, for the
royal family, &c, and for the souls of the Duke's father
and of his friends slain " at Bernett Tukysbery or at
any other feldes or jorneys, and for all cristen soulis"
(Searle, pp. 89-92).
Fellowships were founded by John Collinson, Arch-
deacon of Northampton, 1478, by John Grene, Esquire,
1479, and John Alfray, of Ipswich, 1481 ; in 1483
Thomas Duffield, D.D., late Fellow, left a bequest to
provide " unam lampadem ardentem coram summo altari
infra capellam collegii.'" All these gifts were coupled
with the condition that prayers should be offered for the
donors and their friends.
EARLY DAYS 33
Archbishop Rotherham, Chancellor of the University,
held the Great Seal at the death of Edward IV. But
when the Duke of Gloucester was made Proctector the
Archbishop was committed to the Tower, " because he
had espoused the cause of the Queen Dowager, [then in
sanctuary at Westminster]." The University hereupon
petitioned the ProctectorfortheirChancellor,emboldened
thereto by"his bountiful and gracious charity 1 ' — "found-
ing certyn Prestys and Fellows to the grete worship of
God, and to the encresse of Cristes faith, in the Qwenys
College of Cambrigge." And again the following year,
in acknowledging the benefaction of Richard, now
King, the University specially mention that he "has
lately liberally and devoutly founded exhibition for
four Priests in the Queens' College. And now also the
most serene Quene Anne, Consort of the same Lord the
King (that most pious King consenting and greatly
favouring) has augmented and endowed the same college
with great rents " (Cooper, "Ann.," i. 225 and 228). This
mention of it on March 16, 1484, shows that this latter
gift was intended and announced before it was actually
made. On March 25, 1484, the King allows the College
to hold property in mortmain to the annual value of
700 marks (Searle, pp. 95-97), and on July 5 at the
request of his Queen-consort he grants " to the Queen's
College of St. Margaret and St. Bernard, which exists
by the foundation and patronage of our aforesaid con-
sort," the manor of Covesgrave (Cosgrove), Northampton-
shire, his lands and rents in Sheldingthorp (Skelling-
thorp), Market Deeping, Barham (Barholme) and
Stowe, Lincolnshire, the manors of Newton, Suffolk,
Stanford, Berkshire, and Buckby, Northamptonshire,
34 QUEENS' COLLEGE
with £60 per annum from the fee farm of the town of
Aylesbury and £50 from the fee farm of the fair of
St. Ives (Searle, pp. 98, 99). Fuller is no doubt right
in counting this as one of the acts whereby "King
Richard endeavoured to render himself popular. First
by making good Laws in that sole Parliament kept in
his Reign. . . . Next he endeavoured to work himself
into their goodwill, by erecting and endowing of Religious
Houses ; so to plausiblelize himself, especially among the
Clergy. . . . He is said also to have given to Queens
College in Cambridge five hundred marks of yearly
rent ; though at this time, I believe, the College receives
as little benefit by the Grant, as Richard had right to
grant it. For, it was not issued out of his own purse,
but given out of the lands of his enemy, the unjustly
proscribed Earl of Oxford ; who being restored by
Henry the Seventh, made a resumption thereof"
(" Church Hist., 11 iv. 6, 7). But the estates were not all
the property of the Earl of Oxford; some of them
belonged to Anne, Countess of Warwick, the Queen's
mother, whose property was taken from her and given
to her daughter by authority of Parliament.
However, whatever were the King^ motives, and
whatever were his rights in the matter, this grant
brought the College little good. They held the land
only for one year, and received only one half-year's
rent — Michaelmas 1484 to Easter 1485. The sum
received- amounted to £13% 17s. 10d., but from this
must be deducted expenses connected with the gift,
amounting to ,£68 12*. 3Jd. (Searle, pp. 110-111).
For many years the yearly income of the College did
not exceed £200, so that these estates would have more
EARLY DAYS 35
than doubled its annual revenue. Fuller may be
quoted again :
" As for King Richard the third, his benefaction made
more noise than brought profit therewith . . . which soon
after was justly resumed by King Henry the seventh and
restored to the right owner thereof. The Colledge no
whit grieving thereat, as sensible no endowment can be
comfortable, which consists not with Equity and Honour "
(" Univ. of Camb," v. 35).
Gifts of Richard III., which remained longer in the
hands of the presentees, were vestments for use in the
Chapel and his badge of the boar's head, which is still
used by the College.
Andrew Dokett died November 4, 1484. By his will,
dated two days earlier,?he leaves to the College 40*. per
annum from his Hostel of St. Bernard, to maintain the
Chapel services, the remainder of the income from the
Hostel to be held by his executors for life, on their
death the Hostel to become the property of Queens'
College. Similarly, the house at the corner near St.
Botolph's Church is to be sold, and the proceeds in-
vested in land, pastures or tenements ; the income is to
be applied at the discretion of his executors "pro salute
anime mee, Regmaldi Ely et omnium henefactorum.^ and
on the death of the executors this property also passes
to the College. The three houses in which three poor
women reside (i.e., the earliest Almshouses, then in
Small Bridge Street) are to be managed by his execu-
tors, and afterwards by the College. To this disposi-
tion the condition is attached that his exsequies should
be celebrated on the anniversary with the exsequies of
36 QUEENS' COLLEGE
all the benefactors in the College Chapel : the President
is to receive 3s. 4id., each Fellow 1*., and a distribution
is to be made among the poor, especially the poor of
St. Botolph's parish, to the sum of 20*. He further
bequeaths to the College his garden " in front of the
gates of the College, near the house of Mr. Duffyld " ;
the residue of his goods he leaves to his executors, John
Rypplyngham and William Thurkylle (Searle, pp.
56-58). Dokett had been spared to govern his founda-
tion during the most critical period of its existence.
Its prosperity was largely, perhaps almost wholly, due
to his personal exertions and to the wisdom wherewith
he had shaped its course through the stormy years of
war and revolution. He had commenced with four
Fellows : the number of Fellows was now seventeen ;
the buildings were practically completed, and the Col-
lege was not inadequately endowed. He was felix
opportumitate mortis, in that he passed from the scene
of his labours just when the College had been enriched
by the splendid endowment received from Richard III.,
and when there could have been no suspicion that the
half-year in which he died would be the only period for
which an income would be received from these estates.
His will directed that he should be buried " in choro
capelle collegii predicti ubi lecte sunt lectiones."
"He is buried" [writes Cole about 1777] "in the
chapel of his own college under a gravestone of grey
marble, exactly in the middle, in the antechapel under the
step as you ascend into the Choir. . . . He is in a
Doctor's Habit, but being continually trod on twice a day,
as People go into the chapel, it is no wonder that the
EARLY DAYS 37
strokes are worn away and that it is now almost a plain
smooth piece of brass."
In his will he had written, " I desire and, so far as
lieth in me, I enjoin all the Fellows of the said College
that they elect to be President of the said College as
my sucessor Mr. Thomas Wilkynson." This person,
so strongly recommended for election, had probably
been a Fellow of Queens', as his name is associated in a
deed of 1480 with John Rypplingham and Ralph Songar,
who were Fellows. He held at this time the sinecure
rectory of Harrow-on-the-Hill and the rectory of
Orpington, Kent, and resided sometimes at one, some-
times at the other of these places. There are entries
in the accounts giving the expenses incurred in going
to the President at " Harwe " or " Horpington," and so
far as appears, Mr. Wilkynson only came to Cambridge
when his presence was required there for elections to
Fellowships, for the audit and for Stourbridge Fair.
As the Statutes of 1475 , prescribe the election of a
President on the eighth day after the vacancy, Thomas
Wilkynson was probably elected November 11, 1484.
The executors named in Dokett's will declined the
office, and letters of administration were granted by
Dr. Tuppyn, the Vice-Chancellor, to Mr. Wilkynson,
the President, and the Fellows of the College, April 23,
1485 (Searle, p. 58).
When the battle of Bosworth Field gave the crown
to Henry VII., the short-lived prosperity which Queens 1
College had enjoyed from the gifts of Richard III.
ended abruptly. The estates seem to have reverted at
once to their original owners. The Earl of Oxford was
38 QUEENS' COLLEGE
restored by Henry's first Parliament, November 1485 ;
the Act of Parliament which had deprived the Countess of
Warwick was annulled in 1487, when the Countess con-
veyed her property to the King, so that in a double
sense " these gifts were resumed by King Henry VII."
The result of this resumption was to reduce the number of
Fellowships from seventeen to thirteen. But, happily,
fresh endowments soon came. A Fellowship was
founded in 1491 by the Lady Joan Ingaldesthorpe,
cousin of Lady Margery Roos, who gave the manor of
Great Eversden for the endowment of a priest> to sing
and pray for the soul of Lady Joan and her friends,
with a salary of 10 marks. A Fellow of the College
was also to be presented to the rectory of St. Andrew's,
Canterbury, a privilege lost at the Dissolution of the
Monasteries. Dr. John Drewell, Canon of St. Paul's,
who died in 1494, had given lands in Abbotsley, Has-
lingfield and Pampisford, worth i?24 a year, for the
maintenance of two Fellows and a Bible-clerk. The
executor of Dr. Drewell's will, William Wilde, also a
Canon of St. Paul's, was likewise a benefactor to the
College (Searle, pp. 119-123).
The building of the N. and S. sides of the Cloisters
belongs probably to the year 1495. (See p. 23.)
Henry VII. honoured Cambridge with many visits.
" His Grace was honourably receyvede both of the
Universitie and of the towne" March 12, 1486 (Cooper,
" Ann.," i. 232). He came again April 1487, and appar-
ently in 1491 (Cooper, "Ann.," i. 240) and 1497 (ibid.
249). In 1498 the King and Queen were in Cambridge
on September 1, on their way from Lynn to Huntingdon,
and visited Queens' College, for there appears in the Bur-
EARLY DAYS 39
sar's accounts for the year the entry : " m expensis adven-
tus regis et regine, ut paid per billam. . . . V* 6b.
(Searle, p. 123).
In 1502 the College received from Hugh Trotter, D.D.,
Treasurer of York Minster, formerly Fellow, a sum of
■£"253 6s. 8d., with which an estate was purchased at
Fulbourn. In the following year, February 11, 1503,
the Queen-consort, Elizabeth of York, died. She was
the first of the four Queens, since the foundation of the
College, who had not claimed the position of patroness,
nor did she, so far as is known, promote the prosperity
of the College. Yet she must have felt that she had
rights in connexion with the College, for there remains
the fragment of a mandate from her, with her auto-
graph in the margin, for the election of a person named
Billington to be " scoler " (Searle, p. 124).
The Presidentship was resigned by Mr. Wilkynson in
April 1505. In the records is a letter dated April 12,
between two entries of March 18 and May 7, 1505,
which clearly refers to an announcement of his resig-
nation :
"Ryght reverent and worschypfull and to us att all
tymys most syngular and specyall good mast', Wee
yo r scolars and dayly beedmen humblie recomend us unto
yo r mast'schyp And for as mysch as we underston be
y e lett rs of the moste excellent p'nces, my lady the kyngs
mother [the Lady Margaret], and allso by y r lett r s that ye
be at this tyme myndyt to resigne the p'sidentship of this
our colage called the qwenys colage, so that ye myght
knowe our mynds in this thing, wherefor we write unto
yower masfship at this tyme signifying unto you y' we
ar fully defminate and doth promise you to elect such as
40 QUEENS' COLLEGE
is thoght unto you necessary and profitable unto this our
colage, the lorde bisshop of Rochest' [John Fisher]. In
witness wherof we have sett to o r comon seale, besechyng
you to contynew goode maistre to the same colage and
to all us: and wee shall daiely pray for the long and
prosperus contynuance of your helth to the plesour of
God, who preserve yowe. Frome Cambrige in haste the
XIJ* daye of Apll."
Wilkynson became Prebendary of Ripon in June
1511, died December 13, 1511, and was buried at
Orpington, where is his monument, a slab with a figure
of a priest in brass, habited in a plain cope.
We may note, before leaving his time, that the
curious covenant of May 12, 1503, between the Univer-
sity and the Town (Cooper, " Ann.," i. 260-270) is
signed by " the Mancipil of the Queens Colledge." It is
signed also, among others, by the Manciples of Pem-
broke, St. Mary's, and other Hostels, by the " Barber
of Peterhouse," " the Conduct of the King's Colledge,"
" the Launder of the King's Colledge," " the Mason of
the University," and " the Baker of the King's Hall."
The happy result of this covenant was that the scholars
and the townsmen " ly ved at better peace to the great
benefitt of themselves and the whole realm besides."
From a photograph by] {¥■ Palmer Clarke, Cambridge
ERASMUS' TOWER AND SOUTH SIDE OF CLOISTERS
CHAPTER IV
THE DAYS OF FISHER AND ERASMUS
" For the first time men opened their eyes and saw."
Presidents: John Fisher, 1505-1509; Robert Bekensaw, 1508-1519;
John Jenyn, 1519-1525; ThomasJJfarman, i525~i526(?) ; William
Frankelyn, 1526 (?)-i528.
At the Renaissance the world woke from the slumber of
the Middle Ages. Were there ever crowded into a
half-century events so striking as those which mark the
fifty years which end with the discovery of the New
World? The Invention of Printing had made the
popular diffusion of knowledge possible, and books soon
were brought within the reach of ordinary men. When
More wrote the " Utopia" (1518) the travels of Amerigo
Vespucci were " in everybody's hands." The capture of
Constantinople by the Turks had driven Greek scholars
to Italy and opened new fields of science and literature
to the minds of Western Christendom. Florence, which
was already "the home of freedom and of art," now
became the scene of a great revival of letters. And
then suddenly a New World was added to the Old
World. All the preconceived ideas of the Middle Ages
were broken down. The intelligence, the interest, the
curiosity of men were strangely stirred and quickened.
42 QUEENS' COLLEGE
And the movement soon crossed the Alps and reached
England. It assumed a form characteristic of the
national mind in becoming, if less literary, more
religious, more serious, more practical. John Colet is
perhaps its best type and exponent. Archbishop
Warham is its wise and generous patron. Erasmus is
its most brilliant and fascinating embodiment. No-
where was the result of the " New Birth " more quicken-
ing than at the Universities. Erasmus* (Epist., ii. 10)
describes what Cambridge had been and what it had
now become.
" Scarcely thirty years ago nothing was taught here but
Alexander, the Parva Logicalia as they call them, antiquated
exercises from Aristotle, and the Quaestiones of Scotus. In
process of time better studies were added, a knowledge of
mathematics, a new, at any rate a renovated, Aristotle, and
a knowledge of Greek literature. . . . What has been the
result to your University ? The University has so flourished
that it can compete with the best Universities of the age."
And when in the same decade Bishop Fisher, one of the
foremost and most influential supporters of the move-
ment, was President and Erasmus abode here to teach
Greek, surely Queens' 1 College might claim to be the
focus et ara of the Renaissance in England !
John Fisher, son of a well-to-do mercer at Beverley,
entered v Michael House, graduated 1487, was soon
elected Fellow, proceeded M.A. 1491, was Senior
Proctor 1494 and was elected Master of Michael
House 1497. As Proctor he was sent to the Court at
Greenwich and there presented to the King's mother, the
* The references are to the edition of Flesher & Young, London 1642.
DAYS OF FISHER AND ERASMUS 43
Lady Margaret (Mullinger, " Univ. of Camb.," i. 434).
He became her confessor in 1497, and already the
foundation of the Lady Margaret's Readerships at the
Universities seems to have been mooted- In 1501
Fisher, now D.D., was elected Vice-Chancellor, and in
1503, when the Lady Margaret's Readership was formally
endowed and instituted, was elected the first Professor.
The endowment was ,£13 6*. 8d., a large sum judged
by the ordinary salaries of the time. The Professor
was to read in the Divinity Schools, libere, solleniter et
aperte, to every one resorting there, without fee or
reward other than his salary, such works in Divinity as
the Chancellor or Vice-Chancellor with " the college of
doctors" shall judge necessary, for an hour, namely
from seven till eight in the morning, or at such other
time as the Chancellor or Vice-Chancellor shall think
fit. He was to read every accustomed day in term and
in the Long Vacation up to September 7, but to cease in
Lent, if the Chancellor thought fit, in order that during
that season he and his auditors might be occupied in
preaching.* In case the Reader be elected Chancellor or
Vice-Chancellor, he was to lose the Readership within a
month (Cooper, "Ann.," i. 271, 272). As Fisher was
Vice-Chancellor, he resigned at the beginning of the
new academic year, and Cosin, Master of Corpus, was
appointed in his stead.
In the following year, 1504, Fisher was elected
Chancellor of the University and appointed Bishop of
Rochester. This promotion, given at an early age to a
* On the object of this clause, and of the Lady Margaret's
Preachership, viz., to revive pulpit oratory, see Mr. Mullinger,
" Univ. of Camb.," i. 437#.
44 QUEENS' COLLEGE
man who neither solicited nor expected it, might be
attributed to the influence of the Lady Margaret. But
the Bishop's own statement (Lewis, " Life of Fisher, 1 " ii.
270) is conclusive that the promotion came unsought
from the King himself. Fisher was now in a position
of great authority, and his influence was used in
behalf of his own University. To his representations
to his patroness it is clearly due that her attention was
drawn to Cambridge and the stream of her munificence
directed to the foundation of Christ's and St. John's.
He had resigned the Mastership of Michael House, to
which John Fotehede was elected in 1505, and resided
mainly at Rochester. But the plans of the Countess of
Richmond made him anxious to have an abode in
Cambridge, and Thomas Wilkynson, who, as we have
seen, was generally non-resident, resigned the President-
ship of Queens' College with the double purpose of
enabling the Chancellor to have a Cambridge residence
and of securing for his College so distinguished a Head.
Fuller's account (" Church Hist.," v. 33) is this:'
"He was Chaplain and Confessour to the Lady Margaret,
Comtesse of Richmond, at whose instance and by whose
advise, She founded and endowed Christ's and S. John's
Colledge in Cambridge. Employed in building of the
latter (her posthume Colledge of S. John's), and effectually
advancing that work, he wanted the accomodation of a
convenient Lodging, when Dr. Thomas Wilkinson, Presi-
dent of Queens Colledge, opportunely departed this life :
and that Society requested Bishop Fisher to succeed in his
place, which he gratefully accepted, faithfully discharged,
and thereby had the advantage to finish his new Colledge
in the lesse time, to his greater contentment."
DAYS OF FISHER AND ERASMUS 45
Thomas Wilkynson had not " departed this life," but
had resigned (he lived till 1511), and St. John's was not
founded till 1511. But Christ's was founded in 1505,
and Bishop Fisher was probably anxious to be in Cam-
bridge to superintend its progress. He was elected to
the Presidentship before May 7, 1505. The Lady
Margaret visited Cambridge this same year, doubtless
in connexion with her new foundation. She was
" received with the honour due to so eminent and
munificent a benefactress, the University proceeding as
far as Caxton to meet her" (Cooper, "Ann.," i. 275). That
she stayed in Queens' College appears from the accounts,
where there are entries of preparations for her arrival
and for washing of linen used cum mater regis mtererat
collegia nosiro (Searle, p. 134). Again on April 22,
1506, the Countess of Richmond was in Cambridge, on
this occasion accompanied by the King. They were
received outside the town by the Mayor and the Sheriff,
then by
" the four Ordres of Freres and aftir odir Religious . . .
and then ther stode all along all the Graduatts, aftir
their Degrees, in all their Habbitts, and at the end of
them was the Unyversyte Cross, wher was a Forme and a
Cushin &c as accustomed, where the King dyd alight, and
there the Bysshopp of Rochestre, Doctor Fisher, then
beyng Chaunceller of the Unyversyte, accompanied with
odir Doctors, sensyd [sprinkled with incense] the Kyng,
and aftir made a litle Proposition and welcomed hym ;
and then the Kyng took his Horse ageyn and rood by the
Blackfriers [the site of Emmanuel], thoroughe the Towne,
to the Queens Colledge, wher hys Grace was at that time
lodgged" (Cooper, "Ann.," i. 281).
46 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
" The litle Proposition * — i.e., the Latin Oration of the
Chancellor — has been preserved and is analysed by Mr.
Mullinger (" Univ. of Camb.," i. 449-451).
Mr. Mullinger (ibid. 452) thinks that Erasmus may
have followed in the royal train on this occasion.
Desiderius Erasmus (b. 1467, d. 1536) had visited
England in 1497 at the invitation of his pupil William
Blount, Lord Mountjoy. He was now intimate with
Bishop Fisher, and among his friends was Richard
Whitford, Fellow of Queens 1 , to whom he dedicates his
edition of Lucian's " Tyrannicida " in this year. He
came to Cambridge in 1506, when a grace was passed
allowing him to commence D.D. His stay on this
occasion was not of long duration. But he writes from
the neighbourhood of Cambridge, Nov. 1, 1507 (Epist.,
vi. 9). For the nex£ two years he was mainly in Italy,
returned to England on the news of Henry VIII.'s
accession 1509, and, taking up his residence in Cam-
bridge 1510, remained with his headquarters in this
College for perhaps four years.*
" Queens Colledge " (says Fuller, " Univ. of Camb.," v.
39) " accounteth it no small credit thereunto, that Erasmus
(who no doubt might have pickt and chose what House
he pleased) preferred this for the place of his study for
some years in Cambridge. Either invited thither with the
fame of the learning and love of his friend Bishop Fisher
then Master thereof, or allured with the situation of this
Colledge so neer the River (as Rotterdam his native place
to the Sea) with pleasant walks thereabouts."
The latter and more poetical reason is as delightful as
* In Westdeutsche Zeitschrift IX. (Trier, 1896) Max Reich makes
Erasmus' Cambridge residence only two years and a half. See p. 15 1 /.
DAYS OF FISHER AND ERASMUS 47
it is characteristic of Fuller. The influence of Bishop
Fisher was no doubt a main factor in determining
„ Erasmus' choice of a College, though Fisher had re-
signed the Presidentship before Erasmus came into
residence. But it may be added that at least one
other member of the Society, Whitford, was already
reckoned among his intimates, that others, such as
Bullock and Fawne, were soon among his close friends,
that the College contained men of mark who played a
prominent part in Cambridge and in the great move-
ments of the day, also that at the time, if we may judge
from the valuation of 1534 (Cooper, " Ann.," i. 370),
King's was the only College which enjoyed a larger
revenue, and that by the proctorial cycle of 1514 King's,
Queens' and Christ's are given most nominations.
There remains the larger question why Erasmus selected
Cambridge in preference to Oxford, where he had made
so many friends, More, Colet, Linacre, Grocyn, William
Latimer, in 1498, and which would have gladly wel-
comed him back again ; to Paris, his own alma mater ;
to Louvain, then rising into high repute ; or to one
of the Italian Universities. He liked Italy, but he
disliked the tendency of Italian learning. It was too
sceptical, too pagan, and jarred upon Erasmus' deeper
feelings. Louvain and Paris he seems to have thought
too exclusively theological. From Oxford many of his
best friends had gone, and thus the place had lost
much of its attraction for him. But perhaps the main
reason why he did not return there was the scanty
encouragement held out to a Greek schblar. The
University was strongly anti-Greek, and the " Trojan "
riots (Mullinger, " Univ. of Camb.," i. 524 ; Fuller,
48 QUEENS' COLLEGE
"Univ. of Camb.," vi. 39), which soon afterwards agitated
Oxford, showed how wise was the decision of Erasmus
that at the moment the most promising field for Greek
scholarship was Cambridge, under the protection of the
all-powerful Fisher.
Andrew Pascal], Fellow of Queens' and Rector of
Chedsey, Somersetshire, 165&-1663, gives in the year
1680 an account of the residence of Erasmus (Searle,
p. 153, Willis and Clark, ii. p. 15).
"The staires which rise up to his studie at Queen's
College in Cambr. doe bring first into two of the fairest
chambers in the ancient building ; in one of these, which
looked into the hall and the chief court, the Vice-President
kept in my time ; in that adjoyning, it was my fortune to
be when fellow. The chambers over are good lodgeing
rooms ; and to one of them is a square turret adjoyning,
in the upper part of which is the study of Erasmus ; and
over it leads. To that belongs the best prospect about
the Colledge, viz., upon the river, into the corne-fields, and
country adjoyning. So y l it might very well consist with
the civility of the House to that great man (who was no
fellow, and I think stayed not long there) to let him have
that study. His sleeping roome might be either the Vice-
President's, or to be neer to him, the next. The room for
his servitor that above it, and through it he might goe to
that studie, which for the height, and neatnesse, and
prospect, might easily take his phancy."
I am not sure that, if I understand him aright, Pascall
is correct in his details. In any case the popular notion,
perhaps springing from the name "Erasmus'' tower,"
that Erasmus occupied only the tower, is quite erroneous.
Equally misleading are descriptions that represent the
DAYS OF FISHER AND ERASMUS 49
great scholar as " toiling in his garret at Queens. 1 "
To Erasmus was allotted what was probably the best
and most spacious suite of apartments in the College.
He was better housed than the President himself had
been before 1510. He occupied the whole of the space
on the right-hand side of the passage which leads to
the turret-rooms. Below there were two large rooms,
above there was another spacious chamber ; and the little
turret-room known as "Erasmus' oratory 1 ' was in, all
probability occupied by his servant, the " servitor " of
Pascall's account. And Pascall calls the rooms " good
lodging-rooms, 11 and himself as a Fellow had occupied
only a part of the suite assigned to Erasmus. Another
common notion, viz., that Erasmus was poor, has been
sufficiently disposed of by Mr. Mullinger.
"With ordinary prudence, his income must have more
than sufficed for his wants ; he received from his Professor-
ship over thirteen pounds annually ; he had been pre-
sented by Warham to the rectory of Aldington in Kent,
and, though non-resident, he drew from thence an income
of twenty pounds, to which the Archbishop, with his
usual liberality, added another twenty from his own purse.
To these sums we must add an annual pension of a
hundred florins from Fisher, and a second pension, which
he still continued to receive, from his generous friend,
Lord Mountjoy. His total income, therefore, could scarcely
have been less than £700 in English money of the present
day " (" Univ. of Camb.," i. 504).
Few members of the University at the time could
have been in receipt of anything like the same amount.
But Erasmus was not economical, and he liked the best
D
50 QUEENS' COLLEGE
of everything. When a man has his servant and his
horse, is able to move about freely, can secure all the
books he needs and is surrounded by a host of open-
handed friends, the references he makes to lack of
money need not be taken too seriously : they only
mean that Erasmus could have managed to spend
more.
In view of the gibe of Gibbon that Erasmus learnt at
Oxford the Greek which he taught at Cambridge, it
may be worth while to point out that the serious study
of that language, with which his fame is inseparably
connected, was only commenced by Erasmus after he
had said farewell to Oxford. He knew some Greek
before : but it was when he left Oxford that he devoted
himself to the study. At that time he writes, " I have
applied my whole soul to Greek, and as soon as I get
money I will buy first Greek books and then clothes.'"
Again, six years later he tells Colet (Epist., x. 8)
that he has been working hard at Greek and "found
that he could do nothing in literature without a know-
ledge of Greek." The period between his visit to
Oxford and his residence at Cambridge may be described
as the time spent in accumulating those stores of scholar-
ship, which he afterwards turned to such splendid
account, and his own description of himself as
avToSlSanTog should prevent any misconception as to
the source of his attainments.
Thus equipped the great scholar took up his abode in
Queens' College and embarked upon the task of teach-
ing Greek. In the October term of 1511 he was
lecturing on the Grammar of Chrysoloras (the Greek
scholar who had been so successful at Florence), but his
UAYS OF FISHER AND ERASMUS 51
class was small. He hopes to have a larger audience
when he takes the larger Grammar of Theodoras Gaza
(published 1495). In the same letter, addressed to his
good friend, Andreas Ammonius of Lucca, who was
Latin secretary to Henry VIII. and collector of Papal
dues in England, he says, " Perhaps I shall also under-
take a lecture in Theology, for the question is now
under discussion " (Epist., viii. 3). In this matter his
hopes were not disappointed, for he was elected the
Lady Margaret's Reader in this year, and, as at the
expiry of his two years he was re-elected, he con-
tinued to hold the post for the whole period of his
residence, and was succeeded by his friend Dr. Fawne of
Queens' — the Phaunus of his letters. It is clear that
Erasmus was disappointed with the results of his teach-
ing. He did not attract the numbers nor see the success
for which he had hoped. But he was as easily
depressed as he was easily elated. He was sanguine and
despondent by turns, with as little reason often in the
one case as the other. Whatever he may have thought
at the time, he left his mark behind him in Cambridge.
His friends and pupils are men of great note in the
next few years. Among them may be instanced,
besides Fawne and Bullock already mentioned, Bryan
and Aldrich' of King's, the latter of whom accompanied
him on his famous journey to " our Lady of Walsing-
ham"; Watson, afterwards Master of Christ's, and
Sampson of Trinity Hall, the future Bishop of Lichfield
and Coventry. And posterity may be thankful that
his success in the lecture-room was not sufficient to keep
him from his study. Fruitful and lasting as the effect
of his teaching may be thought to have been, in reality
52 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
it sinks into insignificance, when it is compared in
importance with the literary work done in these years.
It was here that he composed his edition of St. Jerome,
dedicated to Archbishop Warham, which taught the
age to estimate at its true value the Theology of the
Middle Ages, and led men back again to the true path
of Biblical criticism. St. Jerome, and not St. Augustine,
was theologorum prvnceps. Erasmus speaks out in the
preface of this work with no uncertain voice :
" Synods, decrees and even councils are not in my
judgment the best methods of repressing error, unless
indeed truth depends solely upon authority. . . . The
Christian faith was never so pure and undefiled as when a
single Creed was thought to be enough and that the
shortest Creed we have."
And still more important, nay incalculably important,
was his famous edition of the New Testament, known as
Novum Instrumentvm. The marvellous effect of the
work was less due to the fact that it upset the venera-
tion with which the Vulgate was regarded, as a final
authority in questions of text, and led men back to the
Greek original, than to the method which it inculcated
and exemplified. Interpretation was based upon the
literal meaning of the text. Men were recalled to the
historical value of the New Testament. Drs. Westcott
and Hort have made familiar to many the noble passage
in which Erasmus enforces his views :
" These books give you back the living image of the
sacred mind of Christ, they present Christ in His own
person speaking, healing, dying, rising again, in a word
DAYS OF FISHER AND ERASMUS 53
they so give the whole presence of Christ that you would
see Him less clearly, if you beheld Him face to face with
your eyes."
In words quoted from Professor Brewer by Mr.
Mullinger (" Univ. of Camb.," i. 510) :
" the New Testament of Erasmus must be regarded as the
foundation of that new school of teaching on which
Anglican theology professes exclusively to rest; as such
it is not only the type of its class, but the most direct
enunciation of that Protestant principle which, from that
time until this, has found expression in various forms :
'The Bible alone is the religion of Protestants.' What-
ever can be read therein or proved thereby, is binding
upon all men ; what cannot, is not to be required of any
man as an article of his faith, either by societies or
individuals. 'Who sees not that the authority of the
Church was displaced and the sufficiency of all men
individually to read and interpret for themselves was thus
asserted by the New Testament of Erasmus ? "
Even more significant, if we consider the date at
which the words were written and the views taken on
the appearance of Tyndale's version even by Bishop
Fisher himself, is the eloquent passage in his preface, in
which Erasmus pleads for a free circulation of the
Scriptures in the vernacular :
" I entirely differ from those who are unwilling that the
sacred Scriptures, translated into the vulgar tongue, should
be read by the unlearned, as though Christ taught such
subtleties that they can with difficulty be understood by a
very few theologians, or as though the strength of the
Christian religion lay in men's ignorance of it. It may be
54 QUEENS' COLLEGE
better to conceal the state mysteries of kings, but Christ
would have His mysteries /published abroad as widely as
possible. I could wish that even women read the Gospels
and the Epistles of St. Paul. I wish that they were
translated into all languages of all people, that they might
be read and understood not only by the Scotch and the
Irish but even by the Turks and the Saracens. I wish
that the husbandmen may sing portions of them as he
follows the plough, that the weaver may chant them at his
shuttle, that the traveller may with their narratives while
away the weariness of the way."
With this great work ready for publication Erasmus
quitted England in 1515. He returned in the next
year, when the Novum Instrumentum had been published,
but does not seem to have come back to Cambridge.
His friend Bullock — Bovillus — writes to tell him
(Epist., ii. 9) how glad all his Cambridge friends are
at his return :
" they are busy working at Greek, they long ardently for
his advent amongst them once more, they are highly pleased
with his edition of the New Testament, polished, subtle,
delightful and essential to every one who has any taste."
But he did not come back. He wandered about,
mainly in the Netherlands, till 1521, when he settled
down in Basel, and henceforward the story of his career,
which closed in sadness and depression there in 1536, is
beyond the scope of the present history.
But there is a letter (Epist., viii. 16) written from
Queens' College to Ammonius — ex collegia Reginae
August 25, 1511 — which is so often quoted that it would
be considered an unpardonable omission if no reference
DAYS OF FISHER AND ERASMUS 55
were made to it, for it is known to thousands of people,
who probably are not acquainted with any other
detail of the illustrious scholar's life in Cambridge. I
mean of course the letter which is supposed to reflect
on the " College ale."
"As to myself [he writes] I have so far no news to
give you except that my journey [from London down to
Cambridge] was most tiresome, and that my health is
still rather doubtful from the heat into which the journey
threw me. I think that I shall stay in this College at
least for a time. I have not yet begun to lecture : I wish
to recruit my health first."
Then comes the well-known sentence, "Cervisia huius
loci mihi nulla rnodo placet nee admodum satisfaciunt
vina ; si possis efficere, ut uter aliquis vini Graecaniei,
quantum potest optimi, hue deportetur, plane bearis
Erasrnum tuum, sed quod alienum sit a dulcedine^ It is
not incumbent upon the most loyal member of the
College to defend the quality of the "College ale "at
■this distance of time. " Many things have happened
since then." And even had it been proper to enter the
lists otherwise, the last vestige of necessity was removed
when the College ceased to brew its own ale. But it
is only fair to the memory of the brewer of the day to
point out that there is no exclusive reference to the
liquor made by him. What Erasmus says is cervisia
huius loci, and the disparagement is of Cambridge ale in
general. And, after all, what Erasmus really wants to
do is to show cause why his good-natured friend should
send him a cask of Greek wine, and why it should be of
the best possible quality. Probably, however good he
56 QUEENS' COLLEGE
had thought the Cambridge cervisia, the Greek wine
would have been asked for all the same: its alleged
unsuitability to Erasmus' palate enables the request to
be made with a better show of reason. But if he could
have foreseen how often the words would be misquoted
and misused against him, would he not have given some
other reason, or even none at all ?
This account qf the residence of Erasmus, brief as it
is, has taken the narrative beyond some events of interest
in the history of the College. In June 1508 Bishop
Fisher resigned the Headship of the College. There are
letters extant which bear upon the subject. Two are
addressed by the Fellows to the President, a third to the
Lady Margaret, who was evidently aware of the Bishop's
intention and had interested herself in the choice of his
successor. The Fellows write to their President that
they are not so much surprised as grieved at his inten-
bion of resigning. They assure him of their admiration
and their grateful sense that they can have no President
like him. He had alleged his inability to reside as a
reason for resigning : they point out that many other
Masters do not reside, and that they do not expect it of
him, and ask him to reconsider his decision. Then, on
learning that his mind is fully made up, they write
again to express their sense of loss, and ask him to
nominate his successor. The Bishop nominates Dr.
Robert Bekensaw, Fellow of Michael House and almoner
to the Lady Margaret, and his election is notified by
the Fellows to the Lady Margaret, to Bishop Fisher and
to Bekensaw himself. The date is apparently July 6,
1508. The letters are printed in full (Searle, pp. 137-
141). But though Bishop Fisher ceased to be President,
DAYS OF FISHER AND ERASMUS 57
and though much of his attention was soon given to the
Lady Margaret's second foundation, St. John's College,
the College over which he had presided, still enjoyed his
wise protection and his kindly care. To the end of his
life Fisher remained Chancellor of the University, and
never had there been a Chancellor to whom more grati-
tude was due, or of whom Cambridge had more reason
to be proud. Erasmus ascribes to the Chancellor's
influence the peace and progress of the University. To
him Cambridge was indebted for the quiet introduction of
Greek. To his influence the foundation of the Lady
Margaret's Readership and Preachership was due, and
his wisdom may be traced in the wise regulations which
governed those foundations. It is hardly too much to
call him the founder of Christ's and St. John's, for in all
that the Lady Margaret did we see the hand of Fisher.
In the words of the Fellows of his College, poteris vivaci-
tate ingenii, perspicacitate consilii ad haec et auctoritate
tua, plus unus efficere quam alii bis mille. His attain-
ments, his virtues, his blameless character unite to make
him indeed a remarkable man. And when he boldly con-
fronted the haughty Wolsey and fearlessly championed
the cause of Queen Catharine against the angry King,
he acted worthily of himself and finally crowned a noble
and holy life by a not less noble death, as with his New
Testament opened at the words " This is eternal life, to
know Thee the only true God," he knelt to await the
axe' of the executioner.
His predecessor, Thomas Wilkynson, had held the
Headship without endowment. But Bishop Fisher and
his immediate successors received £Q 6s. 8d. from the
College, half the stipend of a Fellow, a sum apparently
58 QUEENS' COLLEGE
considered sufficient to defray their expenses while
resident in Cambridge for elections and the like. It will
be observed that Bekensaw, like Wilkynson and Fisher,
was non-resident. This not only explains the smallness
of the allowance made by the College to its Head, but is
significant of the view taken at the time of the functions
of a Master. A College was anxious to secure as its
Head a man of position and authority. Fame in the
the Church, influence at Court, weight in the State were
probably the qualities principally desired. When later
on a different view prevailed, viz., that it was desirable
to have a resident Master, the emoluments of the office
were increased and the Master's lodgings enlarged-
Meanwhile a set of rooms served to accommodate the
Master for such time as he was in residence, and a small
sum was deemed sufficient to reimburse him for any
expense to which he was put. But the view that the
Headship of a College was a post to be held in conjunc-
tion with high ecclesiastical office prevailed long after
Fisher's time. The annals of Pembroke College afford
an obvious instance. In that Collegium episcopate the
Headship was retained by Bishop Fox at the beginning
of the sixteenth century, by Bishop Ridley in the middle
of the century, and by the saintly Bishop Andrewes at
its close.
Dr. Bekensaw at the time of his election was already
Vicar of Croston and at Court in attendance on the
Lady Margaret. He became in 1512 Rector of Brad-
well-super-Mare, Essex, and Canon of Windsor. Besides
other offices afterwards held by him, he was Chaplain
and almoner to Catharine of Aragon and received from
her the Deanery of Stoke-by-Clare in 1517 (Searle,
DAYS OF FISHER AND ERASMUS 59
p. 145). He was President for more than ten years,
residing mainly at Windsor and later at Stoke, but
coming to Cambridge when his presence was required
for elections and for the audit.
The President was originally lodged in the two rooms
above the Combination-room — i.e., in the President's
study and the bedroom over that, now called, from
its first occupant, Andrew Dokett's room. A spiral
staircase, which has now been brought into use again,
conducted him from the Hall and Combination-room
to his apartment, at the N.W. corner of which there
was a small study. A door in the E. wall gave access
to the Library and through it to the Chapel. The
President was thus admirably situated. He was
" enabled to survey the whole College or to approach
any one of the principal buildings without crossing the
court " (Willis and Clark, ii. 23).
Part of the block on the W. side of the Cloisters,
built 1460, had been used as public apartments. This
part included the rooms which are now the servants' hall,
the Audit-room, or dining-room, and the drawing-room
of the Lodge, though originally the suite was not divided
quite as it is at present. Access was gained to these
rooms by the staircase at the N.E. angle and the suite
was probably entered by the recess in the present
drawing-room. In this suite was a room known as the
" large room " (magna camera) and the " queen's room "
(camera reginae), which apparently are the same. " The
Queen's room" is prepared for Henry VII. in 1506,
" the large room " for Catherine of Aragon in 1521 and
for Cardinal Wolsey in 1520.
When Bekensaw was elected President there was no
60 QUEENS' COLLEGE
connexion between the then President's lodgings on the
E. side and these reception-rooms on the W. side. But
during his tenure of the Mastership the first of the steps
was taken by which the two blocks were joined and the
present Lodge formed. The first step was the construc-
tion of a "gallery." In the accounts for 1510 and the
following years there are entries of payments " for
cleaning the President's chamber, the gallery [le galere]
and the queen's room," " for repairing the gallery, the
cloister, and the Master's chamber," "for rushes laid
down in the chamber and gallery." These entries show
that " a gallery " had been already built, and it could
not have been the present gallery, since in 1515-16
there is a payment for repairing the lead roof on the N.
side of the cloister {super plumbum claustri in parte
boreali), which shows that the N. side had not yet been
crowned by a gallery. Further, this " gallery " must
have been in communication with the rooms occupied by
the President, and, as the " gallery " was not over the
N. side of the cloisters, the only possible position for it
is the N.E. corner — i.e., the old study of the Lodge. It
was an upper storey of wood supported on brick walls.
The N. wall has been greatly altered, but the thick
walls on E. and W. are almost without doubt the
foundation of the old " gallery " (see Willis and Clark,
ii. 36). By entries in the -accounts it is possible to
trace approximately the subsequent steps in the build-
ing. In 1533 a great deal of work was done in the
President's quarters. There are two payments "pro ly
casting of ledde pro deambulatorio presidentis^" and "pro
ly leddis super deambulatorium presidentis? In the
same year both the " gallery " or deambulatorium — i.e.,
DAYS OF FISHER AND ERASMUS 61
the old Study — and the bedroom were wainscoted and
hangings were purchased for the President's chamber.
When the wall was purchased from the Carmelites (see
chap, i.), a clause was inserted in the agreement, by
which the Friars bind themselves not to block the lights
of "three or four windows,'''' which the College had
decided to make " on the N. side of a certain ambulatory
called ly Galeri, adjacent to the demesne of the foresaid
Carmelites'" (Searle, p. 194), and the accounts show
that these windows were at once constructed.
But in 1560 there are entries of payments for " con-
structing the Master's upper chambers " (le sheddes ad
wdificanda superiora cubicula magistri. Willis and
Clark (ii. 34) note that the payments are all for wood-
work ; there are no payments to tilers or plumbers.
The inference is that there was no change in the roof
and that all that was done was a re-arrangement of the
upper storey. In other words, the gallery itself, which
was not built in 1516, had been erected in 1560. The
panel-work is a little later. "We are left to conclude,
from the evidence afforded by the style, that it [the
panel-work] is that mentioned in the will of Dr. Hum-
phrey Tindall (Presidentl579-1614) ; and, from the terms
employed, the cost appears to have been defrayed partly
by subscription, partly by donations, which will explain
the absence of all allusion to it in the Bursar's accounts :
" ' Item. I give to the President and Fellows of Queens
College in Cambridge, to my successors' use, all the seel-
ing and wainscoting of my chambers and lodging I have
which (I take) amounteth to two hundred and fifty pounds
or thereabouts more than I have received from the college
or any other benefactors towards the same."
62 QUEENS' COLLEGE
" The conclusion to which the extracts we have
collected leads is that the present gallery was erected
at some period between 1516 and 1541, but probably
not before 1537 " (Willis and Clark, ii. 35).
The materials purchased from the Carmelites were in
all probability used in the construction of the gallery,
and this also would make the date some time soon after
1537.
This famous Gallery, one of the most beautiful and
interesting buildings in Cambridge, is in two storeys,
eighty feet long and twelve wide. It is constructed of
timber, overhangs the cloister, and is supported by carved
brackets which spring from the cloister walls. It is
noteworthy that the positions of the brackets do not
correspond with the arches of the cloister — a proof that
the Gallery is of later date.
Loggan's plan — an enlargement of which is given
by Willis and Clark, ii. 32 — shows that originally the
appearance of the Gallery was even more picturesque
than it is at present. The oriels facing the cloisters
were originally carried up higher. That in the centre
and the two at either end of the Gallery " were carried
above the roof in the form of turrets surmounted by a
receding storey, a conical roof and lofty vanes of rich
ironwork. The two intermediate oriels were carried up
only as far as the eaves and had gables above 11 (Willis
and Clark, ii. 30).
When by the construction of the Gallery a junction
had been made between the rooms on the E. and those
on the W. sides of the cloisters, the public reception-
rooms on the W. side were incorporated into the
President's Lodge. The name " Audit-room, 11 still
DAYS OF FISHER AND ERASMUS 63
applied to the Lodge dining-room, is a survival of the .
time when the room was not yet part of the Lodge and
still preserves the memory of its old -public character.
The Audit-dinner was actually held in this room
until about twenty years ago. It will be observed that
the extension of the Lodge which has been described
coincides in date with the altered conception taken of
the duties of the Head of a College. His constant
residence was now desired to supervise the foundation
over which he presided. When the bedrooms over the
Gallery had been made in 1560, an ample residence was
provided for the housing of a President and his family.
It is clear that the limited accommodation considered
adequate for the occasional residence of the earlier
Presidents, and even for the constant residence of a
bachelor President in pre-Reformation days, would
soon have to be enlarged, when religious changes made
it necessary to contemplate the permanent residence of
a President and his family. Dr. Heynes (President
1529-1538) was married, and his widow married his
successor, Dr. Mey.
To return to the events of Dr. Bekensaw's time, it
may be noted that the pavement in front of and within
the College was put down in 1515. It was still
customary for poor scholars to perform menial work.
Thus " four poor scholars are paid 16d. for two days
work in cleaning the outer and inner courts. 11 Another
poor scholar receives 6d. " for cleaning the Court and
cloister of the College. 11 And service of this sort was
still very common. If a poor student was unable to
pay for his lodging and his tuition, it was quite
customary for him to give an equivalent in service, to
64 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
wait at table, to run errands — in fact, to act as a servant
generally. A Rede lecturer has recently reminded the
University that a poor student sometimes begged, and
that the practice became so common that it was found
necessary for the Chancellor, the Vice-Chancellor, or
the Commissary of the University to examine into
the merits of each case and grant a certificate, if he
thought that the applicant should be allowed to solicit
the alms of the charitable (see Cooper, " Ann.," i. 245
and 343).
Bekensaw resigned his office about March 1519. No
reason is given for his resignation, and he lived till 1526.
His successor, John Jenyn, was the first President who
had been educated at the College. He had gone through
a round of College offices till 1509, when he was
appointed by Thomas Wilkynson, Rector of Harrow
and ex-President, to the Vicarage of Harrow-on-the
Hill, which was in his gift as Rector. Jenyn had kept
up his connexion with the College, and in March 1519
he was elected President. It devolved upon him to
receive Cardinal Wolsey when he visited the University
in 1520. The Chapel and Cloisters were whitewashed
and " the great chamber '" was prepared for his recep-
tion. And from the accounts it appears that His
Eminence was feasted on swans (Searle, p. 162). Henry
Bullock, the friend of Erasmus, delivered an oration
before the Cardinal on this occasion (Cooper, " Ann.," i.
303). Early in the next year Jenyn was honoured by a
visit from Catharine of Aragon, who stayed three days.
Soon afterwards the Queen recommended John Lambert
for election to a Fellowship. The College declined to
accede to this request. They state in their letter to the
DAYS OF FISHER AND ERASMUS 65
Queen (Searle, p. 165) that they had asked his friends
whether they would vouch for Lambert's learning, but
" they wold not depose for hym." They then proposed
that he should be brought to be examined by them,
"but he wold not.'" They finally offered to give
him
" an honest chamber and X markes for one year and hys
lernyng, and yf they myght perceyve I the meane tyme
that he wer virtuous and like to be lernyd that thene they
wil elect and chose him felaw, as yo r g r ce wold heve theym
to do : but all theys offers and mocyons hys father ofte
tvmes have refused."
However, John Lambert seems in the end to have
been elected, and his name appears on the books for
a short time. He was burnt at Smithfield for denying
the Real Presence in 1538.
In 1522 " bluff King Hal " himself was housed in the
College. Swans were given to His Majesty and " fresh
fish '" was bought to regale him. Swans and fish were
likewise a part of the present given by the University
(Cooper, "Ann.," i. 305). In the next year a comedy
of Plautus was performed by members of the College,
as appears from the accounts (Searle, p. 167).
But after all these glories the mastership of John
Jenyn came to a most inglorious end. He became
involved in a dispute with the Fellows about the allow-
ances which he claimed for his scholar, his horses, his fuel
and his bills. His misconduct was represented by the
Fellows to " the most reverend lord cardinal and the
counsellors of the most illustrious queen many times,"
66 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
and in the end John Jenyn was removed or driven to
resign. The details of the squabble become clear
from the composition made between the Fellows and
Simon Heynes after his election in January 1529. It is
thereby agreed that the President shall have his commons
during residence, the commons of one servant to keep
his chamber at all times, the commons of a second
servant only during residence. These allowances are
to be taken in full compensation for all charges to which
the President is put in finding servants " to ride with
hym m causis collegii," and he is to "take no other
allowance of the College for his said two servaunts 1
wages, but only the commens of oon servant besid his
scolar [another "poor scholar, 1 ' see p. 63] that kepith his
chamber, and that when he is present." The other articles
are that the President shall be " content to have three
horsses founde when he lith at this college, 1 ' otherwise
he shall provide for his horses himself; that he shall
pay for firewood, candles and rushes, like the Fellows ;
that, when he comes to Cambridge, the cost of providing
for his duty shall be borne by himself; that, when he
goes on College business, he shall return the items of his
expenses, " not exceding a reasonable sum by the daye, 11
and that such expenses shall be allowed only when he
goes on College business by the advice and consent of
the Fellows. In all these matters the President
henceforth is, in short, not to do what John Jenyn had
done. Happily the peace was made between Jenyn and
the Fellows, and Jenyn visited the College on several
occasions after he had ceased to be President (Searle,
p. 169). Two very short masterships followed — those
of Thomas Ffarman and William Frankelyn. Ffarman
DAYS OF FISHER AND ERASMUS 67
had been a Fellow for twelve or thirteen years, had held
several College offices, became D.D. in 1524, and in
1525 was instituted to the rectory of All Hallows,
Honey Lane, London, on the presentation of the Grocers'
Company. With Ffarman the beginnings of the
Reformation are reached. He was one of the band of
men who used to meet at the White Horse Inn, in
Trumpington Street, " to confer and discourse for edifica-
tion in Christian knowledge. 11 The nominal president
of this coterie was the Augustinian Prior, Barnes, but
Bilney was the leading spirit of the gatherings, which
were attended by Crome, Shaxton and Skip from Gon-
ville Hall, Rogers and Thixtill from Pembroke, Frith
from King's, Taverner from Corpus, and, perhaps, as
Mr. Mullinger suggests (" Univ. of Camb., 11 i. 573), by
the future Archbishop, Matthew Parker. The Queens 1
contingent consisted of Ffarman, Lambert, destined to
a martyr's death, and Heynes, whose happy lot it was
to aid in compiling the first English Liturgy. There
was a back entrance into the White Horse from Milne
Street, which afforded an unobserved way of approach to
the members of Colleges like King's and Queens 1 . It
may be that the influence of Erasmus should be traced
in the fact that his College contributed so large a quota
to these meetings in the White Horse — " Germany, 1 ' as
the place came to be called, because the " Germans "
who resorted thither occupied themselves with Luther's
writings. Dr. Ffarman is coupled by Fuller (" Univ. of
Camb.," vi. 33) with Stafford and Thixtill as the chief
advancers of the Protestant religion. As the chief
opponents he names Henry Bullock, the friend of
Erasmus already mentioned, and, mirabile dktu, Hugh
68 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
Latimer, who had not yet been " converted " by Bilney,
but " exhorted the scholars not to believe one word of
what Mr. Stafford did read or preach," also the Vice-
Chancellor Nateres, with the Heads of Colleges generally.
In the same passage Fuller states of Dr. Ffarman that
" he concealed and preserved Luther's works sought for
to be burnt." This was when Wolsey sent to make
search for Lutheran books and to bring Prior Barnes to
London (Mullinger, " Univ. of Camb.,'" i. 578). In March
1528 Ffarman was suspended by the Bishop of London,
Tunstall, for having Lutheran books in his possession,
but he died in the autumn of the same year. It is
clear that he was zealous in spreading the Reformed teach-
ing : his curate Thomas Garret, who was subsequently
martyred, spread the works of the Reformers in Oxford,
and his servant, Geoffry Usher, is recorded as " purchas-
ing Tyndale's New Testaments and other Lutheran
books" (Searle, p. 173).* His successor, William
Frankelyn, was a member of King's College, Chancellor
and Archdeacon of Durham. He was engaged in affairs
of state treating for peace with Scotland, in war also, as
he recovered Norham Castle from the Scots. He became
Dean of Windsor in 1536, but was forced to resign the
* Mr. Searle is here followed in the view that Ffarman was really
President. It is possible that he was only Vice-President acting
as President during the vacancy. But he was in office so long
as to make this view difficult to hold. He is mentioned as President
several times during the years 1526 and 1527 (Searle, p. 173). The
date at which he ceased to be President, and whether he ceased by
death or resignation is also not clear. On the whole, all that can
be said with certainty is that the interval between John Jenyn and
Simon Heynes is divided between Thomas Ffarman and William
Frankelyn. Probably we shall 'not be far wrong in assigning them
Presidentships of something like eighteen months apiece.
DAYS OF FISHER AND ERASMUS 69
Deanery at the end of 1553. He was President for
about eighteen months, but " hardly any notices of him
are to be found in the College books " (Searle, p. 177).
With the election of Simon Heynes in the beginning of
the year 1529 the period of the Reformation may be
said to be fully entered upon.
CHAPTER V
THE PERIOD OF RELIGIOUS CHANGE
" No Italian priest
Shall tithe or toll in our dominions ;
But as we, under heaven, are supreme head,
So, under him, that great supremacy,
Where we do reign, we will alone uphold,
Without the assistance of a mortal hand."
Shakespeare, K. J. iii. i.
Presidents: Simon Heynes, 1529-37; William Mey, 1537-53;
William Glynn, 1553-57; Thomas Pecocke, 1557-59; William
Mey (iterum), 1559-60.
In the days of storm and stress which followed, it may
be set down to the credit no less than the good fortune
of Queens 1 College that those who were appointed to
govern the foundation were men of conspicuous ability.
To Dr. Heynes and Dr. Mey must be given a high
place among the worthies who controlled the course of
the Reformation movement and helped to establish the
Church of England upon the via media between the two
extremes, into one or other of which she might so easily
have been dragged. Dr. Glynn is hardly less distin-
guished upon the llomish side than his predecessors
had been on the side of Reformation.
Mr. Pecocke is less conspicuous, no doubt, but at least
there is nothing serious recorded to his discredit at a
PERIOD OF RELIGIOUS CHANGE 71
time when few men's characters escaped unscathed, and
he had hardly been given time to show of what stuff
he was made, when by the Act of Uniformity Dr. Mey
was restored, though, like his successor, the Royalist
Dr. Martin, a century later, he did not live long to enjoy
his recovered honours.
But, high as Heynes and Mey stand, as men of
weight and ability without whose advice and assist-
ance hardly a single measure of the Reformation
process was undertaken, the College had a still more
illustrious son. As scholar, statesman and Church-
man, equally eminent in all three spheres, Sir Thomas
Smith, who was elected Fellow in January 1530, a
year after Simon Heynes became President, combined
titles to fame which are not often met with in. the
same person. His rise into repute was singularly rapid.
He had no sooner taken his M.A. degree than he was
appointed Greek Professor. In 1538 he was made
Public Orator. In 1540 he was appointed the first
Regius Professor of Civil Law. In 1543 he was elected
Vice-Chancellor, and, though soon afterwards he became
Clerk to the Queen's Council, his residence continued,
and he was able to render the University many signal
services. In many ways Sir Thomas Smith is an excel-
lent type of the best men of the Elizabethan period,
and may claim a high rank even among the giants of
those stirring days. No period of its history was so
critical for the University as the sixteenth century. Its
possessions were repeatedly in danger, its very existence
was threatened at times. Its prosperity suffered sorely
from the religious changes and the general unsettlement
of the times. Its members dwindled and its efficiency
72 QUEENS' COLLEGE
was terribly impaired. Yet in the end the University
survived all these vicissitudes, and in reputation, wealth
and numbers reached, in "the spacious days of great
Elizabeth, 1 '' a point it had never touched before. And
for this happy result Cambridge is mainly indebted to
the labours of four great men, who, after the death of
the great Chancellor, Bishop Fisher, in different ways
and at different times during the period guided the
destinies and watched over the fortunes of the Univer-
sity — viz., Archbishop Parker, Sir Thomas Smith, Lord
Burghley and Archbishop Whitgift. And if to these
great names a fifth be added, it would be the name of
Dr. Perne. Perne was not formed of the stuff of which
martyrs are made, and his supposed vacillations have
gained him a dubious notoriety, like that enjoyed by
the Vicar of Bray.* Yet his services to the University
admit of no dispute. It may be doubted whether
throughout these troubled times any man served Cam-
bridge more wisely, more ungrudgingly and more
effectually than Andrew Perne. And a member of
Queens' may, without incurring blame for self-com-
placency, point with legitimate pride to the fact that of
these men no less than three, Smith, Whitgift and
Perne, belonged in some sense to the College. And,
even if other foundations claim a share in the merits of
Whitgift and of Perne, no other College can dispute
with Queens' the possession of Sir Thomas Smith. And
that is a proud possession, for, in Strype's words (quoted
by Searle, p. 241) :
* It was from his name that the University wits of the time
coined the verb pirno, pemare, which meant, they said, "to change
often."
PERIOD OF RELIGIOUS CHANGE 73
" His oratory and learning intermixed was so admirable,
and beyond the common strain, that Queens' College
carried away the glory for eloquence from all the Colleges
besides, and was rendered so famous by this her scholar,
that it had like to have changed her name from Queens' to
Smith's College.
" ' Unius eloquio sic iam Reginea tecta
Florebant, quasi quae vellent Smithea vocari.
Sic reliqttos inter socios caput extulit unus.'
" As Gabriel Harvey, Smith's townsman, and one who
knew him well, writes upon his death,"
And the names of his contemporaries alone would
show that Sir Thomas Smith was not a Triton among
the minnows, but primus inter pares in a Society, which
Mr. Mullinger, himself a member of St. John's, reckons
as second only to his own College " among the Cam-
bridge foundations of this period, when estimated by its
services to learning " (" Univ. of Camb.,'" ii. 45).
Thomas Smith was a native of Saffron Walden. He
seems to have been at the outset poor and friendless.
In terms of glowing gratitude he records himself, in his
Second Oration as Professor of Civil Law, the kindness
and encouragement he had received from Sir William
Butts, formerly Fellow of Gonville Hall, physician to
the King, the Dr. Butts of Shakespeare's "King
Henry VIII." :
" I was still little more than a boy," he says, " I had no
hope of friends, I was desperate from my poverty and
helplessness and already meditated abandoning the Uni-
versity and letters, when, on account of a report he had
heard of a disputation of mine in the schools, he summoned
me to him, quite untrained and unpolished as I was,
74 QUEENS' COLLEGE
entirely unknown to him, and, so far as I can learn, re-
commended by no one to him : he bade me not to despair,
and like a father rather than a patron and friend from
that day forth gave me every help and encouragement."
The passage, quoted by Mr. Mullinger (" Univ. of
Camb.," ii. 45), does equal credit to the discernment of
the patron and the gratitude of his protege. Smith, of
Queens 1 , and Cheke, of St. John's, afterwards Sir John
Cheke, were the two most promising students of the
day. They were rivals in proficiency, but they were
close personal friends. When the Regius Professorships
were founded, in 1540, Smith took the chair of Civil
Law and left the Greek chair for his friend Cheke. The
names of the two friends are linked together in their
famous reform of Greek pronunciation and the curious
controversy to which it gave rise. There had been
great changes in the pronunciation of Greek, as of
Latin, but while the changes in Latin pronunciation
were marked by corresponding changes in spelling,
Greek remained in form as it had been in the days of
the Attic Orators. At the time of the Renaissance
students had accepted without doubt or inquiry the
pronunciation they heard from the exiled Greek scholars
who were their teachers. The discrepancy between
spelling and pronunciation was first noticed by the acute
Erasmus, who advocated a reform in his dialogue —
De recta Latini Graecique sermonis pronuntiatione —
in 1528. However, the difficulty noted by Erasmus
was discovered independently by Smith and Cheke.
While they were busy discussing the matter together,
a copy of Erasmus' dialogue came into their hands.
PERIOD OF RELIGIOUS CHANGE 75
They then agreed that the pronunciation of Greek
ought to be reformed, and Smith, perhaps as the bolder
of the two, undertook to introduce the change in such a
way as to avoid exciting alarm or hostility by too
violent a break with existing methods. Accordingly
he gave no notice of his intentions to his class, but
introduced, as it were by accident, in his lecture a word
now and then pronounced in accordance with the new
method. This, says Strype,
" He did for this end, that if his auditors utterly refused
his words thus pronounced, then he reckoned he ought to
defer his purpose for some longer time ; and accordingly
so he intended to do ; but if they received them with a
good will, then he would the more speedily go on with his
innovation. But behold the issue ! At first no notice was
taken of it ; but when he did it oftener, they began to
observe, and listen more attentively. And when Smith
had often inculcated 77 and 01 as E and OI, they, who
three years before had heard him sound them frequently
uncorrectly after the old way, could not think it was a
lapse of his tongue, but suspected something else, and
laughed at the unusual sounds. He again, as though his
tongue had slipped, would sometimes correct himself, and
say the word again after the old manner. But when he
did this daily, and, as appeared every day, the corrected
sounds flowed from him more and more, some of his friends
came to him and told him what they noted in his lectures.
Smith now cared not to dissemble, but owned then he had
been thinking of something privately, but that it was not
yet enough digested and prepared for the public. They,
on the other hand, prayed him not to conceal it from them,
but to tell it them without any grudging. Whereupon he
promised he would. Upon this rumour many came
76 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
together, and repaired to him ; whom he required only
to hear his reasons, and to have patience with him three or
four days at most, until the sounds, by use, were made
more trite to their ears, and the prejudice of novelty more
worn off. And so by little and little he explained to them
the whole reason of the sounds " (Life of Sir T. Smith).*
The reform thus initiated by Smith was followed by
other teachers of Greek in the University : in his own
words, "all who were thought to Have any ability
pronounced in that method." But when Cheke had
succeeded Smith, and there appeared to be no longer
any fear of opposition in Cambridge, suddenly there
came a most unexpected check. Bishop Gardiner, now
Chancellor, peremptorily ordered a return to the old
pronunciation (May 1542). The arguments alike of
Smith, who assumed full responsibility for the change,
and of Cheke fell upon deaf ears. There was consider-
able opposition to the Chancellor's decrees, but repeated
orders and vigorous measures on his part gained him
the victory for a time. Then with the accession of
Elizabeth " the new method ,1 came in again, and the
pronunciation of Erasmus was generally followed, until
in turn it was superseded by the system still in use.
The history of the controversy is given in full by Mr.
Mullinger (" Univ. of Camb.," ii. 54-62).
Meantime Smith had been at Padua, the great seat
of the study of Civil Law, the better to prepare himself
for the duties of his new Professorship. He heard
* This account of Strype's is based on Smith's own version in his
treatise " De recta et emendata linguae Graecae pronuntiatione," written
in 1542 to Bishop Gardiner in defence of what he had done, vide
infra. See also Fuller, " Univ. of Camb.," vi. 7-8.
PERIOD OF RELIGIOUS CHANGE 77
there the most famous authorities of the day. He was
admitted to the degree of doctor of Civil Law, and
returned to England after an absence of more than a
year at the end of 1541. The whole system of studying
law had been reformed by the influence of Alciati. But
Civil Law was in danger of being drawn into a common
ruin with the Canon Law, now abolished. Further,
the increasing importance of the Common Law, and the
contempt entertained by its practitioners for a study
which demanded time and labour and offered little
reward, likewise jeopardised the position of Civil Law as
a branch of learning. However, in Bishop Gardiner
Civil Law had a powerful protector. To the desire to
have an eminent professor, whose fame and ability
would recommend the study, may be ascribed the
appointment of a man of Smith's unrivalled reputation
to the new chair. He delivered two introductory
lectures, which are highly interesting and characteristic.
He did not expect to meet with any enthusiasm for the
study which it now became his duty to promote. So he
sought to disarm hostility by the story of his own
experiences. He had himself, he says, entertained so
profound a dislike for law, that, when he was appointed
professor, he repeatedly prayed that, if law should
continue to be as burdensome and hateful as he then
thought it, he might be released from his position by a
speedy death. But happily his feelings had changed,
and distaste had given place to an eagerness to com-
mence his duties. He was grieved that he could no
longer continue his Greek lectures, and he was appre-
hensive that he could win no approbation from such
students of Civil Law as delighted only in technicalities.
78 QUEENS' COLLEGE
But such were mistaken in their view. The study of
law required all the aid of classical learning. He him-
self had made the range of his reading as wide as
possible, and without a knowledge of the ancient
writers on medicine and philosophy, the orators and
the poets, there were any number of passages in the
Pandects which could not be understood. It would be
a mistake to suppose that his study of law was a new
thing. He had pursued it vigorously since he became a
Master of Arts ; he had recently visited the French Uni-
versities and heard the greatest of the Italian professors.
He had at least acquired their methods. Then he in-
formed his audience of the course he proposed to adopt,
and asked them to give him their best attention, and
to devote adequate time to the subject. The second
lecture, delivered the next day, dilates upon the benefits
to be derived from the study. Many had gone forth
from .Cambridge, who, by devoting themselves to Civil
Law, had rendered the highest services to the State.
Such were Gardiner, Thirlby and Butts. The King him-
self, who was so liberal in promoting learning, com-
plained that good lawyers were few. To the theologian
the study was indispensable. And, though the ordinary
English lawyer was most inadequately trained, he showed
a shrewd mother- wit and a dialectical skill worthy of
all praise. The English student had a great advantage,
because of the purity and precision of his mother-
tongue. Nothing could be of greater interest than
legal studies when properly pursued ; the greatest
scholars had enriched and enlarged their command of
language by studying the Digest (Baker, MSS. xxxvii.;
Mullinger, "Univ. of Camb.," ii. 129-132).
PERIOD OF RELIGIOUS CHANGE 79
Two years later (1543-44) Thomas Smith was Vice-
Chancellor. To his tenure of the office belongs the Statute
for the matriculation and registration of students.
Previously the Head of the College had administered an
oath to every student above fourteen years of age, by
which he bound himself to preserve the interests of the
University, to keep the peace, and obey the authorities.
But by the Statute of 1544 it was required that the
student should give the Registrary his name, his tutor's
name, and his College, and that, if he was of mature
age, he should bind himself by the following oath,
on which, it will be seen, the Declaration now made at
matriculation, has been based :
" The Chancellor and Vice-Chancellor of the University
of Cambridge, so far forth as is lawful and right, and ac-
cording to the rank in which I shall be, as long as I shall
dwell in this republic, I will courteously obey. The laws,
statutes, approved customs and privileges of the university,
as much as in me is, I will observe. The advancement of
piety and good letters, and the state honour and dignity
of this university I will maintain as long as I live, and with
my suffrage and counsel, asked and unasked, will defend.
So help me God and the Holy Gospels of God " (Cooper,
" Ann.," i. 413).
The name of Sir Thomas Smith will appear again in
connexion with various events in which he played a
part. Meanwhile it is time to return to the history of
the College as a whole, during the period under con-
sideration. On the vacancy caused by the resignation
of William Frankelyn, in January 1529, Simon Heynes,
who had been a Fellow since 1516, but had recently
80 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
been presented to the Rectory of Barrow, Suffolk, was
elected eighth President. Heynes had been the
chief agent of the College in the complaints preferred
against Dr. Jenyn. That the agreement made between
Heynes and the College, as described in the last chapter,
pledging Heynes not to do what Jenyn had done, was
not due to any want of confidence in the integrity of
the new President appears from the extraordinary powers
conferred by the Fellows on this Master by an order of
the following month, February 1529. These powers
enable him by virtue of his office to lease or set forth to
farm all such lands belonging to the College as he
should think convenient, for as many years, at such
fines and with such covenants as he should think
proper ; and also to fix such fines for copyhold lands as
he should deem fit, and to sell such woods as he should
judge desirable, provided thab the said President read
the indentures to the Society before they were sealed.
They give him power likewise to make bargains for lands
to be purchased for the College, to order all repairs,
and in general they commit to him the making of all
bargains and covenants for the College, and the allow-
ing or disallowing of all bills, promising to ratify and
approve whatever he shall do in these matters. This
agreement is signed by the President and eight Fellows.
It is important to note that these large powers are
given only " to the President now being," i.e., the powers
are restricted to Mr. Heynes, and are clearly intended
as an exceptional measure to place the affairs of the
College on a better footing. In exercise of the author-
ity thus conferred, the President, in 1530, sold the
College estate at Gilden Morden, and in 1534 the
PERIOD OF RELIGIOUS CHANGE 81
estates given by the Lady Alicia Wyche in Holbeach,
Whaplode and Muldon, in Lincolnshire. In 1535 he
sold to Benet (i.e., Corpus Christi) College, St. Bernard's
Hostel, of which William Sowode was then Master, for
one hundred marks. This sale seems to have been part
of a transaction between the two Colleges for mutual
accommodation : for about the same time Benet College
sold to Queens 1 part of the ground on which its Alms-
houses stood in Silver Street. The general plan pursued
was to get rid of property which had been a source of loss
to the College. Thus, in consequence of heavy repairs,
the property in the town left by William Syday had
been unproductive and the stipend of his Fellow paid
out of other revenue. The property was now (1529)
sold for ,£80 and land bought producing J?4 per annum,
and the socius sacerdos changed to a socius non saeerdos.
This was done by the authorisation of Pope Clement
VII., who confirmed the Statutes in this year. This
confirmation by the Pope was rather an expensive
luxury. " For the diploma of the Lord Pope Clement
for the confirmation of the Statutes" there was paid
£& 6s. 8d., and there are items for calf-skin, parchment,
books, copying, and the like, which amount to another
£3 10s. (Searle, pp. 188, 189).
In 1530 Henry VIII. had caught at Cranmer , s sug-
gestion that the validity of his marriage with Catharine
should be submitted to the Universities. No steps were
left untried to secure a verdict favourable to the King's
wishes. The University of Cambridge was directed to
send a decision under the common seal, and the King
hinted very plainly what that decision ought to be.
Opinions were greatly divided, and it was plain that a
82 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
decision in the sense desired by the King would not be
easily obtained. Accordingly Stephen Gardiner, Master
of Trinity Hall, afterwards Bishop of Winchester, the
King's Secretary, and Edward Fox, Provost of King's,
afterwards Bishop of Hereford, Almoner to the King,
were sent to secure a favourable decision from the Uni-
versity. After some negotiations the matter was referred
to a syndicate of twenty-nine, with the proviso that the
decision of the majority should be regarded as the
decision of the University. The royal envoys reported
proceedings to the King. They sent him a list of the
twenty-nine delegates, marking those who were known
to be favourable with the letter A. Simon Heynes was
one of the delegates, and he is duly marked A. (Cooper,
"Ann.," i. 337-339).
Heynes proceeded D.D. in 1531 and held the office of
Vice-Chancellor for the two years 1532-1534. His
tenure of office was eventful. In his first year he was
called upon to attest Archbishop Cranmer's dissolution
of the King's marriage with Catharine of Aragon. In
the next academical year, after a curious riot about the
election of Proctors (Cooper, " Ann.," i. 362), he went to
Court to procure from the King the confirmation of the
privileges of the University, and was sent back to preach
against the authority of the Pope and in support of
the royal supremacy. The formal declaration of the
University (May 2, 1534), that the Pope had "no
greater authority or jurisdiction over this kingdom of
England granted him by God than any other foreign
bishop," was probably sent to the King by the hands of
the Vice-Chancellor.
In the same year, 1534, was passed the Act of
PERIOD OF RELIGIOUS CHANGE 83
Parliament which gave to the Crown the first fruits
and tenths of all ecclesiastical property. In conse-
quence of this Act all ecclesiastical property was valued
by commissioners. In the survey of the diocese
of Ely the valuation of the Colleges is given. The
wealthiest College is King's, valued at i?751, St. John's
comes next at =£"507, and Queens' stands third on the
list at £9£0. This Act pressed heavily upon the
University, and at Queens' the number of Fellows in
orders was reduced from twelve to ten. The tenths
were to be paid by the College, the first fruits by the
incoming Fellow. Mr. Searle quotes the College order,
p. 191, which affirms that "the house cannot sustain the
old accustomed number of priest fellows and scholars
with other charges and also pay the said tenth part."
Thomas Cromwell was now Chancellor of the University.
His earliest connexion with Cambridge dates no further
back than 1532, when he had done good service in
securing the privileges of the University against the
town, and on Lord Mountjoy's death he had been
elected Lord High Steward. His grim note, made
months before the Bishop's death, "Item: when
Master Fisher shall to his execution," illustrates his
relentless policy. It is also a curious instance of the
rapid changes which were taking place, that Cromwell
succeeded his victim as Chancellor. " The University
made Cromwell Chancellor to save itself" (see also
Fuller, "Univ. of Camb.," vi. 53). In 1535 came the
Royal Injunctions to the University. Homage to the
Crown replaced homage to Rome. The Canon Law
was suppressed. Professors were to teach the Old and
New Testament according to the true sense thereof, and
84 QUEENS' COLLEGE
students were allowed to study the Bible in private.
The Colleges were to institute daily lectures in Latin
and Greek, to put aside the scholastic interpreters of
Aristotle, and to use instead more recent and reasonable
expositors. At the same time Cromwell, as the King's
deputy, became Visitor of the University. But Crom-
well, too busy to discharge the office in person, in turn
appointed a deputy, the notorious Dr. Thomas Legh
(Fuller, " Univ. ofCamb.," vi. 55). The University and
Colleges were directed before the Feast of the Purifica-
tion (February 2, 1536) to deliver their respective
" charters of foundation, donation or appropriation,
statutes, constitutions, pontifical bulls, and other diplomas
and papistical muniments, with a full rental of their im-
moveable property and a true inventory of their moveable
goods into the hands of Master Thomas Cromwell, or of
his deputy for the purpose, to await his good pleasure."
Accordingly the Papal authority was renounced and
the King's supremacy acknowledged, and all charters
and statutes, with the rental of lands and the inventory
of goods, were sent to the Visitor. No doubt this was a
severe test to the University's powers of submission.
And lest the loyalty of the Universities should be tried
too far, in 1536 a most important concession was made
in their favour — viz., the remission of the tenths and
first fruits, which in 1534 had been appropriated to the
Crown. The agents of the University of Cambridge in
securing this Bill were the Vice-Chancellor, Dr. Crayford,
formerly Fellow of Queens', and the senior Proctor,
Ralph Ainsworth, of Peterhouse.
To the Mastership of Dr. Heynes belongs the visit to
PERIOD OF RELIGIOUS CHANGE 85
Cambridge or Alexander Alane, the Scotch Reformer, in
1534. He came by invitation of Cranmer and Cromwell :
he held the status of " King's scholar " and his office was
to lecture on the Scriptures, with the purpose of teaching
his hearers the theology of the German Reformers. He
joined Queens' College, and was delighted with his
surroundings — habui iucundissimum sodalithim in collegio
RegmcB is his own expression. But he could not get
his money from Cromwell, his teaching was not accept-
able to his auditors, and, finding that the Vice-Chancellor
(Crayford) sided with his opponents, he quitted the
University for London.
In 1537 a dispute between the College and the Car-
melites ended, as narrated in chapter i., in the purchase
of the boundary wall by the College. Dr. Heynes was
now increasingly employed on royal business. He had
been sent in 1535 to try to bring Melancthon to
England. He became Canon of Windsor and Rector
of Fulham, and shortly before he was made Dean of
Exeter, on the deprivation of Reginald Pole, in June
1537, he resigned the Presidentship of Queens'. Like
his successor, Dr. Mey, he was one of the compilers of
the Prayer Book of 1549 ; he was one of the commis-
sioners for inquiring into heretical depravity, and again
for visiting the University of Oxford, and lived till
nearly the end of Edward VI.'s short reign. Sir Thomas
Smith, who must have known him intimately, in his
Second Oration, referred to above, in praising the King
for his wise promotions instances the case of Heynes as
" a man of remarkable integrity, piety and liberality to
the studious."
The ninth President, Dr. Mey, was even an abler man
86 QUEENS' COLLEGE
than his friend and predecessor, Dr. Heynes. William
Mey was a Fellow of Trinity Hall. He had taken his
LL.D. degree in 1530. He was a friend of some of the
men who had met at the White Horse, and, even if he
was not himself a frequenter of those meetings, his
opinions were unmistakably those of a Reformer. He
rose into eminence as a lawyer. His name does not
appear among the Fellows of Queens 1 , but he was
employed to obtain the Papal confirmation of the
Statutes in 1529. He was Chancellor to Bishop West
of Ely, and a great favourite with his successor, Bishop
Goodrich. He was in London with Dr. Heynes, then
Vice-Chancellor, in 1533, and brought letters from him
to the University.
Dr. Mey was appointed by Archbishop Cranmer his
Commissary for visiting the diocese of Norwich in 1534.
He was ordained subdeacon, deacon and priest all at
once by Bishop Goodrich in 1536. In 1537 he was
appointed one of the commissioners who produced " The
Institution of a Christian Man," " the great dogmatical
document of the Reformation, 1 ' " a noble endeavour on
the part of the Bishops to promote unity and to
instruct the people in Church doctrine " (Blunt, " Hist,
of Ref."). In 1546 he was made Dean of St. Paul's.
He shared with Dr. Heynes and Dr. John Taylor,
formerly Fellow of Queens', the honour of being a
compiler of the Prayer Book. There was hardly a
commission on which he did not sit, scarcely a measure
passed in which he took no part. In Downes' words
(" Lives," p. cxxxv.), " he was well skilled in the consti-
tution both of Church and State, and there was scarce
any considerable step taken towards the reformation of
PERIOD OF RELIGIOUS CHANGE 87
the prevailing corruptions and abuses without consulting
his opinions. 1 " Such was the man who became President
of Queens 1 in 1537. He would probably have been
welcomed as the Head of any College, and his appoint-
ment was a most happy choice. It may be conjectured,
in lack of definite evidence on the point, that the
resigning President secured the choice of a successor so
eminently able to uphold the opinions which they shared
in common.
The first important event of his Mastership was the
acquisition by the College of the ground belonging to
the Carmelites. The steps by which the site was
acquired — viz., the surrender by the Prior and Friars,
the King's warrant to Dr. Daye, Provost of King's
College, Dr. Mey, Richard Wilkes, and Thomas Smith,
Fellows of Queen's College in 1538, the purchase of the
materials of the Convent for ,£20 in 1541, and finally
of the site for ,£'36 in 1544, have been related in chapter i.
It need only be added here, that the inventory taken in
accordance with the King's warrant shows that the
Carmelites were very poor, unless, indeed, in view of the
impending dissolution the more valuable of their
belongings had been quietly removed; that a part of
the ground was purchased by King's College ; and that
the glass in five windows on the north side in the
Library of Queens' College seems to have been brought
from the Carmelite Convent.
"They are each of two lights, and are glazed with
quarries of various patterns, while in the upper part of
each light is inserted the head of a Carmelite Friar. A
narrow border of red and blue glass runs round each light-
88 QUEENS' COLLEGE
There are fragments of inscriptions inserted in the border "
(Searle, p. 233).
When the College had ascertained the willingness of
the Carmelites to surrender, a letter (August 8, 1538)
was addressed to Cromwell, as the King's Secretary,
asking that the site might be granted them. The letter
is given by Mr. Searle ("Additions," &c. vi.) and is
probably the composition of Sir Thomas Smith. After
a captatio benevolentiae addressed to Cromwell in terms
sufficiently flattering, the letter continues :
" There is a convent of Carmelites adjoining our College.
It is small, and has been diminished by the recent sale of
part of the ground to King's College. Owing to the
decline of false religion and the consequent failure of the
revenues got by mendicancy the Friars have nearly all left
the house. Only a few are left, who do keep up the name
of a convent somehow, but even these, as they can no
longer maintain themselves or keep a roof over their heads,
would gladly, with the royal permission, retire. We have
no doubt therefore that the King's Majesty will soon con-
vert the convent to better uses. If the King would grant
the convent to some College, especially our College,
although the ground is not very extensive, it will be a
great acquisition to us and His Majesty will confer a favour
on the University, will grant what is essential to us and
will perhaps not be unpleasing to the King and his de-
scendants. For whenever royalty has come to Cambridge,
it has almost invariably stayed in our College, because the
College lies away from the noise of the town, because it is
near the river, or because it is pleasantly situated. Ac-
cordingly, if the ground shall become the site of a granary
or a tanyard, it may be an annoyance to the College and a
PERIOD OF RELIGIOUS CHANGE 89
nuisance to royalty. But if it is assigned to the College,
to which it is most necessary, we shall not only rejoice
endlessly in the grant for our own sakes, but shall also be
mightily pleased, because we hope that royalty also will
reap some benefit from the grant."
It is pleasant to think that this naive letter, with the
reasons so artlessly set forth why the boon asked should
be granted, did not fail of its purpose. It is amusing to
find that the success of Queens 1 College in the matter
encouraged the University to follow the example thus
set. They also plead that they may have a share in the
spoil of the Monasteries : they beg that the houses, out
of which " swarms of drones and throngs of impostors
used to issue," may be converted into Colleges, the
homes " of young men distinguished by their aptitude
for learning, or of older men well qualified for preach-
ing. 1 ' In particular, the University was anxious to
secure the once fine buildings of the Franciscans, where
a Parliament had sat in the time of Richard II. The
King was not unfavourable, but he was developing other
views, and the issue was the foundation of Trinity
College (see Mullinger, "Univ. of Camb., 11 ii. 25 ff.).
The immediate result of the dissolution of the
Monasteries was a very serious decline in the numbers
of the University. And while the renunciation of the
Papal authority, which was now required, excluded all
strict Romanists, the Six Articles were no less an
obstacle to many of Reforming views. Nevertheless the
tone of the University had greatly improved, and the
standard of scholarship was much higher than it had
been. Instruction was now more regular and systematic,
90 QUEENS' COLLEGE
and the five Regius Professorships were founded in 1540.
But an uneasy feeling prevailed. It was thought that
the Universities would soon share the fate of the
Monasteries. And how well founded these fears were
became plain, when there was passed the " Act for the
Dissolution of Colleges.'" At this crisis Sir Thomas
Smith was able to render the University priceless
service. He was Clerk of the Queen's Council. His
friend Cheke was tutor to Prince Edward. The
University turned for aid to their influence and their
talents, and Smith was entrusted with a petition to the
Queen (Katharine Parr) imploring her intercession with
the King.
" The evidence," says Mr. Mullinger (" Univ. of Camb.,"
ii. 78), " is such as to leave little doubt that it was to Smith's
exertions that Cambridge, at this juncture, was indebted
for its escape from imminent peril. A Commission could
not indeed be altogether averted, but he dexterously con-
trived, under the plea of relieving the University from
heavy and unnecessary expense, that it should not be
saddled with the cost of an enquiry conducted by any of
the Court officers, but that the proposed task of reporting
on the revenues of the Colleges and the manner in which
they were expended, should be confided to some of its
own members, whose experience and character would
afford a guarantee of their efficiency and good faith."
This was indeed drawing the sting from the Com-
mission. The University could look forward with
confidence to the result of the inquiry, when the work
was entrusted to members of its own of " notable vertue,
lerning and knowledge," in the persons of Dr. Parker,
Dr. Redman and Dr. Mey.
PERIOD OF RELIGIOUS CHANGE 91
These three Commissioners set to work at once.
Their powers were dated January 16, 1546, and their
report was completed before the end of February. The
most striking feature brought out by the survey was
the poverty of the University. Of the fifteen founda-
tions, two only, King's and St. John's, had an annual
income of more than £500. Queens' and Michael
House were the only two where the expenditure was
not considerably in excess of the income. The revenue
of Queens' College is returned as £272 2*. 7£d. The
President received £3 6s. 8d., £3 16*. 8d. for his
commons, and an allowance of £6 for his horses. The
seventeen Fellows in Priest's Orders had £6 13s. M.
each for stipend, commons and livery ; four Fellows not
in Orders £3 18*. ; six poor scholars, or Bible-clerks,
and the Master's scholar £9, 12*. apiece. The
butler had £2 12*., the head-cook 33s. 4d. for
stipend and livery and £2 12s. for commons, the
under-cook 20*. for stipend and livery and £2 12*.
for commons, the Master's servant £2 12s. for
commons. The Divinity lecturer received 40*., the
Rhetoric lecturer 40*., the Greek lecturer 40*., the
Dean 6s. 8d., and bread, wine, wax &c, for the Chapel
cost 40*. a year on the average. The steward's fee was
20*., the auditor's and the bursar's 26*. 8d. apiece. The
exsequies celebrated annually for all the benefactors
cost £3 14*., exsequies for particular benefactors and
money distributed to the poor on these occasions
£19 17*. lid., and £1 ,6s. 8d. was paid for annual
sermons founded by Mr. Lasby. The ordinary expenses
of the College are — sizings £3, surplices, utensils and
stores £4i, pleas and expenses of accounts and courts
92 QUEENS' COLLEGE
£6 13s. id., repairs of the College and on the property
£35, and extraordinary expenses =£13 6s. 8d. The
total expenditure amounts to £273 is. Id. and exceeds
the receipts by £1 Is. llfd. (Cooper, " Ann.," i. 431 ;
" Documents relating to the University and Colleges of
Cambridge," 1852, vol. i. pp. 212-226).
Archbishop Parker has left in his own handwriting
(" Parker Correspondence, 1 ' pp. 35-60, quoted by Mullin-
ger, " Univ. of Camb.," ii. 79) an account of the King's
comments on the report and his decision. " He thought
he had not in his realm so many persons so honestly
maintained in living by so little land and rent." Henry
then inquired why the expenditure exceeded the revenue,
and was told that "it rose partly of fines for leases and
indentures of the farmers renewing their leases, partly
of wood sales." On this he observed, "pity it were
these lands should be altered to make them worse." " At
which words," says the Archbishop, " some were grieved
for that they disappointed lupos quosdam Mantes " [i.e.,
the courtiers who had hoped to get the lands]. In the
end, the King promised "to force the University no
further," and the Commissioners departed happy. And
so the danger was overpast. Thanks largely to Sir
Thomas Smith, the hands of the spoiler had been kept
from the University.
After the accession of Edward VI. a fresh Commission
to visit the University, with power to amend and alter
the Statutes of the Colleges (Cooper, " Ann.," ii. 24), was
issued to Bishops Goodrich (Ely) and Ridley (Rochester),
Sir William Paget, Comptroller of the Household, Sir
Thomas Smith, Secretary of State, Sir John Cheke,
Dr. Mey, Dean of St. Paul's and President of Queens',
PERIOD OF RELIGIOUS CHANGE 93
and Dr. Wendy, the King's Physician. The Visitors
brought a new code of Statutes with them, and after
their visitation they issued some additional Statutes,
under the name of Injunctions, to the University.
Among other things these Commissioners were em-
powered "to dissolve two or more Colleges in the
University and on their site or in other fit places to
found and erect a College of Civil Law," and "to
constitute a Medical College in some other fit place in
the University by assigning one of the Colleges for the
study of Medicine." These intentions were not carried
out, although it was proposed to unite Clare and
Trinity Hall for the former purpose. However, the
project was frustrated by the determined resistance of
the former Society. The Commissioners commenced their
work on Monday, May 6, 1549, by listening to a sermon
at Great St. Mary's from Bishop Ridley. They then
went to King's College Chapel, where their commission
' was read, and the books, statutes and lists required by
it were duly handed in to them. Sir John Cheke
produced the Book of New Statutes " synged with the
Kynges hand and subscrybed with the cownsell : he red
every word therein and delivered it unto the Vyce-
chancellor." The Bishop of Ely ended the proceed-
ings by
" a short proposition wherein among other he dyd chefflye
exhorte all men to be obedyent unto the Kynges proceed-
ings, and to renownce all papystrye and superstytyon, and
to bryng in bylls every man of all thynges worthy re-
formacon, as well in the universyte and colleges as of
every private person."
94 QUEENS' COLLEGE
On the following day the visitation of the Colleges
began. Queens' was visited May 20, when the Statutes
of 1529 were revised. The work did not take long :
" on the Munday which was the xxth day thei sate at
the Quenes college and made an ende and supped
ther." It appears from the accounts that their supper
cost £4< 12*. Id. In the disputations, which took
place before and by order of the Visitors, the members
of the College played a prominent part. The first
subject proposed was, that " Transubstantiation could
not be proved by Scripture, nor be confirmed by the
consent of ancient fathers for a thousand years past."
Dr. Glynn, ex-Fellow and soon to be President,
opposed; and on the subject of the Lord's Supper he
and Andrew Perne, Fellow, afterwards Master of Peter-
house, who subsequently was one of the three who
challenged Bucer, were ranged on opposite sides (Cooper,
"Ann.," ii. 31). The Visitation terminated July 4,
and the Injunctions made by the Visitors were read at
a Congregation, July 5. But Bishop Goodrich, Cheke,
Mey and Wendy still had to prepare the first Statutes
of Trinity College (Mullinger, " Univ. of Camb.," ii.
138,/.).
In 1550, for the better preservation of order during
Stourbridge Fair, the Colleges are directed to supply a
night watch. Twenty-four men are to be provided :
King's, Trinity and St. John's furnish four each,
Christ's three, and Queens' two ; the other Colleges are
grouped together in pairs to supply the remainder.
These men are to be sent nightly
" in redynes harneshed and weponed, before the bell of
PERIOD OF RELIGIOUS CHANGE 95
St. Johns at viii of the clock be ceased, in defawt whereof
every Colege in whom such defawt shal be, to paye to the
Proctours xii d wherewith to fynd other in their romys.
Item, that over and beyond the said nombre, the said
Colleges have in a redynes other xxiiii according to the
rate aforesaid " (Cooper, " Ann.," ii. 48).
Stourbridge Fair in those days, when such an armed
force was required, was an event almost of national
importance. The present decayed condition gives no
adequate conception of its glories in earlier days.
Dr. Mey, constantly employed on Commissions, sent
on royal business and acting as Master in the Court of
Requests, could have been little in Cambridge at this
time. Various incidental references show that he was
busy as Dean of St. Paul's. When Mary succeeded her
brother on the throne, Dr. Mey was in London. Bishop
Gardiner resumed office as Chancellor of the University,
the old Statutes were directed to be restored, Dr. Wat-
son, Gardiner's chaplain, was sent to Cambridge and
visited Queens' with the other Colleges at the end of
August, 1553. The Vice-President, Stokes, and John
Bernard, a Fellow, were sent to the President in
London ad perquirenda antiqua statuta collegii. These
were the Statutes of 1529. The President had been
examined by the Queen's Commissioners before the
envoys could reach him ; the Mass was restored in
St. Paul's on September 1, and before the end of the
year " such divine service as was commonly used in the
last year of Henry VIII. and none other " was directed
to be used. Before the year closed Dr. Mey had
ceased to be President. There is nothing to show whether
96 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
he bowed to the inevitable, and resigned, like Dr. Parker,
" in a kind of necessity," or whether he was deprived
because he was married. For five years he lived in
retirement. But he was destined to be restored to his
Mastership and to sit on yet another University Com-
mission. With three exceptions (Gonville, Jesus,
Magdalene) every College in Cambridge received a new
Head. Queens 1 College was fortunate in that the new
President was a distinguished former member of the
Society, who, though he was a strong Roman Catholic,
was a scholar and no persecutor. William Glynn was
elected Fellow in 1530. He filled several College offices
in the next ten years (Searle, p. 245). He became
D.D., was elected Lady Margaret's Professor and re-
signed his fellowship in 1544. On the foundation of
Trinity College in 1546 he was appointed a Fellow
and was the first Vice-Master. He had resigned his
Professorship, from which he had been inhibited, in
1549. But he held other preferments, and was chap-
lain to Thirlby, then Bishop of Norwich. His election
to be President of Queens 1 was probably December 5,
1553.
In 1554 the Convocation of Canterbury sent letters
to the University containing propositions on the nature
of the Real Presence in the Eucharist, about which it
was intended to hold a disputation at Oxford with
Cranmer, Ridley and Latimer. The University approved
the propositions, and, as the accused prelates . were
members of the University, it was resolved to send
delegates to the discussion to defend the propositions
and use all means to induce the three Reformers to
assent to the doctrines in question. Dr. Glynn was
PERIOD OF RELIGIOUS CHANGE 97
one of the delegates sent, and, though he was an old
friend of Ridley, he is accused of having been somewhat
rough with him (Fox, vi. 491, quoted by Searle, p. 247).
However he took no part in the discussions with
Cranmer and Latimer. He was Vice-Chancellor for the
year 1554-55, but was sent early in 1555 on an embassy
to the Pope to obtain confirmation of all that Cardinal
Pole had done in the Pope's name. Immediately after
his return he was consecrated Bishop of Bangor. He
continued to be President for two years after this, but
he was for the most part engaged with his Welsh
diocese, and it appears probable that his resignation
was due to his inability to attend to his duties in
Cambridge. Perhaps he may have felt that he was not
doing the College justice, or found that his non-residence
caused dissatisfaction and therefore removed himself
from a false position. Whichever be the true explana-
tion, he did resign about September 1557, and died
May 21, 1558. Fuller's high estimate of him seems to
have been well deserved :
"An excellent scholar, and as I have been assured by
judicious persons, who have seriously perused the solemn
disputations (printed in Master Fox) betwixt the Papists
and Protestants, that none of the farmer pressed his argu-
ments with more strength and less passion than Dr. Glynn :
though constant to his own, he was not cruel to opposite
judgments, as appeareth by the appearing of no persecu-
tion in his diocese ; and his mild nature must be allowed
to be at least causa soda or the fellow cause thereof"
(" Worthies of Anglesea ").
On the death of Bishop Gardiner, Cardinal Pole
became Chancellor, and a general visitation of the
98 QUEENS' COLLEGE
University and Colleges was ordered at the beginning
of 1557. A full account of the proceedings written by
John Mere, Registrary and Esquire Bedell, has been
preserved. After the Mass of the Holy Ghost in King's
College Chapel on January 11 the Visitors went to Great
St. Mary's, where the sermon was preached by Thomas
Pecocke, B.D., " inveying against heresyes and heretyckes
as Bylney, Latamer, Cranmer, Rydley, &c." Many days
were spent in the shameful posthumous proceedings
against Bucer and Fagius, whose bodies were burnt with
"a greate sorte of bookes that were condemned with
theym." The visitation of Queens' took place on
January 18. Here is Mere's account :
" The vysyters came to the Quenes college half houre
before vii, and in the gate howse a forme sett with carpet
and cushyns, w[h]en fyrst the President [i.e., Dale, the
Vice-President, Dr. Glynn, the President was absent] re-
ceyved them with holy water and sensinge in a cope and
all the company in surplesses with crosses and candlestycks.
After that they went to the Chapell processionaUter and
had masse of the Holy Ghost songe, which done they sit-
ting styll in the stalles the President delivered the certifi-
cat of all the companyes names and I [John Mere] called
them, and then they wente upp to the awlter and so to the
vestrye perusinge all thinge as they did at the King's
college. Then thei wente to the master's lodgyngs and
there sate in examination untill x, at what tyme the Vice-
chancellor came and fet them to St. Maryes."
But Dr. Watson, Bishop of Lincoln, and Dr. Cole
" remayned styll at the Quenes college and there dyned
and continued tyll affter iiii. of the clocke." This
dinner is made the ground of a great complaint against
PERIOD OF RELIGIOUS CHANGE 99
the Visitors by Fox (viii. 273, quoted by Searle p.
254). He relates that they had ordered only three
kinds of meat at most to be prepared for them, that at
Queens' a capon more than was prescribed was brought
up, when they thrust it away in great displeasure.
" These thriving men, that were so sore moved for the
preparing of one capon, within little more than one month,
beside their private refections, wasted in their daily diet
well nigh a hundred pounds of the common charges of the
colleges, so that the university may worthily allege against
them this saying of our Saviour, ' Woe unto you that strain
out a gnat and swallow up a camel.' "
This seems a little unfair, for whereas the supper of
Edward's Commissioners cost £4i 12s. Id. this dinner is
entered in the books as costing £1 18s. 10^d. Fox's "nigh
a hundred pounds," £82 10s. 4<d., was raised by a rate of
4<d. in the pound. The share paid by this College was
£4> 10s. Od. The Visitors came to the College again
on February 8 and February 12. Their object was to
ascertain how far the Statutes of 1529 were observed.
The Fellows were examined separately, and their answers
are preserved in the Parker MSS. and given at length
by Mr. Searle, pp. 256-260. It appears therefrom
that the College consisted of a President, eleven Fellows,
of whom only three were priests, nine scholars — six not
on the foundation — two cooks and two servants. The*
President and seven Fellows were absent. Whether
this was by consent or not is a disputed point. The
Vice-President Dale declares that they have the assent
of the maj ority. The next witness, Hausoppe ( Alsoppe),
maintains that the President is absent without the
100 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
consent of the Fellows and does not perform his duty in
carrying out the Statutes. He has been repeatedly
urged by the senior Fellows to force the juniors to take
Priests 1 Orders according to the Statute, but has not
done so. This evidence may throw some light on Bishop
Glynn's reasons for resigning. His unwillingness to put
pressure on the juniors to take orders is quite in keeping
with " his mild nature. 11 The evidence discloses various
petty irregularities. The most serious piece of laxity
evidenced is that John Mey, Dr. Mey's brother, who
had been Bursar, was indebted to the College to the
amount of ,£40. John Mey became Master of
St. Catharine's and Bishop of Carlisle, but he does not
appear to advantage at this period. Two of the Fellows,
Robinson and Joscelyn, are agreed to have been thrust
in irregularly by the Edwardian Visitors. Joscelyn was
removed, as was Longworth, afterwards Master of
St. John's. Robinson, afterwards Bishop of Bangor,
John Mey, and Igulden took Priest's Orders soon
afterwards. Post hoc, ergo propter hoc is in this case a
safe assumption to make. The evidence as a whole
reveals a state of discord and division, which is un-
edifying, but perhaps not surprising in view of the
utter unsettlement of the time.
Thomas Pecocke, B.D., who had preached before the
Visitors, became President about October 1557. He
was a native of Cambridge, had been Fellow of
St. John's, held several livings and a canonry, first at
Norwich, then at Ely, and was chaplain to Bishop
Thirlby. He was a man of some prominence on the
Roman Catholic side, and probably his election was
urged, if not forced, upon the College. The chief
PERIOD OF RELIGIOUS CHANGE 101
event of his short tenure of office was a wretched
squabble about elections to Fellowships. The President
with a majority (six) of the Fellows pressed the election
of three men, Harnesse, Hyndmer and Welles, all
members of other foundations. It can hardly be
doubted that the object of the majority was to make
the most of their opportunities and fill the vacancies,
before the Marian policy had been reversed, with men
favourable to the Romanist view. However, the Vice-
President and four Fellows protested loudly against the
election of three persons " by common fame most
unworthie in all the tounne, not knowen or sene ever
before to us," and accused the President " with his crew
of gamblers and bankrupts'" of gross misgovernment
and the basest motives. Both parties appealed to Sir
William Cecil, who had accepted the Chancellorship on
Cardinal Pole's death. Cecil rebuked both parties with
dignity on their unworthy attitude. The matter was
referred by him to the decision of Dr. Pory, the Vice-
Chancellor, Dr. Parker and Mr. Leedes. The whole
correspondence, in which Sir Thomas Smith took part,
will be found in Searle, pp. 268-283. In the end the
arbitrators assured themselves that two of the three
persons were satisfactory, and authorised Pecocke to
admit them. Wretched as the whole controversy
appears, there are two points of some interest in the
correspondence. The first is the admission by the
President and his party of the unsatisfactory condition
of affairs to which the Marian reaction had reduced the
University. The second point is that the Chancellor
consulted his friends Sir Thomas Smith and Dr. Mey
on the state of their College, and learned from Sir
102 QUEENS' COLLEGE
Thomas Smith " that Mr. Pecocke now presidente of the
said colledg is fully minded to gyve over his interest
and title in the same to Doctor Mey," " which thing, 17
continues Cecil, " I like very well. 7 '
These proceedings took place in March and April,
1559. In May, according to the intention ascribed to
him by Sir Thomas Smith, Mr. Pecocke quietly retired.
He lived apparently in the town, and was alive in 1581.
A grant of £4< is made to him by vote of the President
and Fellows, June 1559. So it may be hoped that
they parted in peace and amity. Dr. Mey was restored
without opposition. He had lived in retirement during
Mary's reign, but he had not been far from Cambridge.
The expense of sending a servant with the old Statutes
from his residence to the College was only 6d. His
rooms in the College seem to have been kept for him,
even if they were not occupied by him. And there
would be no difficulty in this. For some years there
had not been the full number of Fellows. Dr. Mey had
lost the Deanery of St. Paul's and the Presidentship.
But he seems to have retained his canonry at Ely and
he was preferred to livings during Mary's reign (Searle,
p. 286). The inference is that he did not leave
England. Had he done so, a man of his mark would
certainly have been named among the exiles at Strass-
burg, Zurich, Frankfort, or elsewhere. In June 1559
he was again President and Dean of St. Paul's. He
was one of the seven divines who, with Sir Thomas
Smith, revised the Prayer Book of 1552, which, after
their revision, was enforced by the Act of Uniformity
from June 24, 1559. In the same month, June 1559
he was appointed with Cecil, Cooke, Dr. Parker
PERIOD OF RELIGIOUS CHANGE 103
Haddon, Wendy, Home and James Pilkington to
reorganise and reform the University. The instructions
of the Commissioners were almost identical with those
given to the Commission of 1549, and, with a few
modifications, the "laws, injunctions and resolutions"
enacted during the reign of Edward VI. were put in
force both for the University and the Colleges. These
Elizabethan Statutes of Queens 1 College are signed by
Archbishop Parker, Bill, Haddon and Mey. On one
more Commission Dr. Mey sat in October 1559 — viz.,
the Commission to take the oaths of ecclesiastics. He
was nominated to the Archbishopric of York June 1560,
but died August 8, the very day of his election. This
sad coincidence is noted in the inscription on his monu-
ment (Dugdale's " St. Paul's," 63).
"Attulit hmc mortem quce lux concessit honorem;
Maluit, ac fieri Prcesul, adire polum.
Aspice quam rebus sit sors incerta caducis !
En ! pete quce nulla sint peritura die."
He left the College financially very prosperous. An
estate at Eversden had recently been purchased for
£60. And now, February 1560, the College purchased
from Mr. Anthony Pope, the manor, advowson and
estate of Hockington (Oakington), Cambridge, which
had been the property of Croyland Abbey, for i?700
(Searle, pp. 295-96).
CHAPTER VI
SOME ELIZABETHAN DIVINES
" In her days ....
God shall be truly known ; and those about her
From her shall read the perfect ways of honour."
Shakespeare, King Henry VIII.
Presidents: John Stokes, 1560-1568; William Chaderton, 1568-
1579; Humphrey Tindall, 1579-1614; John Davenant, 1614-1622;
John Mansell, 1622-1631.
The continual changes of the last few years had
operated most prejudicially on the University. A
striking proof of this is seen in the fact that in the
academic year 1558-59, the number of persons who took
the B.A. degree was only twenty-eight (Mullinger,
"Univ. of Camb.," ii. 170). Within ten years the
University had been
" under the government of four different constitutions, had
witnessed the banishment and death of some of her most
distinguished ornaments, and had been exposed to the still
more bitter trial and humiliation of witnessing the most
rapid and fundamental revolutions of opinion and profession,
amongst the majority of her members, on the most vital
points which can concern mankind " (Dean Peacock,
"Observations," p. 41, quoted Mullinger ii. 178).
Yet, it is surprising how rapidly Cambridge recovered
o
2
a
H
'A
SOME ELIZABETHAN DIVINES 105
under a firm and settled government. There were diffi-
culties and struggles soon to come. The extreme
reformers developed into Calvinists and Puritans.
Nowhere were the early Puritans stronger than in Cam-
bridge. The University was divided and convulsed by
the Puritan movement, and, had its course not been
guided by clear heads and firm hands, might easily have
been wrecked at this crisis. But happily the rulers of
Church and State were wise and firm. Cambridge had
never had more loyal sons than Archbishop Parker and
Sir William Cecil, Lord Burghley. They asked nothing
better than to be able to serve Cambridge. "I would
wish," writes Parker, before" he had been made Primate
(Correspondence p. 51) " to bestow most my time in the
University, the state whereof is miserable at this present,
as I have had intelligence from time to time thereof."
He was not suffered " to bestow his time " in Cambridge,
but from his high place he exercised a wise and vigilant
control over his akna mater. Cecil, writing in a moment
of discouragement, when he wished to be relieved of the
Chancellorship, declares his unalterable affection for "the
honourable and deare body of the University,"
" wherof, although I was once but a simple, small, unlerned
and loe member, yet have I as greate plentye of natural
humor of love towards the same as eny other that hath by
degrees byn rewarded to be yn the higheste place of that
Bodye'' (Cooper, "Ann.," ii. 174).
The return of prosperity to the University may be
illustrated by the rapid rise in numbers of this College.
At the date of Queen Elizabeth's visit, August 1564,
when the total number of members of the University
]06 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
was 1267, the Society consisted of the President or
Master ; fifteen Fellows (of whom two were B.D., six
M.A., and seven B.A.); six pensioners in Fellows 1
Commons (of whom one was B.D. and two were M.A.),
twenty-three scholars and Bible-clerks (of whom four
were B.A.) ; fourteen pensioners in Scholars' Commons ;
six sizars or poor scholars, in all sixty-five. In 1573
Dr. Caius enumerated the Master, nineteen Fellows,
eight Bible-clerks, seventeen scholars and seventy-seven
pensioners, making a total of one hundred and twenty-
two. In other words the number of residents had almost
doubled in less than ten years. And, if we may look
forward for another fifty years, in 1621, the Society con-
sisted of a President, nineteen Fellows, twenty-three
scholars, eight Bible-clerks and three lecturers, these,
together with the students, making a total of two hundred
and thirty, probably the highest figure the College has
ever reached. And, as we shall see, at the period in
question, Queens 1 was very prosperous under Bishop
Davenant.
Dr. William Mey's successor was John Stokes. Stokes
had entered as a Bible-clerk in 1538, was elected Fellow
1544 and ordained soon afterwards. He had retained
his Fellowship during the religious changes of the pre-
ceding reigns, and became Vice-President in 1556. As
he led the opposition to Mr. Pecocke he was evidently
an anti-Papist, a conclusion confirmed by the fact that
Sir William Cecil had marked him for promotion, and
the Queen had consequently made him Archdeacon of
York, an office which he retained till his death. He
became D.D. in 1564, and was Vice-Chancellor in the
following year.
SOME ELIZABETHAN DIVINES 107
The great event of his Presidentship was the visit of
Queen Elizabeth in August 1564, of which Nicholas
Robinson, formerly Fellow of Queens', and afterwards
Bishop of Bangor, wrote a full account in Latin. The
Chancellor came down to prepare for the royal visit.
He was most loyally anxious that the University should
not offend the Queen by any foolish display of Puri-
tanical proclivities. He commanded " that order should
be diligently kept of all sorts, and that uniformity
should be shewn in apparel and religion, especially in
setting of the communion table.'" On Saturday, August
5th, the Queen rode in from Haslingfield. She entered
the town by Queens 1 College, where Sir William Cecil
sat upon his horse at the gate. From there to the west
door of Kings 1 College Chapel " stood upon both sides,
one by one, all the University. 11 Addresses in prose and
verse, which are preserved in Bishop Robinson's narrative,
were presented by two Sophisters, two Bachelors, and
two Masters : one of the Bachelors was Robert Some, of
Queens 1 College. At the service on the following day
the sermon was preached by Andrew Perne, formerly
Fellow of Queens 1 , now Master of Peterhouse. On this
occasion was used the earliest extant version of that
particular form of the bidding prayer with which we are
familiar (Mullinger, ii. 192). Dr. Perne took as his text,
" Omnis anima subdita sit potestatibus superemmentibus,' 1 ''
Rom. xiii. 1. And who could more fully enforce the
duty of obedience to princes than the tolerant divine
who had steadily obeyed Henry VIII., Edward VI. and
Queen Mary, no less than her present Majesty ? " He
attacked the Anabaptists, denounced the arrogance of
the Pope, commended Henry VI. and Henry VII. for
108 QUEENS' COLLEGE
their benefactions to the University." To the royal
foundation, of which he had been a member, he alluded
with becoming pride. " Quod seculum unquamfuturwm
erit, in quo admirabili? beneficentia gerenissimas Reginos
Elizabethce, clarissima? coniugis Edovardi quarti Junda-
tricis collegii Regince iron m magna laude et admiratione
erit ? " His object was to stimulate Elizabeth to do the
like, " privily moving and stoutly exhorting her Highness
to the lyke, by their example." In the evening the
Queen witnessed a performance of the Aulularia in
King's College Chapel. On the following days there
were disputations in Great St. Mary's Church. In the
disputations in Philosophy William Chaderton, after-
wards President, took part ; in Medicine, Dr. Lorkin,
formerly Fellow of Queens' and in Divinity, Dr. Stokes,
the President. Her visit to Queens' on the Wednesday
was cut short for want of time. " Her Majestie came
home by the Queens' College and S. Katherine's Hall ;
only perusing the houses because it was almost one a
clock." The oration prepared by Robert Some for this
occasion was not delivered ; nevertheless it is duly given
in Bishop Robinson's narrative. During the Queen's
stay, " the Cofferer, the Masters and other officers of
the Household " were lodged in Queens' College (Cooper,
"Ann.," ii. 184-206). Gifts were made by the College of
11*. 4<d. to the Comptroller of the Household, and
9*. 4>d. to the Cofferer (Searle, p. 301).
At the time of the royal visit the College was engaged
in building. The wages of the workmen are duly
recorded in the books during the summer of this year,
but no particulars about the building itself are given.
There can be little doubt, however, that the extension
SOME ELIZABETHAN DIVINES 109
was on the S. W. side of the College, and that the edifice
then erected was that " clunch building," which had
fallen into disrepair and was pulled down to make way
for Essex's building two hundred years later. Loggan's
map and plan show the relations of this building to the
rest of the College. It extended along Silver Street,
from the S.W. corner of the Hall range to the river, and
a return of it extended to the Cloisters, overlapping by
some 25 feet (Willis and Clark, ii. 18) the W. side of
the Cloister Court. In June 1564, William Packet,
Bursar, buys stone, i.e., clunch, at Barrington, and
twenty-two loads are brought to Cambridge. The
woodwork is charged in the accounts for Sept., the iron-
work is charged at the end of this year and the beginning
of the next. " It therefore occupied only seven months
in building.'"
Dr. Stokes, as Vice-Chancellor, was called upon to
adjudicate a curious controversy. The Lady Margaret's
Preacher, William Hughes, B.D., a former member of
the College, gave offence to the people of Leicester by
the doctrines he preached there. Whitgift, the Lady
Margaret's Professor, was sent to make inquiries, and it
was decided by the University that the whole question
should be examined by the Vice-Chancellor, Dr. Stokes,
Dr. Whitgift and others. But, as apparently they came
to no determination, at the Earl of Leicester's request
the matter was left to him, Sir William Cecil and Arch-
bishop Parker. Hughes gave offence by his exposition
of " the descent into hell," and so great a controversy
arose on the subject in Cambridge, that Cecil, as Chan-
cellor, ordered that " no manner of person should in any
sermon, open disputation, or reading, move any question
110 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
or doubt upon the article ' de descensu Christi ad
inferos.'' "
John Stokes died April 29th, 1568. He bequeathed
to the College <£ J 90 and an estate at Ocley (Oakley),
Bedfordshire, to found four scholarships for poor
scholars. He was buried in the Chapel. His monu-
ment was at the E. end, but since 1777 has been in the
ante-Chapel. The inscription and the verses on the
brass will be found in Searle, p. 299. He had had a
brass put up to Andrew Dokett in 1564, as appears
from the accounts (Searle, p. 302). Dr. Stokes died
early : he was only 45.
The thirteenth President, William Chaderton, had
graduated at Pembroke, and was at this time Fellow of
Christ's. He was a man of good family, and a scholar
of great promise, who has already been mentioned as
taking part in the disputations before the Queen. Sir
John Har'ington (quoted Searle, p. 304) tells a curious
story of him.
" It will not be forgotten in Cambridge, while he is
remember'd, how preaching one day in his younger yeeres
a wedding Sermon (which indeed should be festivale)
Mr. Chatterton is reported to have made this pretty com-
parison, and to have given this friendly caveat : ' That the
choice of a wife is full of hazard, not unlike as if one in a
barrell full of serpents should grope for one Fish ; if (saith
he) he scape harm of the snakes and light on a fish, he
may be thought fortunate, yet let him not boast, for
perhaps it may be but an Eele.' Howbeit he married
afterwards himself, and I doubt not sped better than his
comparison."
Chaderton, in 1567, had been elected Lady Margaret's
SOME ELIZABETHAN DIVINES 111
Professor in succession to no less a person than Whit-
gift. His election to be President was due to the
influence of Sir William Cecil, to whom he returned
thanks in a neat and complimentary Latin letter (Searle,
p. 305). He was admitted May 8th: "the colledg
diner at the admitting of our mV cost 13.?. 3d. He
succeeded Dr. Stokes in the Archdeaconry of York as
well as the Presidentship.
The new President soon married. It would be
interesting to know where he bestowed his wife. The
lady was Katharine Revell, and Chaderton, who was
chaplain to the famous Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester,
wrote to ask his patron's assent to his marriage (Searle,
p. 305). But Elizabeth, 1 whose views on the subject
were well known, had taken a high hand in the matter
of married Heads. The Queen's Majesty expressly
willed and commanded :
" that no manner of person, being the head or member of
any college or cathedral church within this realm, shall
from the time of the notification hereof in the same college,
— the date is August 1561 — have or be permitted to have
within the precinct of any such college, his wife or other
woman to abide and dwell in the same, or to frequent and
haunt any lodging within the same college " (Cooper,
"Ann.,"ii. 169).
Mr. Mullinger (ii. 287) quotes a case where this ordi T
nance was disregarded, and no doubt in time it became
a dead letter.* But it may be doubted whether so early
* It is a significant fact that " the Bill prohibiting the Residence
of married men with their Wives and Families in Colleges," etc., got
as far as the second reading in the Lords in 1604, and again in 1606,
when it was agreed that it should not be committed. See Cooper,
" Ann.,'' iii. 5 and 20.
112 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
as this Mrs. Chaderton would be brought into College,
although there can be little question that the next
President's family regularly occupied the now enlarged
Lodge. Dr. Chaderton — he took the D.D. degree in
1569 — was recommended to the Chancellor, when Dr.
Whitgift proposed to resign the Regius Professorship of
Divinity, by the Heads of Houses, " as one most fit in
their Judgments to succeed in his Place," and received
the Regius Professorship at the end of 1569, holding it
until he became Bishop of Chester. The notorious
Thomas Cartwright succeeded him as Lady Margaret's
Professor. And the juxtaposition of the names was
ominous of what was to be Chaderton's main work in
the University. Under the guidance of Parker and
Cecil, and under the leadership of the indefatigable
Whitgift, a number of the Heads banded themselves
together to uphold the cause of law and order. Of
these Dr. Chaderton was neither the least conspicuous
nor the least active. The early divagations of the
Puritans appeared to be trifling enough. They refused
to wear the surplice and the cap, and flounced out of
the College Chapels when the service was commenced in
Latin, as was now permitted in Collegiate Churches and
Chapels, " in direct response to a petition representing
that familiarity with the Latin tongue would be
thereby promoted, and that this in turn would result in
a richer growth of theology " (Mullinger, ii. 183). But
under these childish exhibitions there lay deeper
principles, and the Church-rulers rightly discerned that
it was not a mere question of vestments, but that all
order and uniformity of worship was at stake. Cart-
wright, whose great abilities and fine personal gifts were
SOME ELIZABETHAN DIVINES 113
marred by a strange want of judgment, in his lectures
on the Acts of the Apostles, bitterly attacked the
existing Church-government. Both as Regius Professor,
and as having himself just vacated the chair which Cart-
wright now filled, Dr. Chaderton might well feel that
he was deeply concerned in the matter. He writes
(June 11th, 1570) to the Chancellor to lay before him
the pass to which things have come.
"True it is such seditions, contention, and disquietude,
such errors and schismes openlie taught and preached,
boldlie and without warant, are latelie growne amongst
us, that the good estate, quietnes, and governance of
Cambridge, and not of Cambridge alone but of the whole
church and realme, are for great hazarde unles severlie by-
authorities they be punished." Cartwright, who ' alwaies
stubburnlie refused the cappe and such like ornaments,'
'dothe now for his daylie lectors teache such doctrine as is
pernitious and not tollerable for a Christian commonwealth.'
The sequel hardly belongs to this narrative. It is
enough to say that Cartwright's degree was refused ;
that he was first suspended and then deprived of his
Professorship.
The agitation about Cartwright led to a change in
the Statutes of the University. The most important
change was in the caput. The Heads became a distinct
estate in the government of the University. To them
also was reserved the interpretation of the Statues. In
drafting the new Statutes Chaderton lent his help. The
draft was sent to Cecil, who submitted it to the Arch-
bishop, and the new Statutes, enacted " on account of
the again increasing audacity and excessive licence of
"* ' H
114 QUEENS' COLLEGE
men," received the Queen's assent Sept. 25th, 1570. See
Mullinger, " Univ. of Camb.," ii. 222-238. It need only
here be noted that Humphrey Tindall was one of the
juniors who protested against the changes made by
these Statutes, and that Nicholas Robinson, now Bishop
of Bangor, was one of the distinguished men, to whom
the matter was referred and who saw no reason to make
any alterations. The Bishop of Bangor's name was
added to the list " as some time twice proctor in Cam-
bridge, and having good understanding in causes there."
See Cooper, "Ann.," ii. 279-304.
But Dr. Chaderton had to keep order nearer home.
One of those who tried to make a diversion in Cart-
wright's favour was Robert Some, of Queens' College, who
was the orator on the occasion of the Queen's visit. Mr.
Some preached a violent sermon at St. Mary's nominally
directed against pluralities and non-residence, which,
said Dr. Chaderton in his letter to the Chancellor, " had
not been greatly amiss, but that he burst out into a
heat of pernicious and rebellious articles," attacking,
like Cartwright, the government of the Church. This,
as will appear, was not the only sermon preached by
Mr. Some which got him into trouble. Chaderton had
not only to keep order, he had to keep the peace. A
Fellow, Ralph Jones, is twice admonished by him for
sowing discord and for quarrelling. The same gentle-
man was expelled from his Fellowship for retaining
i?44 15*. ll^d. after the audit of his accounts as Bursar.
But he was restored by the intercession of Lord
Burghley, on payment of the money, and a promise
" quietly to behave hymself in the College hereafter "
(Searle, pp. 321-22). But the most turbulent spirits in
SOME ELIZABETHAN DIVINES 115
the Society were Robert Some aforesaid and Edmund
Rockrey. They are leaders against the President in the
case of William Middleton, who, being refused his
College grace for the MA. degree, took the degree at
Oxford. The majority of the body considered that this
was not a compliance with the Statute, but that, if
Middleton wished to retain his Fellowship, the degree
must be taken at Cambridge. Hereupon Middleton
was removed, but Some and Rockrey interposed and
admonished the President not to proceed to fill up the
Fellowship. The election was suspended and the case
referred to the Chancellor. In the end the matter was
compromised, Middleton was restored to his Fellowship,
but not to his seniority.
" At the instance of the righte honorable S r . W m . Cecill,
Lord Burgheley, and ChaunceUor of this Unyversytie, the
said Wm. Mydleton, upon his humble submyssyon &
promes to lyve orderlie and quietlie hereafter, was shortlie
after Mychelmas eodem anno predicto (1575), chosen agayne
fellow and so became a junyor and lost both his allowance
and senioritie."
But the course of the majority was partly justified by
subsequent events, for ten years later the same person
Middleton was brought up before the next President and
two Senior Fellows and " receyved an admonitione and
was charged to surcease from disorderly and contentious
practises and dealinge, upon the perill furder to ensewe,
upon the Statute de semmandis discordiis.'" (See Searle,
pp. 324-31.) The case of Edmund Rockrey is more
complicated. He was a follower of Cartwright's, who
in defiance of the Vice-Chancellor's monition denounced
116 QUEENS' COLLEGE
the new Statutes of 1570. He was repeatedly examined
upon what he had said, and it was finally determined
that he must read a public recantation. This he refused
to do, so he was " expelled out of the colledge and
university for his grete disobedience, disorder and con-
tumacy.'" However, by the advice of Lord Burghley,
the sentence was revoked and Rockrey was restored.
But, though up to this time he had held College offices,
he does not seem to have been allowed any further part
in the management of the College. And he had learnt
nothing from the past. He signed the remonstrance
against the new Statutes of the University. He refused
to wear clerical and academic garb, and was repeatedly ad-
monished because he would not receive the Communion.
The President and the Chancellor being together at
Theobald's, in 1575, Dr. Chaderton consulted Lord
Burghley on the case. The Chancellor urged delay, but
the President writes a year later that Rockrey is still
disorderly and a centre of disaffection. Perhaps to
remove Rockrey from the scene of these disagreements,
Lord Burghley gave Rockrey a Prebend at Rochester in
1577. He then refused to resign his Fellowship and
maintained that he could hold it, as others had done,
with his Prebend. Lord Burghley's feeling was against
this, but he would sanction no forcible proceedings. So
Rockrey held on, to the despair of Dr. Chaderton. At
last, in 1579, Rockrey retired, and the College got rid
of a most froward and unruly member. But caelum,
rum animum, mutavit. At Rochester he was first sus-
pended and then deprived. Yet " he is said to have been
distinguished for his learning and abilities, and to have
been an admired and popular preacher " (Searle, p. 345).
SOME ELIZABETHAN DIVINES 117
In 1575 a long agreement was drawn up between the
University and the Town, for cleansing and lighting the
streets, and diminishing the danger of pestilence and
fire. For better provision against the casualty of fire,
the Colleges were to have proper equipment. The
apparatus ordered for Queens 1 College was " 5 buckets,
1 scoop, 1 long ladder, 1 short ladder " (Cooper,
" Ann.," ii. 337). This is a point on which the Colleges
have been very remiss, long after the date of this ordi-
nance. It was reserved for the modern Ladies' Colleges
to set to the old foundations the example of having an
organised fire-brigade.
In 1576 the minister of Trinity parish was committed
to prison by the Heads for irregularly marrying Mr.
Byron, of Queens 1 College, to a Miss Beaumont, of
Leicestershire, who was sojourning in Cambridge. Two
Masters of Arts, who were present at the wedding, were
also committed. The case is set forth in a letter from
the Vice-Chancellor, Dr. Goade, to the Chancellor, given
Cooper, "Ann.," ii. 348.
" ' The circumstances,' says the Vice-Chancellor, ' maye
seeme to aggravat the dealing in this contract. The place
in Cambridge, the younge Gentleman a great heyer (heir), a
schollar of Queenes Colledge, a pupill about the age of 1 9
yeres, committed to the charge of a tutor in the same
Colledge, the marriage without either consent or privity
of the Gentleman's parents or tutor, the solemnizacion
close and seacreat without banns or licence for the ministre
to marry theim, the younge gentleman sence conveyed into
the country wherby I cannot take ordre for the restoringe
of him to his Tutor, untill his father's pleasure be knowen,
besyde the greatest inconvenience of all (if it fall out trew)
118 QUEENS' COLLEGE
of a precontract pretended sence the said marriage betweene
the said scholler and another yonge gentlewoman of the
town.''
Poor Mr. Byron ! It looks as if he were a youth with
more money than brains, who was married out of hand
by Miss Beaumont and her relations to secure him from
the toils of the " yonge gentlewoman of the town.'"
Sir Thomas Smith visited the College in Aug. 1571,
when he had " a marchpane and a pottle of Ippocras,"
at a cost of 14*. 8d. On December 2nd, 1573, he made
over to the College a rent charge of £12 7*. 4>d. on the
manor of Overston, Northamptonshire. With this
money were to be founded a lectureship in arithmetic,
with a stipend of £3, a lectureship in geometry, with a
stipend of £4<, and two scholarships of £2 Ss. 8d. each.
His lecturers were enjoined that the lectures should not
" be redd of the reader as of a preacher out of a pulpit,
but per radium et eruditum pulverem, as it is said, that is with
a perm on paper or tables, or a sticke or compasse in sand
or duste to make demonstracon, that his schollers maie both
understand the reader and also do it themselves and so
profit.''
The scholars are required not to proceed B.A. until
they are expert in arithmetic, nor M.A. until they under-
stand the first six books of Euclid " bie the judgment
of the reader of geometrie, upon the said reader of
geometrie his oth." The balance of £1 was to be
employed " at one or two daies in the year to amende
the cheare of the fellows and scholars in such one daie or
two as it shall please them.'''' This is the origin of
*' Tom Smith's Feast " on Dec. 2nd.
SOME ELIZABETHAN DIVINES 119
The last of Sir Thomas Smith's many services to the
University was perhaps also the greatest. " One of his
last acts was the introduction of a measure which long
afterwards caused his name to be held in grateful remem-
brance, not only at Queens 1 , but in every College in
Cambridge and in Oxford, as well as at Eton and at
Winchester " (Mullinger, ii. 375). This was the Act of
1576 " for the Maintenance of the Colleges in the Uni-
versities, and of Winchester and Eaton." The important
clause is that no College,
" after the end of this present session of Parliament, shall
make any Lease for lief lieves or yeeres, of anie ferme or
anie their Lands, Tenements or other Heredytaments to the
which anie Tythes, Errable Lande, Meadowe or Pasture
dothe or shall apperteigne, except thai the one thirde parte
at the leaste of the olde Rent be reserved and paide in Come, . . .
that is to sayein good Wheate after VI*. Wild, the quarter
or under, and good Malte after Vis. the quarter or under.
. . . The same Wheate, Malte, or the money cominge of the
same to be expended to the use of the Relief of the
Commons and Diett of the saide Colledges."
Sir Thomas reasoned that the supply of gold and
silver being unlimited, land and the produce of land
limited, the value of land must rise. The provision that
one-third at least of the old rent should be paid in corn
stopped, in part, the system of extravagant fines on the
renewal of leases, which afforded immediate dividends,
but conferred no permanent benefit. The third payable
in corn, which rose to be six or eight times its nominal
value, became far more valuable to the Colleges than
the remaining two-thirds paid in money. The
120 QUEENS' COLLEGE
advantages secured by the measure were soon felt. In
1601 the Act was described as a "most blessed and
gracious Statute, . . . without which happie helpe
the Colledges had, many of them, bene left forsaken by
their students long ere this " (Cooper, " Ann.," ii. 602).
(See also Fuller, " Univ. of Camb.," vii. 6-8.)
And so with this most useful measure a great career
closed. Sir Thomas Smith died Aug. 12th, 1577. By
his will he bequeathed to the College his Latin and
Greek books and his great globe, made by himself. Dr.
Chaderton, through the influence of his patron, Lord
Leicester, became Bishop of Chester and resigned the
Presidentship in 1579. He was translated to Lincoln
in 1595. Sir John Harington says of him, at Cam-
bridge, that " he was beloved among the schollars, and
the rather for that he did not affect any soure and
austere fashion, either in teaching or government, as
some used to doe ; but well tempered both with courage
and courtesie" (Searle, pp. 310-11). In 1589 he gave
the College Library a very fine copy of Montanus 1 Poly-
glott Bible, in eight volumes.
On the vacancy made by Bishop Chaderton's resig-
nation, Humphrey Tindall was elected President, July
3rd, 1579. He was a son of Sir Thomas Tindall, of
Hockwold, Norfolk : his mother was Amye, daughter of
Sir Henry Fermor, of East Barsham. He was just 30
at the date of his election. The youthful Humphrey
had been matriculated at Gonville Hall, in 1555. As
he could not have been more than six years old at the
time, the case, if the dates are right, is very remarkable*
* In his deposition about Lord Leicester's marriage he is described
as natus annus 34 aut circiter. This would allow him to be ten at the
SOME ELIZABETHAN DIVINES 121
He did not come into residence at that immature age,
for he did not graduate until 1565-6, when he was 16 or
17. He had been scholar of Christ's, and was now
Fellow of Pembroke, and Vicar of the Pembroke living
of Soham, which he held to the end. He was, as his
predecessor had been, chaplain to the Earl of Leicester,
and in the previous year, 1578, had married him privately
to Lady Letitia, widow of Walter Devereux, Earl of
Essex. The marriage caused a great sensation, as it was
supposed that Lord Essex was poisoned, and Lord
Leicester forsook Lady Douglas Sheffield, who was
believed to be his wife. Humphrey Tindall's deposition
on the subject is quoted from the State Papers by Mr.
Searle, pp. 352-55. There can be no doubt that he
owed his promotion to Lord Leicester's influence. The
probability that he would be put forward for election
by Lord Leicester had been foreseen, and one of the
Fellows, David Yale, had written to Lord Burghley a
year previously to urge that Leicester should not be
allowed to influence the election, as Mr. Tindall was too
young and inexperienced to be President. However,
the election was directly due to Lord Burghley's recom-
mendation, and Tindall, " ornatus non itapridem, Ilhis-
trissime Heros, insigni tuo prcestantique beneficio,' 1 '' makes
his acknowledgments to the Chancellor in due form.
TindalPs wife, Jane Russell, lived to marry again twice
after his death. From entries in the College accounts
she lived in the Lodge, the building of which was com-
pleted in TindalPs time (see pages 60-62), but they
resided for the most part at Ely, of which Tindall
date of his matriculation, and there are cases of matriculation at
that age.
122 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
became Dean, 1591. The family was of Bohemian
extraction, and Fuller (" Univ. of Camb.," v. 34) narrates
of Dr. Humphrey Tindall what he calls " an improbable
tradition " then current :
" That in the reign of Queen Elizabeth he was proffered
by a Protestant Party in Bohemia to be made King thereof.
Which he refused alleadging that he had rather be Queen
Elizabeth's subject than a forain Prince. I know full well
that Crown is elective. I know also for some hundreds of
years it has been fixed to the German empire. However,
because no smoak without some fire or heat at least ; there
is something in it, more than appears to every eye."
Fuller goes on to say that he does not know how
Bohemian blood came into his veins, but that he gave
the arms of Bohemia for a crest. The evidence for
TindalPs Bohemian descent has been carefully sifted by
Mr. Searle (pp. 368-370). Fuller's " improbable tradi-
tion " appears to rest on Robert Johnson's enlargement
of Bolero's Belazioni universali (Rome, 1592) in which
Bohemia is said to have offered the crown to Dr.
Tindall's father, " which story is famously known in
Cambridge." But there is no trace of the story in
Bolero himself.
Tindall, as a young man, was a " Liberal." He had
signed the remonstrance against the new University
Statutes in 1572. His views were Calvinistic to a
marked degree. But a predilection for Calvinistic
doctrine by no means implied a love for Calvinistic
discipline. Men, who held strongly the doctrines of
Calvin, may be said to have spent their lives in combat-
ing Calvin's system of Church government, because they
SOME ELIZABETHAN DIVINES 188
saw that it would mean separation and disintegration.
In doctrinal opinions, for instance, there was no very
wide divergence between Archbishop Whitgift and
Thomas Cartwright. Yet Whitgift's whole career, at
Cambridge and as Primate, was one long and successful
struggle against the theories of Travers' DiscipMma,
which was the accepted pronunciamento of the Puritan
party. And Humphrey Tindall, Calvinist as he was,
would have nothing to do with any Puritan laxity, and
held the reins of government with a hand as firm as ever
his predecessor had done. One of his first acts as Pre-
sident was the building of the College brewhouse, which
caused a storm in a tea-cup. The expense was defrayed
by the sale of a number of trees. Both the Chancellor
and Bishop Chaderton lamented this action. The
Bishop says that the trees had been " the ornament, .
bewty, and defence of the Colledge," and hopes that
" the long row of goodly ashes 11 may be saved. The
Vice-Chancellor is ordered to inspect and report to the
Chancellor. His report with the explanation of the
Fellows was apparently satisfactory, and the matter was
allowed to drop.
While Dr. Tindall was Vice-Chancellor, 1585-86,
John Smith, of phristfs, in his Ash-Wednesday sermon,
attacked the custom pf allowing plays to be performed
in the Colleges on Saturday and Sunday evenings, as a
breach of the Sabbath. He was summoned before' the
Vice-Chancellor and Heads and examined on his sermon.
Smith was more amenable to authority than members of
his party usually were. He undertook to explain his
views more fully in another sermon, which was to be
submitted beforehand to the judgment of the Vice-
124 QUEENS' COLLEGE
Chancellor. The importance attached to such pulpit
utterances, and the fierce controversies which originated
therefrom, will be better understood, if it is remembered
that attendance at the sermon was obligatory, and
absence was punished by a fine. And the pulpit was,
perhaps, never more potent than it was in Cambridge at
this time. Many members of the University were called
to account for ill-judged sermons shortly afterwards.
Such were the famous William Perkins, of Christ's, who
" subsequently explained himself, 11 Charles Chadwick, of
Emmanuel, Sampson Sheffield, of Christ's, and Francis
Johnson, of Christ's. Dr. Tindall, on these occasions,
showed himself as firmly determined as any of the Heads
that liberty should not run wild to licence. The dis-
course, however, which was most momentous in its
issues, was preached by a man of quite the opposite
school of thought to the " Separatists" just mentioned.
William Barret, Fellow of Gonville and Caius College,
in the Easter Term of 1595 (Fuller, " Univ. of Camb.,"
vii. 17), attacked the doctrines of Calvin " with some
sharp and unbecoming speeches of that reverend man,
and other foreign learned Protestant writers (exhorting
the auditors not to read them)." This sermon marks
the beginning of a revolt against Calvinistic doctrines.
The reaction came surely, if slowly, and the first step had
been taken which led to Bancroft, Mountaigne and
Laud. Barret was cited, and eventually consented to
recant. But his recantation was so made that it was
held to aggravate the offence. He was again cited, and,
being threatened with expulsion, appealed to Arch-
bishop Whitgift for protection, complaining of the
harshness with which he was treated, and the undue
SOME ELIZABETHAN DIVINES 125
leniency shown to men of views opposite to his own.
The Archbishop intervened with more force than dis-
cretion, and, while correspondence was passing between
Whitgift and the Heads of Houses, Robert Some
preached another of his violent sermons ; " intemperate
and indiscreet" the Archbishop calls it. Peterhouse,
on the death of Dr. Perne, had chosen another Master
from Queens'. But the bitter and bigoted Some was a
complete contrast to the kindly and tolerant Perne.
On this occasion
" his text, it seems, was out of Acts iv. 5 : ' Their rulers,
and elders and scribes, and Annas the high priest, and
Caiaphas, and John, and Alexander, and as many as were
of the kindred of the high priest were gathered together
at Jerusalem. And when they had set them in the midst
they asked, By what power, or by what name, have ye done
this ? ' Turning all this unto the Archbishop (John
Whitgift) that bore one of these names, and the rest of the
high commission : comparing them unto these Jewish
persecutors : and those that were convented before them
to Peter and John, the preachers of Christ and his doctrine"
(Strype, "Life of Whitgift, iv. 15).
The sermon was considered to be a direct attack on
the Archbishop, though the Heads assured him that
they had not so understood Some, and that Some
denied any such intention. If the attack was intended,
its grossness was greatly aggravated by the fact that
Some owed his election at Peterhouse to Whitgiffs
choice. However, when Barret was summoned to Lam-
beth, Humphrey Tindall and Whitaker, Master of St.
John's, were sent to represent the Heads. Barret was
126 QUEENS' COLLEGE
told that his views on some points were erroneous, and
agreed to sign a recantation drawn up by the Arch-
bishop. The interest of this mission of Tindall and
Whitaker to Lambeth lies in the fact that it led to the
Lambeth Articles, which, though they seemed to be a
victory for Calvinism, hastened the downfall of Cal-
vinistic views in Cambridge and the Church of England
generally.
Among the Cambridge verses composed on the death
of Sir Philip Sidney are Latin verses by Dr. Tindall,
printed Searle, p. 359, and Miles Sands, Fellow of
Queens'", and Greek verses by Richard Milbome, Fellow
of Queens', afterwards Bishop of Carlisle. The number
of men who could write Greek verses in the University
must have been small at this date. When Downes' long
tenure of the Greek chair (1585-1625) ended, it is
mentioned by Fuller as something most wonderful that
there were actually five duly qualified candidates for the
Professorship ! Of the Grecians at this period, Queens"
College had a full share, for two of the best Greek
scholars in England were Sir Thomas Smith and John
Aylmer, Bishop of London, formerly Fellow. Aylmer's
name will always be held in honour, for it was he who
imparted to Lady Jane Grey her wonderful knowledge
and love for Greek. The number of Queens' men who
were then prominent in Church and State is conclusive
evidence of the reputation and prosperity of the College.
Besides the worthies who have just been mentioned,
Queens' was one of the Colleges which could lay claim
to Archbishop Whitgift, whose academic career com-
menced as a pensioner here, and among her members
were Thomas Davies, Bishop of St. Asaph (d. 1573),
SOME ELIZABETHAN DIVINES 127
Nicholas Robinson, Bishop of Bangor (d. 1585), John
Mey, Bishop of Carlisle (d. 1598), Edward Scambler,
Bishop of Norwich (d. 1594), William Chaderton,
Bishop of Chester, then of Lincoln (d. 1608), Richard
Longworth, Master of St. John's and Dean of Chester
(d. 1579), Andrew Perne, Master of Peterhouse and
Dean of Ely (d. 1589), George Gardiner, Dean of
Norwich (d. 1598), Henry Hastings, Earl of Hunting-
don, Lord President of the North (d. 1595), Sir Thomas
Heneage, Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (d. 1594)
Roger Manvers, Earl of Rutland, Ambassador to Den-
mark, famous as a soldier and a traveller (d. 1612),
Poynings Heron, one of the commanders in the army
raised to repel the Spanish Armada (d. 1595), Edward de
Vere, Earl of Oxford, the poet (d. 1604), Sir Christopher
Yelverton, Speaker of the House of Commons (d. 1607),
John, Lord Lumley, High Steward of the University of
Oxford, a great benefactor to the University Library
and to the Bodleian Library (d. 1609), William, Lord
Cobham, Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports (d. 1597),
Henry Smith, the preacher, known as " silver-tongued "
(d. 1591), Dr. Richard Cosin, Dean of the Arches (d.
1597), Thomas Newton, famous as a Latin poet (d.
1607), Thomas Digges, mathematician (d. 1595), Robert
Bowes, Ambassador to Scotland (d. 1597). The list
could be extended considerably, but the names given
will suffice to show how many men of varied attain-
ments Queens' College had among her alumni. Prob-
ably no Cambridge College, and certainly no Oxford
College — for Cambridge, in the reign of Elizabeth,
enjoyed an easy superiority — could show a more dis-
tinguished list.
128 QUEENS' COLLEGE
A melancholy interest attaches to an endowment
received in 1593. Sir Henry Williams, alias Cromwell,
of Hinchinbrooke, made over to the town of Hunting-
don i?40, the value of goods forfeited to him as lord of
the manor of Warboys, on condition that the sum of
40«. be paid to a Fellow of Queens 1 College, being D.D.
or B.D., for an annual sermon preached on March 25th,
in one of the churches of Huntingdon. The forfeited
goods belonged to John Samwell, of Warboys, who,
with his wife Alice and his daughter Agnes, was accused
of procuring the death of Lady Susan Cromwell, Sir
Henry's wife, by witchcraft. The accused persons were
imprisoned on Lady Cromwell's death, and Mrs. Sam-
well, who was a feeble old woman, being tortured in
prison, confessed to everything with which she was
charged. The prisoners were accordingly convicted of
bewitching Lady Cromwell and other persons, and all
three were hanged. A full account of the case is given
by Mr. Searle, pp. 380-383. It appears that the unfor-
tunate old woman was nearly eighty; that the first
suggestion of witchcraft was made by a Cambridge
physician, Dr. Barrow; that the supposed witch had
been sent to Bishop Wickham, and confessed to him and
two j ustices of the peace ; and that the Judge who tried
the case (Mr. Justice Fenner) tested the alleged effects
himself. The terrible belief in witchcraft was not only
common, but was increasing . at this time. The belief
was held strongly by no less a person than King
James I. himself. Mr. Mullinger (" Univ. of Camb.,"
ii. 489) quotes a contemporary case, where the pretended
power to exorcise claimed by a graduate of the Uni-
versity was exposed by Dr. Harsnet, Master of
SOME ELIZABETHAN DIVINES 129
Pembroke. But evidently Dr. Harsnet was far in
advance of the time in his courageous attack upon this
horrible belief. Dr. Tindall was appointed by the
Privy Council to investigate a case of witchcraft in
1609 (Cooper, " Ann.," iii. 13). In the annual sermon
the preacher was to " preache and invaye against the
detestable practise, synne, and offence of witchcraft,
inchauntement, charme and sorcerye." One of these
sermons was preached by the famous John Smith, the
Cambridge Platonist ; four sermons, preached by Mr.
Naylor in 1792-95, were published under the title of
" The Inanity and Mischief of Vulgar Superstition, 1 "
and some account of the witches of Warboys was added.
The last sermon was preached in 1812 by the " Rev. Mr.
Goram," i.e., the Rev. C. G. Gorham, whose views on
Baptism ' gave rise to "the Gorham controversy." Sir
Henry Cromwell had entered as a fellow-commoner
July 2, 1580 ; Oliver Cromwell and Robert Cromwell
had also entered as fellow-commoners in Jan. 1578 ; a
second Henry Cromwell entered Aug. 30, 1600 ;
Thomas, John and William Cromwell, April 2, 1604
(" Old Parchment Reg." 37).
On Lord Burghley's death, in 1598, the gifted but
unfortunate Robert Devereux, Earl of Essex, was elected.
Chancellor. Lord Essex had been Whitgiffs pupil at
Trinity, and the Archbishop strongly recommended his
election to the Chancellorship : " I doe not think any
man in' England so fitt for that office as he is." The
new Chancellor shortly afterwards visited the University
and stayed at Queens' 1 , where the room he lodged in
was long called "the Essex Chamber." On this occa-
sion " the pleasant comedy of ' Lelia ' was excellently well
130 QUEENS' COLLEGE
acted before him " (Fuller, " Univ. of Camb.," vii. 34).
Lord Essex was also Earl Marshal of England, and,
during his short tenure of the Chancellorship, was able
to settle one of the many questions which caused
constant bickerings between University and Town, viz.,
the question of precedence between the Vice-Chancellor
and the Mayor. His award was, " I do set down this
judgment, as earl marshal of England and judge by my
office of all places and precedencies, that the vice-chan-
cellor of Cambridge is to be in commission before the
Mayor. 11 Cooper's " Annals," vol. ii., from which this
award is taken (p. 594) afford ample evidence that Dr.
Humphrey Tindall was firm in maintaining the privi-
leges of the University against encroachments by the
Town. Another member of the College, Dr. John
Jegon, who became Master of Corpus, was, perhaps, the
chief champion of the University in these disputes. In
less than three years from his election, the brilliant
Robert Devereux's career closed with tragic sadness on
Tower Hill, and Sir Robert Cecil, afterwards Earl of
Salisbury, the younger son of the great Burghley, was
promoted from Lord High Steward to be Chancellor of
the University.
The depreciation of the value of College property by
the system of fines on the renewal of leases has been
already alluded to in connexion with Sir Thomas
Smith's Act. But even now that the alienation of
College lands had been forbidden by law, means were
found to evade this most proper enactment, and Queens'
College furnished a case of evasion in 1598. The estate
at Babraham was part of the benefaction of John
Otware. This estate, by a lease bearing date Feb. 7,
SOME ELIZABETHAN DIVINES 131
1598, was granted to Sir Horatio Pallavicini for three
lives, with a reserved rent of three guineas. Then a
deed bearing date Feb. 9 was executed, covenanting
that, in consideration of i?200 paid by him, heshould
enjoy the estate in fee simple, that acquittances should
be given by the College for the reserved rent, as it
became due, without its being received; that at any
time within a month after requisition the College should
grant new leases ; and that it should hand over to Sir
Horatio all papers concerning the estate. The last
lease granted in pursuance of this covenant was made
to Thomas Minott, of Stortford, in Hertfordshire, in
1636, with the rent reserved of a peppercorn, if demanded.
In the deed of sale it is said to be the intention of the
President and Fellows to purchase another estate with
the i?200. But this was never done, and ultimately the
money was spent on the building of the rooms in the Wal-
nut-Tree Court, a very useful application of the money,
so that if ill-gotten it was well spent. Dr. Plumptre
closes his MS. account of the transaction as follows :
" The estate consisted of sixty acres of land and some
tenements, and the price given for the purchase might
perhaps at that time be a fair one. The purchaser was a
courtier and great favourite of King James I., and how
far this act of the then Body is to be excused on the score
of Court influence, I must leave to the readers."
King James, on his joyful progress to assume the
English crown, did not come to Cambridge. But at
Hinchinbrooke, the seat of Sir Oliver Cromwell, the
uncle after whom the Protector was named, he received
the homage of the University (Fuller, "Univ. of
132 QUEENS' COLLEGE
Camb.," vii. 35-36) and there in all probability
the Millenary Petition was presented to him. Soon
after the Hampton Court Conference the strenuous
Whitgift passed away, with Pro Ecclesia Dei on his lips
— no unfit summary of his long and useful life. The
Ecclesiastical Canons of 1604 were Bancroft's. By them
uniformity was enforced on all Colleges.
" All masters and fellows of colleges and halls, and all
the scholars and students in either of the Universities,
shall in their Churches and Chapels upon all Sundays, holy
days, and their eves, at the time of divine service, wear
surplices, according to the order of the Church of England,"
Canon 17.
The Heads of Colleges were required to furnish
certificates of the conformity of their societies with lists
of the ministers who held a licence to preach. The
President of Queens'' made his return Jan. 7, 1605.
" According to Mr. Vice-Chancellor's appointment, I do
hereby certify that the Fellows, Scholars and Students of
our Colledge as usually before time, so at this present, do
continue y e conformity in Divinis Officiis, both in Surplisses
and Hoods, every one according as the University
Statutes do require, and also in due observation of the
Communion Book."*
He appends the names of ten " ministers, who being
now present at home have shewed letters of orders "
(Searle, p. 393).
Early in 1607 the acting of plays in the Colleges was
attended with serious disorders. The worst disturbance
was at King's, where the windows of the Hall were
* This is in obedience to Canons 16 and 23, q.v.
SOME ELIZABETHAN DIVINES 133
broken, a gate forced, and an uproar made " by multi-
tude of scholars and others, for the space of about two
hours together " (Cooper, " Ann., 11 iii. 24). But
windows were broken in Queens' too, for in the
accounts appears the entry : " Item for repairing th' hall
windowes after the plaies .... xlv 8 ." In conse-
quence of these disorders a decree, inflicting banishment
or suspension from degrees in the case of graduate
offenders, and " correction in the schools by the rod '
for rum adutii, was published by the Heads, among them
Dr. Tindall, who, if his signatures are given correctly,
never seemed quite to have made up his mind how to
spell his own names. George, fourth Earl of Hunting-
don, was entertained by the College in this year. His
visit was probably paid because his grandson Henry,
afterwards fifth Earl, was in residence at the time. His
Lordship's entertainment cost £4s 5s. 4*7. Two bene-
factions that deserve notice belong to this date, viz.,
those of Humphrey Davies and John Stoddart.
Humphrey Davies gave land to found a Fellowship an d
six scholarships. The College compounded with his
executors in 1630 for ,£250 instead of the land. The
money was paid by instalments, but, being in Dr.
Martin's hands, was sequestered by the Parliament in
1642 with Dr. Martin's own property, and so lost to
the College (see chap. vii.). John Stoddart, citizen and
grocer of London, founded a scholarship with a rent-
charge on " the Swan with Two Necks," Lad Lane,
London. Henry Hastings, Earl of Huntingdon, men-
tioned above, soon afterwards gave 102 volumes to the
Library, and Roger Manners, Earl of Rutland, gave two
sums (20 marks and £ 20) to the Library for buying
134 QUEENS' COLLEGE
books. Dr. Tindall himself, by his will, gave " all his
books in folio which were not in the Library, 1 " which
were 58 in number, as well as " the seeling and wayns-
coting of his chamber and lodging, 11 which he values at
<£250 more than he has received. This, as already
explained (p. 61) refers to the large extensions which
virtually completed the Lodge in his time. He died at
Ely, Oct. 12, 1614, and the lines at the foot of his
monument in the Cathedral are worth quoting :
" In presence, government, good actions and in birth,
Grave, wise, couragious, Noble, was this earth,
The poor, y e church, y e colledge saye here lyes
A friende, A Deane, A Maister, true, good, wise."
Hut this is not so quaint as the inscription to his
sister Ursula, who like him was buried in the Cathedral —
{Tyndall by birth.
Coxee by choice.
Upcher in age and for comfort.
Anno Aetatis 77.
A lady's reasons for contracting a second marriage in
mature years have not often been stated in such plain
unvarnished terms !
Dr. Tindall's death had been long expected, and the
question of his successor had been freely discussed.
The choice lay between John Davenant and George
Mountaigne. Seldom have two better qualified men
been proposed for the Headship of a College, and seldom
have their claims been more nicely balanced. John
Davenant was the son of a wealthy and well-connected
London merchant. He was admitted a pensioner of
Queens 1 College in 1587. He had an elder brother,
SOME ELIZABETHAN DIVINES 135
Edward, who is highly praised as a mathematician and
classical scholar, and " was a better Grecian than the
Bishop " (John). When a Fellowship was first offered
to Davenant his father would not allow him to accept it,
" as conceiving it a bending of these places from the
direct intent of the Founders, when they are bestowed
on such as have plenty." The father must have been a
high-minded and honourable man ; people did not often
show such conscientiousness in dealing with endowments.
However, on his father's death in 1597 he became a
Fellow. He had been Examiner, Greek lecturer and
Dean. According to the testimony of his nephew,
Thomas Fuller, the Church historian,
"Dr. Whitaker (then Regius Professor), hearing him
dispute, said that he would in time prove the honour of the
University. A prediction that proved not untrue; when
afterwards he was chosen Margaret Professor of Divinity
being as yet but a private Fellow of the College."
He was appointed Professor and became D.D. in
1609, when he was 36. For a short time before his
election as President he had held the College living of
Hockington (Oakington), and Fuller (quoted Searle,
p. 410) tells a delightful story of the future Bishop and
an Anabaptist who objected to pay tithes. George
Mountaigne, who was three years senior to Davenant,
was also well-born. He was elected Fellow in 1592, and
was praised for his acting in the Miles Gloriosus in the
College about the same time. He was a man of ability
and a highly attractive person. He was now Dean of
Westminster and " was often heard for to pi'ofesse, he
would rather be master of that College (Queens 1 ) than
136 QUEENS' COLLEGE
dean of Westminster." According to the story told by
Thomas Ball, the pupil and biographer of the famous
Puritan tutor of Queens', John Preston, Davenant owed
his election to Preston's energetic zeal on his behalf.
Preston was afraid of Mountaigne's Court influence,
especially his influence with Robert Carr, Viscount
Rochester, the ruling favourite. Accordingly he planned
to secure a free election. He posted horses along the,
road to London, and on the news of Dr. Tindall's death
rode off" in hot haste and addressed himself to Lord
Rochester on behalf of Dr. Davenant. Rochester,
ignorant that his chaplain, Mountaigne, coveted the post,
was favourable, and Preston returned and had the elec-
tion of Davenant made before Mountaigne had time to
move. The account, whatever truth there is in it, is
animated by a most manifest bias against Mountaigne,
to whom Ball is very unfair. Thus he states that Moun-
taigne had given a goodly piece of plate to the College
with the inscription sic incipio, but now in his anger
" vowed it should be sic desirta." But Mountaigne never
interrupted his friendly relations with the College : and
only four years later (1618) he founded two scholarships.
Nor did his failure on this occasion in any way interfere
with Mountaigne's singularly rapid promotion. He
became successively Bishop of Lincoln 1617, of London
1621, of Durham 1627, and finally in 1628, the year of
his death, Archbishop of York. It was a singular
accident that as Bishop of London it devolved upon
him to consecrate his former rival to the Bishopric of
Salisbury. But while Dr. Mountaigne's memory deserves
to be cleared from the unworthy aspersions of Ball, no
fault need be found with the result of the election. Dr.
SOME ELIZABETHAN DIVINES 137
Davenant proved as successful a President as he was a
learned divine. The College was never more prosperous
than during his eight years' rule with Preston as tutor.
And in balancing the claims of the two candidates for the
Presidentship, one cannot help feeling that John Davenant
would never have said to the King, when he was perplexed
about the filling of a bishopric, " Say unto this mountain,
Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the see.''''
When Prince Charles and the Elector Palatine had
visited Cambridge in 1613, Dr. Davenant had won high
praise as moderator in the disputations. "The best
Divine in my judgment 1-1 (says Hacket, Life of Williams)
" that ever was in that place, Dr. Davenant, held the
Bains of the Disputation. 1 ' And when King James,
accompanied by Prince Charles, came in 1615 the two
Divinity professors, Dr. Bichardson and Dr. Davenant,
disputed before his Majesty, with Bishop Harsnet,
the Vice-Chancellor, as moderator. Dr. Davenant had
to maintain the proposition that " the Pope has no
temporal power over kings, 11 and denied the Pope's
right to excommunicate kings. Dr. Bichardson ob-
jected and alleged the excommunication of Theodosius
by St. Ambrose. But on this the King angrily inter-
rupted that St. Ambrose had acted most arrogantly.
Dr. Bichardson bowed to the King's authority : " Re-
sponsum vere regium et Alexandro dignum. Hoc rum
est argumenta dissolvere sed dissecare " ; " and so sitting
down, he desisted from any farther dispute." But the
disputation in philosophy is still more famous. Matthew
Wren, of Pembroke, afterwards Bishop of Ely, was
respondent, and John Preston, of Queens 1 , was first
opponent. They had been chosen as the best talents
138 QUEENS' COLLEGE
in the University, and the subject had been happily
selected to suit the taste of a monarch who was equally
fond of hunting and of philosophy. The question was
" whether dogs could make syllogisms." Preston said
they could. "The major proposition in the mind of a
harrier is this : ' The hare is gon either this or that
way " : and with his nose he smells out the minor,
namely, ' She is not gon that way,' and follows the
conclusion, ' Ergo, this way,' with open mouth." Wren
objected and distinguished between "sagacity" and
" sapience." " Dogs especially in things of prey and
that did concern their belly might be nasuti, but not
logici." Preston was prepared with another syllogism,
when the moderator, Dr. Read, interposed ; but the
King was delighted; he intervened in person and
instanced the case of one of his own dogs that was right,
when all the rest had gone wrong, marked the place,
went after the others, and " by such yelling arguments
as they can best understand prevailed upon a party of
them to go along with him, 1 ' and so succeeded. What,
the King asked the moderator, could he have done better
himself ? He bade the poor moderator " think better
of his dogs, or not so highly of himself." Preston saw
his opportunity, and " desired leave to pursue the King's
game, which he had started, unto an issue; but the
answerer protested that his Majesties dogs were always
to be excepted, who hunted not by common law, but by
prerogative." This was a delightful piece of flattery,
which appealed directly to the King's foibles. But the
moderator had now recovered himself and was equally
adroit. He acknowledged that the King's dogs were-
able to outdo him and prayed his Majesty to
SOME ELIZABETHAN DIVINES 139
" consider how his illustrious influence had already ripened
and concocted all these Arguments and Understandings, that
whereas in the morning the reverend and grave Divines
could not make Syllogismes, the Lawyers could not, nor
the Physicians, now every Dog could, especially his
Majesties," "and the king went off well pleased with the
businesse " (Ball, "Life of Preston," 80-81).
Preston's name comes up again in connexion with
the performance of George Ruggle's celebrated play
" Ignoramus " before the King at Clare. The actors had
been chosen from the whole University, birth, good looks
and talent being considered, and amongst those selected
was Morgan, a pupil of Preston's, who had allotted to
him the'part of the heroine, Rosabella. Preston declined
to allow his pupil to take a woman's part, but the boy's
guardians overruled the objection and Morgan eventually
played the character. However, another member
of the College, Samuel Fairclough, held such strong
views on the subject of appearing in woman's clothes
that he took no part in the performance. The parts
were distributed thus : Ignoramus, Parkinson, of Clare ;
Theodorus, Hutchinson, of Clare ; Antonius, Holies
(afterwards Lord Holies), of Christ's ; Rosabella,
Morgan, of Queens' (killed at the first battle of
Newbury fighting for the King) ; Dorothea, Norfolk, of
Queens'; Surda and Vince, Compton (afterwards Earl
of Northampton), of Queens' ; Trico, Lake, of Clare
(afterwards Secretary of State); Dulman, Towers, of
Queens' (afterwards Bishop of Peterborough) ; Torcol,
Bargrave, of Clare (afterwards Dean of Canterbury);
Bannacar, Love (afterwards Master of Corpus). An
analysis of this famous piece with an account of the
140 QUEENS' COLLEGE
performance is given by Mr. Mullinger ("Univ. of
Camb.," ii. 528-542). It occasioned much comment that
some of the actors were in Orders, and a courtier, who
compares the King's receptions at Oxford and Cam-
bridge, alludes to this fact in the lines —
" Oxford had good Comedies, but not such benefactours ;
For Cambridge Bisshops whiflers had, and Preachers for
their actours." — (Cooper, "Ann.," iii. 82).
Preston had entered at King's, but not being an Eton
boy he migrated to Queens'. He is stated to have been
the pupil of Oliver Bowles, one of the best tutors of his
day, but Bowles seems to have left Queens' before the
man who was to be the tutor of the next period
entered the College (Searle, p. 397). It was only
after taking his degree that Preston became in any
way remarkable. Then his abilities became widely
known. Mr. Mullinger ("Univ. of Camb.," ii. 478-483)
narrates, how he who had before been careless of divinity
was touched and changed by the preaching of John
Cotton. Under Dr. Davenant, Preston was Dean and
Catechist as well as Tutor. His addresses in the Chapel,
like those of Bishop Andrewes at Pembroke, attracted
such crowds that it was found necessary to exclude all
who were not members of the College. As a tutor he
stood without a rival in popularity, and the number
of men who entered under him was very large. And
despite his Puritanical views many of his pupils were
men of family and fellow-commoners. Preston is so
conspicuous a figure in the Cambridge of that time that
it may be permitted to touch very briefly on some
incidents of his later career. Numerous as were his
SOME ELIZABETHAN DIVINES 141
pupils he kept a watchful eye on them all. His care is
illustrated by the story told of him how, when a
young fellow-commoner, Sir Capel Bedell, had fallen
in love with the daughter of Dr. Newcome, commissary
to the Bishop of Ely, Preston took a party of his
pupils, including the enamoured one, for a few days to
the country, and brought the party, without exciting
any suspicions, to Much Hadham, where Sir Arthur
Capel, the young gentleman's grandfather, lived. There
the secret entanglement was told to the grandfather ;
the young baronet remained at Much Hadham, and the
hopes of Dr. Newcome and his daughter were blighted.
But Dr. Newcome, who lived in St. Botolph's parish,
was avenged. Many who could not hear Preston in
Queens' College Chapel desired to hear him elsewhere.
He undertook to preach at St. Botolph's and a crowd
was assembled to hear him, when Dr. Newcome, as
Bishop's Commissary, forbade the sermon. The con-
gregation protested, but Dr. Newcome remained
inflexible and withdrew from the church with his
family. Rather than disappoint his audience Preston
defied the veto and preached " a very savoury and
holy sermon." Newcome hurried off' to the King, who
was at Newmarket, and goaded his Majesty to take
action. The King directed Bishop Andrewes to take
proceedings. Preston was summoned before the Heads
(among them Dr. Davenant), ordered to apologise to
Dr. Newcome, which he did, and to preach at St.
Botolph's another sermon, telling people that they
ought to attend their own parish churches and not
run gadding to sermons elsewhere. Whatever Preston
thought he did not show his feelings, but preached
142 QUEENS' COLLEGE
to the crowd, all agape for a sensation, a sermon on
growth in grace and prayer as a means to growth
in grace, which sent the most frivolous home in
serious mood (Fuller, "Univ. of Camb.," viii. 6).
They came to scoff and they stayed to pray. However,
Preston was debarred from preaching in Cambridge
without the express permission of the Vice-Chancellor,
although by Buckingham's influence he was restored
to the King's favour and made one of the Prince's
chaplains. But Preston was soon to be moved to
another College. Emmanuel was the Puritan College,
and Preston was in every way a man after the heart
of the Fellows of that College. Nothing could suit
them better than to have such a man as Preston for
Master. Their Master, Laurence Chaderton, was very
old, but still wonderfully vigorous. He lived to be nearly
103. Buckingham made Chaderton's retirement easy,
by pledging himself to provide for him, and gave
assurance that the King would welcome Preston's
election. Still, in spite of these assurances, the
Fellows of Emmanuel were very uneasy. The greatest
secrecy was observed, the very gates were kept locked,
until the election was safely over and Preston had been
chosen. Then he was escorted in procession by the
members of his old College to the foundation which
had chosen him as its Head, and Puritan Emmanuel
unbent to unwonted feasting and rejoicing.* This was
* Preston took some of his pupils with him to Emmanuel, among
them a Londoner, Chambers, a youth of ability. When wonder
was expressed how rooms would be found for these men in a College
already so full, "I remember," says Fuller ("Worthies, Northampton-
shire"), one said, "Master Preston will carry Chambers along with
him."
SOME ELIZABETHAN DIVINES 143
in 1622, and the date looks like a confirmation of the
theory that Preston's position at Queens' largely
depended on Davenant's strong support, and that when
Davenant became a Bishop, Preston was perhaps not
very anxious to be left without a protector in a place
where "the Fellows for the most part were not his
friends." One more contest and one more victory still
lay before Preston after his election at Emmanuel. His
admirers determined to secure his appointment as
lecturer at Trinity Church, and largely increased the
stipend of the office to make the post worthy of
his acceptance. Trinity Church was in the gift of the
Crown, and King James endeavoured to induce Preston
to withdraw. But Preston had the Duke of Bucking-
ham's support ; he stood his ground and eventually was
appointed to the lectureship, which he held till his,
death (1624-1628) (Fuller, " Univ. of Camb.," viii. 9).
To return to the history of Queens', Preston in his
pupil's phrase was "the greatest pupil-monger in
England," and under Dr. Davenant's rule the College
was highly prosperous. Increased numbers led to a
desire for increased accommodation. The site chosen
for building was N.E. of the Chapel on the ground
purchased from the Carmelites, hence the building is
described as being " in the Friars." These were the
buildings in the Walnut-Tree Court and the date was
1618. The cost, was defrayed by employing the ^OO
so irregularly obtained in 1598 by the sale of the estate
at Babraham, and by using i?100 given about the
year 1580 by John Joscelyn (formerly Fellow and Latin
Secretary to Archbishop Parker) to found a Hebrew
Lectureship —
144 QUEENS' COLLEGE
[" provided alwaies that ye stipend of 51. yeerly due unto
the Hebrew Lecturer, and also the yeerly rent . . . which
y e Land at Babram would have yeelded unto y e Colledg,
bee payed out of the chamber-rents of the sayd building ;
untill such time as y 6 Colledg shall purchase land of equall
valor to yt which was sould away."]
Other smaller sums, rent-fines, wood-sales, &c, make
up £714 7*. lOd. The total cost of the building was
=£886 9*. The balance of £119, 1*. M. was repaid to
Dr. Davenant ; £TZ Is. 2d. " out of the focalia bill " ;
^100 in 1622. (See Searle, pp. 437-438.)
"The date 1 6 17, inscribed on the East front, probably
denotes the year in which the first stone was laid. The
final payment to the architects, dated March 9, 1618, is
signed by them, so that we learn that they were Gilbert
Wigge and Henry Mann. The former had been employed
on the second court of St. John's College in 1602. . . . The
work occupied rather less than two years. The building is
a stack of brick chambers 106 feet in length. ... It was
built originally in two storeys, and a half storey with small
garrets above, as shown in Loggan's print ; and it had four
chambers on a floor. Having suffered from a fire it was
partially rebuilt between 1778 and 1782, upon which
occasion the gablets were removed, and the upper storey
added" (Willis and Clark, ii. 19-20).
In 1823 the building was re-roofed, the walls re-
paired and embattled parapets raised on each side, under
the direction of Mr. Woods, Clerk of the Works at
Downing. Mr. J. W. Clark has shown that there
were three studies in each of these chambers, so that
when there were sixteen sets of rooms they accommo-
dated forty-eight men.
SOME ELIZABETHAN DIVINES 145
In the same year 1618 Dr. Davenant had a memorable
experience. He was one of the divines sent by the King
to the Synod of Dort as deputies from the English
Church. His colleagues were Dr. Carleton (afterwards
Bishop of Llandaff and of Chichester) the one Oxford
man among the deputies, Dr. Samuel Ward, Master of
Sidney, and Dr. Joseph Hale (afterwards Bishop of
Norwich), whose place was taken later by Thomas
Goade of King's, while Walter Balcanqual of Pembroke
came to represent the Church of Scotland. Drs. Dave-
nant and Ward attended before the King at Royston on
Oct. 8 and received his Majesty's instructions. The
Synod lasted from Nov. 3rd 1618 till April 29th 1619.
Its proceedings were chiefly remarkable for the arrogance
of the dominant party and the unfairness with which
the Remonstrants were treated. The English deputies
remained unshaken in their Calvinism, but the whole
tone and tenor of the Synod helped on the reaction
against the prevailing tenets of the day. After a tour
through the Low Provinces the Englishmen returned
home. The King, "after courteously entertaining of
them, favourably dismissed them," and " they returned
to their several professions. 1 ' . . . "Dr. Davenant,
besides his Collegiate care, to his constant Lectures in
the Schools" (Fuller, " Church Hist.," xv. 4). Edward
Davenant, Fellow of Queens', accompanied his uncle to
Holland : leave of absence was granted him by the
College " and all his allowances till his return, as yf hee
wer at home." This College order is dated Oct. 6th
1618 and initialled J. D. (Searle, p. 413).
In 1621 Dr. Davenant was nominated to the See of
Salisbury. His promotion was due to the warm recom-
146 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
mendations of Dr. John Williams, then Dean of West-
minster, afterwards Bishop of Lincoln and Lord Keeper.
Williams had learnt to value and admire Davenant at
Cambridge, and " being warm in favour " now secured
his advancement. " Twelve years he had been Public
Reader in Cambridge, and had adorn'd the Place with
much Learning, as no Professor in Europe did better
deserve to receive the labourer's Peny at the twelfth
Hour of the Day " (Hacket, " Life of Williams "). A
curious circumstance in connexion with the appointment
was that Davenant succeeded his brother-in-law at Salis-
bury. Robert Toulnesonne or Townson, whose name
stood next to Davenant's on the list of Fellows at
Queens', was the son of the under-cook of the College.
He married Davenant's sister, was chaplain to the King
and Dean of Westminster 1617-1620, when he became
Bishop of Salisbury. But he held the See less than a
year and died leaving a widow and fifteen children. It
was perhaps with this fact in his mind that the King
charged Davenant (as he is said by Camden and Wood
to have done) " not to marry." His widowed sister lived
with the Bishop till her death in 1634 and, according
to one unkind and perhaps untrue authority, " Bishop
Davenant being invested married all his nieces to clergie-
men, so he was at no expence for their preferment."
From this point the career of Bishop Davenant does not
belong to the history of the College. It remains only
to note that he was a great benefactor to the foundation.
In 1626 he gave ,£100 for the Library, with which 130
volumes were purchased : in 1 637 he gave a rent-charge
on an estate in Sheppey to maintain two scholars and
pay £10 a year to the Library, and the two livings of
SOME ELIZABETHAN DIVINES 147
Cheverel Magna (afterwards exchanged for Seagrave)
and Newton Toney, Wiltshire. In learning and in
character Bishop Davenant stands high above most of
his compeers, and even those who differed widely from
him speak of him with profound admiration and respect-
The general feeling entertained for him is shown by the
extracts from Allport's Life quoted by Mr. Searle, pp.
427-428. A Life of Bishop Davenant has recently been
published by Mr. Morris Fuller, a member of the
College who is descended both from Bishop Davenant
and Thomas Fuller the historian. As a sample of the
emoluments received at this time, the year 1621-22 may
be taken. In that year the President received £5, i.e.,
half a fellowship as stipend and ,£10 for commons,
four Fellows received £10 in full, ten received £9, the
other five sums ranging down to £5 8s. 8d., deductions
being made for absence from College. £14 is allocated
to the President and Fellows " for laundress and barber "
(" Magn. Journ.," vi. 2).
It was Bishop Davenant's wish that Dr. Ward should
succeed him as Lady Margaret's Professor, and the wish
was gratified by Dr. Ward's appointment Feb. 23rd,
1622. There were persons who wished Preston to get
the Professorship, and, though the Bishop did not share
this wish, he appears to have desired Preston to succeed
him as President, and, finding that Preston would not
be elected, to have contemplated retaining the Master-
ship with the Bishopric. However he resigned his
office as President April 22nd, 1622. The accounts
contain the entries " For a dinner bestowed on my Lord
of Sarisberie at his departure . . . £5 15,v. 3d., For a
paire of gloves bestowed on him ... £1 18s. Od." It
148 QUEENS' COLLEGE
had been supposed, when Davenant was made a Bishop,
that Dr. Balcanqual of Pembroke, who had been with
Davenant to the Synod of Dort and afterwards proved
himself a staunch royalist, would be the new President,
but the King did not prevent a free election and the
choice of the body fell on Dr. Mansell. JohnMansell,
a member of a family that " came in with the Con-
queror," was elected Fellow in 1600, was in residence
and held various Cojlege offices 1604-1617, when he
appears to have vacated his Fellowship. Mansell was
Vice-Chancellor (1624-1625) when James I. came to
Cambridge for the last time in Dec. 1624. Prince
Charles accompanied the King, and the Ambassadors of
the French King obtained at Cambridge the ratification
of the marriage contract between the Prince and
Henrietta Maria. The distinguished visitors were
entertained with the usual disputations, and during the
King's stay " in an extraordinary commencement many
(but ordinary) persons were graduated doctors in
divinity and other faculties " (Fuller, " Univ. of Camb.,"
viii. 11). The most exciting event of Dr. Mansell's
tenure of the Presidentship was the contested election
for the Chancellorship in 1626. The Duke of Bucking-
ham, who was then under impeachment by the House
of Commons, was the Court candidate, but many
members of the Senate, not liking the interference of the
Court, resolved to support the Earl of Berkshire, the
son of the late Chancellor. Among those who were most
active in canvassing for the Duke was Dr. Mountaigne,
now Bishop of London, but he " found his own College
most bent and resolved another way to his no small dis-
contentment." In the end the Duke was elected by
SOME ELIZABETHAN DIVINES 149
108 votes to 106, Dr. Mansell and two Fellows of
Queens' supported the Duke, but the majority of the
Fellows, including Edward Martin, went against him.
The Duke was as pleased as the House of Commons
was displeased at this election. The House resolved to
send a letter to the University to signify then- dislike
of the election " and require them to send some to the
House to inform them." But the King signified his
pleasure that the letter should not be sent, and in
answer to a representation from the House replied that
" concerning the Election itself his Majesty is far from
conceiving it a Grievance: for he never heard that
Crimes objected were to be taken as proved ; or that
a Man should lose his Fame or good Opinion in the
World, upon an Accusation only." The dissolution of
Parliament stopped further discussion. The Duke
visited Cambridge, and showed himself ready to become
a great benefactor to the University, especially to the
library, but Felton's dagger ended his life and his
Chancellorship Aug. 23rd, 1628.
In Feb. 1628 Thomas Edwards, M.A., late of Queens',
was charged before the Vice-Chancellor with having in
a sermon at St. Andrew's Church preached against
obedience to superiors. He recommended that in cases
of doubt earthly superiors, as tutors, husbands, masters,
should not be consulted but " a man in whom the
Spirit of God dwells." He explained that he meant
only that they should not be obeyed, if they advised
contrary to the word of God. He was ordered to repeat
this explanation in St. Andrew's and to send in a certifi-
cate that he had done so. This Thomas Edwards was
afterwards a well-known Puritan divine and author of
150 QUEENS' COLLEGE
Gangraena. Fuller, who knew him very well, says that
he " was often transported beyond due bounds with the
keenness and eagerness of his spirit ; and therefore I have
just cause in some things to suspect him. 1 ' But Fuller
himself is the most interesting person who belonged to
Queens' at this time. The nephew of Bishop Davenant,
he was admitted Pensioner in 1621 and took his M.A.
in 1628 when he was 20. His uncle naturally hoped
that he would get a Fellowship at Queens', and the
President held out some hopes that he would do so.
But, although no less than seven Fellows were elected
just before Michaelmas 1628, Fuller was not one of them.
So, in consequence of the friendship of Bishop Davenant
with Dr. Ward, Fuller migrated to Sidney in 1629,
"that he might be conveniently placed for the con-
tinuance of his studies, till he should be otherwise
disposed of."
Three famous members of the College died at this
time, viz., Sir Edward Villiers, half-brother to the first
Duke of Buckingham, James I.'s favourite, Ambassador
to Bohemia, President of Munster ; Thomas Middleton,
the dramatist ; and James Ley, Baron Ley, Lord
Treasurer. (See Searle, p. 459.) Another famous member
of the College, Dr. Henry Butts, Master of Corpus,
shewed heroic courage during the terrible plague which
visited Cambridge in 1630. He was twice re-elected
Vice-Chancellor in consequence. But when the King
and Queen visited the University in 1632 — on which
occasion the "Rival Friends," by Peter Hausted of Queens',
author of Senile Odium, was performed before their
Majesties — poor Dr. Butts' mind became unhinged by
the excitement and he was found hanged in his chamber
SOME ELIZABETHAN DIVINES 151
on Easter Day. Seldom has an honourable and useful
life ended so sadly and tragically. On April 17th, 1630,
" The Colledge broke up, so did the University, to avoid
the infection of the plague dangerously spred in the
towne. It was then agreed that fellows should have
their whole allowance, during the time of the dissolution,
whether they were absent or present," and on Oct. 29th
this grant for absence was continued till the Audit (Old
Parchment Register, Searle, p. 461). In July 1630 the
sum of 2s. was expended on " pitch, tarr &c. to air the
Officers and Schollars Chambers.'" Dr. Mansell died
Oct. 7th, 1631. He left a widow and a daughter.
There is an enactment, that comes up repeatedly at
this period, which is strange according to modern notions.
Thus Dec. 19th, 1625, the Vice-Chancellor and Heads
made a decree, reciting that, contrary to the ancient
statutes of the University and Colleges, boys and men,
ignorant of letters and altogether unapt to make any
progress in the studies of the University ; and women
besides had crept within the college walls, to do those
works which used to be done by. indigent students to
help to bear their charges, from whence great damage
had accrued to poor scholars and scandal to the Uni-
versity at home and obloquy abroad. To check these
evils it was decreed that no boys or men ignorant of
letters should be permitted in the Colleges, unless they
were College servants or private servants who only do
their own master's work : that no woman shall be
allowed to enter except as a sick -nurse or a laundress,
and even then the age is specified and the number
limited. (Cooper, "Ann.,'" iii. 182.) During the
plague of 1630 Mr. Mead writing from Christ's says,
152 QUEENS' COLLEGE
" We have taken three women into our Colledge . . ,
Two are Bedmakers, one a Laundresse. I hope the next
Parlement will include us in y r generall Pardon."
Evidently " the poor scholar,'" who " valeted " his
well-to-do comrade, was considered to be in danger of
being ousted by men and women from the town. The
Heads were anxious to preserve " the poor scholar " from
extinction, and by strictly limiting the amount of menial
service employed from outside the College took pains to
preserve for the " poor scholar " the slender emoluments
which he enjoyed. The porter, the cook, the steward
" were all alike on the foundation and generally recruited
from the subsizars " (Mullinger, ii. 399). At Queens 1
College an order was passed Sept. 17th, 1636, " that the
Beere Butler shall bee henceforward always a schollar of
this Colledge, to continue in that place upon his good
behaviour till hee bee M r . of Arts, or have time for that
degree, and not longer " (Old Parch. Reg. 130).
CHAPTER VII
THE ROYALIST PRESIDENT
" Such as do build their faith upon
The holy text of pike and gun ;
Decide all controversies by
Infallible artillery ;
And prove their doctrine orthodox
By apostolic blows and knocks."
Butler, Hudibras, i. i.
President: Edward Martin, 1631-1662 : Herbert Palmer intruded
1644- 1647 ; Thomas Horton intruded 1647-1660.
On Dr. Mansell's death Edward Martin was elected
seventeenth President of Queens 1 College, October 16th,
1631. His whole-hearted loyalty to the Church of
England and to the King, with the sufferings which his
devotion entailed upon him in the troubled years of
the Civil War and the Commonwealth, makes him a
romantic figure. Little is known of the first part of
his life. He appears to have been a member of a
family of scholars from Lloyd's statement (" Memoires, 11
p. 461), "that he had six ancestors in a direct line
learned before him, and six libraries bequeathed to him, 11
to have belonged to a Cambridge family, and to have
been about fifty when he was elected President. He
entered the College in 1605 as a sizar, held a scholar-
154 QUEENS' COLLEGE
ship 1608-9, took the M.A. degree 1612 and was
admitted Fellow 1617. For the next ten or eleven
years he was busily employed in College work and
held the living of Hockington (Oakington) 1625-30,
when he was preferred to Conington. From 1628-31
he held an appointment, which perhaps shows that
the views he entertained in later life were fully de-
veloped at this date and which certainly tended to
confirm him in his opinions, viz., the post of Chaplain
to William Laud, first as Bishop of Bath and Wells,
then as Bishop of London. The Archbishop of Can-
terbury and the Bishop of London licensed books to
be printed, and their Chaplains examined works intended
for the press. In his capacity of Chaplain to the
Bishop of London, Martin in 1630 licensed a book
entitled "An Historicall Narration of the Judgment of
some most Learned and Godly English Bishops, Holy
Martyrs and others, concerning God's election and the
Merits of Christ's death." The purpose of this book
was to prove that the Reformers were Arminians and
that Arminianism was the doctrine of the Church of
England. The book gave great offence, and the
notorious Prynne in particular took pains to make
Bishop Laud acquainted with the history of the
treatise and to get the work withdrawn. Failing to
move Laud, Prynne procured the suppression of the
book by the Archbishop Abbot. Bishop Laud ad-
mitted to the Primate that his Chaplain had done ill
to license the book, but said that "he had given him
such a ratling for his paines, that he would warrant
His Grace he should never meddle with Arminian
Books or Opinions more." This the Archbishop re-
THE ROYALIST PRESIDENT 155
ported to Prynne, but Prynne was dissatisfied. He
said that Martin had preached Arminianism at St.
Paul's Cross, and that, whereas he should be censured
by the High Commission, he was promoted by the
Bishop to a great living and to the headship of
Queens' College. The great living was the Rectory of
Uppingham, to which Martin was instituted October
18th, 1631. If any influence was required, no doubt
Bishop Laud could easily have induced the King to
nominate his Chaplain for election to be President.
However, he was unanimously elected, and there is only
Prynne's unsupported statement that 'the choice was
due to Bishop Laud's influence.
The new President took the D.D. degree by royal
mandate in March 1632, when the King and Queen
visited Cambridge. Some of the persons recommended
for degrees were unsatisfactory to the University, and
the Vice-Chancellor Dr. Butts is accused of having
earned some degrees — Dr. Martin's in particular —
" with much disorder and violence." But this rests on
the statement of Sir Simonds D'Ewes, who is as unfair
to men of Anglican views as Prynne himself. (See
Searle, pp. 466-469.) On the occasion of the royal
visit two plays were acted, " The Rival Friends " by
Peter Hausted of Queens' and " The Jealous Lovers "
by Thomas Randolph of Trinity. Although by Dr.
Butts' influence precedence was given to Hausted's play,
Randolph's was far the more successful, and the failure
of " The Rival Friends " was one of the causes which
contributed to Dr. Butts' derangement. But amongst
those who acted in Hausted's comedy was John Pearson,
son of Robert Pearson, a former Fellow of Queens', who
156 QUEENS' COLLEGE
was admitted sizar June 10th, 1631, but just after this,
March 28th, 1632, migrated as scholar to King's
(Searle, p. 509). This was the illustrious Bishop of
Chester, " Pearson on the Creed." It is something that
so great a name should have adorned the boards of the
College, even though, as in the case of Whitgift and
Fuller, other foundations can lay claim to a share in the
glory reflected by Pearson's sober judgment and vast
learning upon Cambridge and the Church of England.
Hausted was Dr. Martin's Curate at Uppingham and
brought trouble upon himself and annoyance upon his
Rector by a sermon preached before the University in
1634. His object appears to have been to inculcate a
reverent and orderly service, but he foolishly attacked
other nations, notably the Dutch, as too slovenly. In
consequence he was stopped, brought before the Vice-
Chancel lor and suspended from preaching before the
University. The facts of the case are set forth in a
letter of Dr. Martin's to William Bray, Chaplain to
Laud, now Archbishop (Searle, pp. 511-512).
Laud, as Archbishop, wished to visit the University.
The question of his jurisdiction was raised, and the
Heads, except Drs. Beale, Martin and Sterne, the three
royalist sufferers of the Civil War, submitted to the
Archbishop that the University was " exempt from the
metropolitical jurisdiction and visitation of the See of
Canterbury." Oxford also questioned the Archbishop's
right, and the matter was referred to the King in
Council, who after hearing counsel for the Universities
and the Primate determined in favour of the Arch-
bishop's claim (Cooper, " Ann.," iii. 276). The visita-
tion never took place, but in preparation for it a paper
THE ROYALIST PRESIDENT 157
was forwarded to the Archbishop and endorsed by him
" Certain Disorders in Cambridge to be considered of in
my visitation," which is supposed to have been drawn
up by Dr. Cosin, Master of Peterhouse, or Dr. Sterne,
Master of Jesus. The paper enumerates "Common
Disorders in the University'" and "Speciall Disorders
in y c Church and Chappelles " : it ends " in the other
Colleges, St. Joh. Qu. Pet. Pemb. & Jes. they endeavor
for order and have brought it to some good passe. Yet
here for Apparel and fasting night suppers are they
faultie still, which with any other thinge amisse will be
willingly represented " (Cooper, " Ann.," iii. 283). The
Colleges, which thus are noted as being better than
the rest, are those where the known principles of the
Masters would strive for " decency and order."
When Sylvester Adams, Fellow of Peterhouse, was
brought up in 1637 for a sermon before the University,
in which he maintained the necessity of confession to a
priest, Dr. Martin was one of the Heads who saw no
need of insisting on a recantation. There were several
meetings, and in the end there was a slight majority
against the sermon, but no recantation seems to have
been made. Anthony Sparrow, of Queens', afterwards
Bishop of Exeter and of Norwich, also justified the con-
fession of sins to priests. Being impugned for this by
the Vice-Chancellor, he went to London and got his
sermon licensed by the Archbishop's Chaplains and
printed. " He hereupon returned in triumph to Cam-
bridge, to the great griefe and discouragement of the
Protestant, but extraordinary encouragement of the
Popish party there." This is Prynne's version, but
another account is that the sermon was printed " at
158 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
the request of the Vice-Chancellor and Heads " (Cooper,
" Ann.," iii. 288).
The whole " High Church " movement in the Uni-
versity was intensely distasteful to the Roundhead
party. The changes which had been made, such as
placing the Holy Table close to the east end of churches
and chapels, engaged the attention of both the Short
and the Long Parliaments. It was definitely ordered in
April 1641 that no students should be forced to sub-
scribe to Canon 36, and in September of the same year the
House of Commons made orders that the Colleges should
remove the Communion Tables from the east end of
their Chapels, should take away their rails and level the
chancels. They were to remove all crucifixes, " scandalous
pictures 11 of any of the persons of the Trinity or of the
Virgin, to abolish all basins, tapers and candlesticks
from the Tables, and to give up bowing at the name of
Jesus and turning towards the East. In these orders it
is easy to see the intense Puritan spirit which brought
Archbishop Laud to the scaffold. When the Primate
was put upon his trial, one of the charges made against
him was of having countenanced superstitious obser-
vances and practices in the University, and among the
witnesses called to prove this against him was the
learned John Wallis, afterwards Fellow of Queens' and
Savilian Professor of Geometry at Oxford, who deposed
that the "innovations 1 ' were "brought in since the
Archbishop's time by means of Byshop Wren, Doctor
Cosins, Dr. Martin and others, all Canterburies
great favorites " (Cooper, " Ann.," iii. 289). At the
moment when the orders of Parliament were issued, the
Royalists in Cambridge were strong enough to disregard
THE ROYALIST PRESIDENT 159
them, but events were marching on apace, the seizure of
the five members in Jan. 1642 made the Civil War
inevitable, and days of terrible trial and distress were in
store for the Cambridge Colleges. It would seem that
coming events had cast their shadows before. The
entries during the preceding years had steadily fallen off
and the number of residents had seriously diminished.
We have seen that in 1621 the members of Queens 1
College numbered two hundred and thirty. In 1641 a
poll tax was assessed on the Colleges : the numbers at
Queens' had fallen to one hundred and twenty-four and
the total of the University to two thousand and ninety-
one (Cooper, " Ann., 1 ' iii. 315).
The " Associated Counties," of which the town of
Cambridge was the headquarters, exercised so powerful
an influence on the issue of the Civil War, that the
University is commonly lost sight of in the Parlia-
mentarianism of East Anglia as a whole, and it is
erroneously supposed that Cambridge was far less loyal
than was actually the case. The position of the Uni-
versity and the prevalent feelings of the Eastern Counties
have been carefully described by Mr. Kingston in his
most interesting volume "East Anglia and the Great
Civil War. 1 ' As Mr. Kingston shows, Cambridge was
quite as loyal to the King as Oxford. But the two
Universities were very differently situated. " Oxford
was the Mecca of the Royalists and Cambridge the head-
quarters of the Associated Counties." The side taken
by the Eastern Counties generally in the war is to be
explained mainly by two considerations. In the first
place a fervent Puritanism prevailed. In the second
place there were comparatively few great families, con-
160 QUEENS' COLLEGE
nected with the Court and influencing their followers
and dependants, resident in that part of the country.
And Cambridgeshire in particular has never boasted a
long list of great county families, such for instance as
Hertfordshire has always been able to show. Of the
gentry too not a few were Parliamentarians. Such
names as Cromwell, Manchester, Montague, Desborough,
Sir Dudley North, Sir Samuel Luke (" Hudibras"),
represented some of the best blood of the Eastern
Counties. There was blood as good on the other side.
But the Royalists were quite outnumbered, and there-
fore for the most part unable to move. When an
opportunity presented itself, they were ready enough to
shew themselves, for example Lord Capel (a Queens'
man, Preston's pupil Sir Arthur Capel), Sir C. Lucas
and Sir G. Lisle at Colchester. It is a mistake to
suppose that the leaders of East Anglia all fought
a outrance in the spirit of Cromwell. They were for
the most part " Moderates," to the last they respected
the person of the King, and their object was to reform
religion rather than government. Such was the intruded
President, Herbert Palmer, who was a well-born gentle-
man. Altogether the Eastern Counties viewed the
struggle, mainly if not entirely, from a religious stand-
point. What roused them was the " No Popery " cry :
the Ship-money excited little real discontent. It will
be seen that the University was unfortunately placed.
The town of Cambridge was stragetically important. It
commanded the Eastern Counties and was the advanced
post of the Parliament, and as such it was strongly
garrisoned and fortified. " Committees " were constantly
sitting, a watchful eye was kept upon the Royalist
THE ROYALIST PRESIDENT 161
gownsmen, and they were kept down with a strong hand
from the first.
To return from these considerations to the course of
events, on March 12th, 1642, the young Prince, after-
wards Charles II., was received by the University with
such enthusiasm, that two days later (March 14th) the
King, "then departing from the Parliament," 1 paid a
flying visit with the Prince on his way from Newmarket
to Huntingdon. The University received him with
such vehement acclamation as more than compensated
any lack of enthusiasm in the county and the town.
On parting the King promised the Vice-Chancellor :
" Mr. Vice-Chancellor, whatsoever becomes of me, I will
charge my sonne upon my blessing to respect the Uni-
versity. 11 When the University Printer, Roger Daniel,
issued the King's Proclamation of Array, the Parlia-
ment sent down the University members to see that its
own Proclamations were read, charging them to procure
certificates from the Heads of Colleges of the reading of
the same (Cooper, " Ann.," iii. 325). One of the clergy
who refused to read the Parliament's Proclamation was
Daniel Chandler, of Oakington. When he came to the
words " the House of Commons " he threw the paper
away, " What have I to do with the House of Com-
mons ? " and hastened off to join the King. When the
King wrote from York, in June 1642, asking for contri-
butions for his defence against the Parliament, which he
would repay with 8 per cent, interest, " as soon as it
should please God to settle the distractions of the King-
dom," Dr. Martin was foremost in furthering the King's
cause. Dr. Martin himself lent £100 and ten of the
Fellows (amongst them Sparrow, the future President
162 QUEENS' COLLEGE
and Bishop) £85, a very large sum, as will appear when
it is considered that St. John's, with the royalist Dr.
Beale as its Head, sent no more than £150. In July
1642 the King asked for the College Plate, promising
to return the Plate or its value when the troubles were
ended. Queens' College, " by the unanimous act and
consent of Master and Fellows," promptly packed and
despatched the Plate, sending in all 591 ounces of gilt
plate and 923 ounces of white plate. The complete list
will be found in Searle, pp. 518-520: some of the most in-
teresting items of the articles of gilt plate are Dr. Perne's
bowl with a cover, Bishop Jegon's bowl with a cover,
the Earl of Huntingdon's bowl with a cover, Dean
Tindall's tankard, the Earl of Lincoln's bowl with a
cover weighing 109 ounces. Of the white plate John
Mansell's four pots, Bishop Mountaigne's Poculum
Caritatis, Thomas, John and William Cromwell's flagon,
Arthur Capel's and Thomas Fairfax's (grandfather of
the Parliamentary Commander) tankards, and Bishop
Chaderton's bowl. Other Colleges sent their plate about
the same time : and, although Cromwell, member for
Cambridge, and his brother-in-law Walton, member for
Huntingdon, lay in ambush near Lolworth to intercept
the plate, the greater part of it was conveyed in safety
to the King at Nottingham. Part, however, was seized
by Cromwell and its value is stated at £20,000, but, as
the portion which reached the King and which consti-
tuted the larger part of what was sent, is valued at
£8,000 or £10,000, the amount cut off by Cromwell
must have been exaggerated. It is curious " to picture
the grim Oliver lying in ambush with his disorderly
band of peasants on foot" to catch the flagon presented
THE ROYALIST PRESIDENT 163
by his forbears " Thomas, John and William Cromwell,"
and there can be little doubt that, had it been possible
to consult those gentlemen on the subject, they would
have greatly preferred that their flagon should go to the
King rather than come into the hands of their rebel
kinsman. But Cromwell was wonderfully active at this
crisis. He seized the Castle : the town was committed
to his charge (Aug. 17th, 1642) in conjunction with the
Mayor and three Aldermen, with power " to disarm all
Popish Recusants, and all other dangerous and ill-
affected Persons, who have opposed the Orders and Pro-
ceedings of Parliament, or endeavoured to oppress the
People, by the Commission of Array, or otherwise' 1
(Cooper, "Ann.," iii. 331).
In all the Royalist efforts of the Colleges the Heads
of Queens 1 , St. John's and Jesus, Drs. Martin, Beale, and
Sterne, had been prominent. And together with Bishop
Wren they attempted to execute the King's Commission
of Array. Accordingly they were seized by Cromwell
on Aug. 30. They were treated
"with all possible scorn and contempt, especially Cromwell
behaving himselfe most insolently towards them, and when
one of the Doctors made it a request to Cromwell, that he
might stay a little to put up some linnen, Cromwell denyed
him the favour ; and whether in a jeere, or simple malice
told him, that it was not in his commission."
This was an ominous beginning, and what followed
was of a piece with it. It was ordered that the Bishop
of Ely and the three Doctors should be conveyed to
Blackwall, and from thence by water to the Tower of
London. The three Heads, tied on their horses, were
164 QUEENS' COLLEGE
paraded through the villages which they passed, the
people being called out to abuse and revile them. They
were not taken by water, but "led captive through
Bartholomew Faire and so as farre as Temple Barre,"
suffering every possible insult and indignity on the way.
The Archbishop was already in the Tower, but the
Bishop of Ely and the Cambridge Heads were debarred
from seeing or speaking to him. After some days con-
finement the three Heads petition that, as they are
forced by their imprisonment " to neglect both their
owne private affaires and the publique dutyes of their
severall places'" and are put to ruinous expenses,
" they shall be released upon their bonds to appear
whenever called for." Their appeal was referred to the
Committee for the safety of the Kingdom (Sept. 20th) ;
no reasons were stated for their committal, although
they petitioned for such statement (Sept. 27th); and
their position was aggravated by the order "that all
Malignants and Delinquents that were sent for should
bear their own charges'''' (Dec. 2nd). On Dec. 26th a
petition was read from the three Colleges, representing
the injury suffered by them in the long detention of
their Heads and urging that the presence of their
Masters in Cambridge was specially necessary at that
season for the Audit, the choice of Scholars and
officers and other important business. This also was
referred to the Committee for the Safety of the King-
dom, and nothing was done for the prisoners, until on
Jan. 11th, 1643, Sir Philip Stapleton, who had been
Martin's pupil at Queens 1 , procured that they should be
transferred to Lord Petre's house in Aldersgate Street.
Before they were transferred they had to pay the officers
THE ROYALIST PRESIDENT 165
of the Tower £80 a-piece, and were thought to have got
off cheaply. At Lord Petre's house they were kept
several months. They could obtain neither trial nor
release, " unlesse to free their bodies they should ensnare
their souls by loanes of money to be imployed against
the King, or take impious Oathes or Covenants.'"
On April 1st, 1643, was passed the Ordinance for
sequestering the estates of "malignant" clergy and
Dr. Martin's private property was seized, together with
the £250 received by him for the College from the
executors of Humphrey Davies (p. 133). In Aug. 1643 the
unfortunate Masters were put on board a small coal-ship
at Wapping, and confined under hatches with three or
fourscore persons of quality, so that many succumbed to
the ill-treatment. The survivors it was proposed to
sell as slaves to Algiers or the West Indies ! This
would be thought incredible were not the evidence clear.
Calamy indeed treats the statement as a fiction and
advises Walker to expunge the statement from the
"Sufferings,' 1 but the passage quoted by Mr. Searle
(p. 485) from Vicars' " Jehovah-Jireh or God in the
Mount " " renders the barbarous actions above related
less improbable." Finally, after eight days in this
" Little Ease," Dr. Martin was with others transferred
' to the Bishop of Ely's house at Holborn, where he
remained a prisoner for five years.
Meanwhile, outside his prison, the President's enemies
were active against him. In pursuance of the powers
granted to Cromwell against Popish recusants and
malignants, spoilers were at work. The University
complained that " certain men had commenced to
sequestrate the libraries and goods of some of the
166 QUEENS' COLLEGE
masters, 1 ' and, although on the representation of the
Earl of Holland, Chancellor of the University, Parlia-
ment ordered, March 4th, 1643, that no outrage or
violence should be offered to the Colleges or their
members, property was pillaged and libraries plundered.
Apparently Dr. Martin's library was taken at this time.
All his preferments were likewise stripped from him.
He figures in the " First century of Scandalous Malig-
nant priests " : his views are misrepresented and his
aims grossly distorted. (See Searle, p. 487.) On March
13th, 1643, he was removed by the Earl of Manchester
from the Presidentship "for opposing the proceedings
of Parlyament and other scandalous acts in the Uni-
versity of Cambridge," a form which afforded some
amusement to the sufferers, "as tho' Opposing had
referred to other Scandalous Acts as well as to the
Proceedings of Parliament." Dr. Martin was a deter-
mined Royalist and a strong High Churchman, but it is
hardly necessary to say that there was nothing
" scandalous " in his life and actions. He was a high-
minded man of strict life and unselfish aims, who would
fain see others living as he lived himself.
Dr. Beale after this got exchanged and joined the
King at Oxford, but Dr. Martin and Dr. Sterne remained
in durance. Dr. Martin appears to have been sum-
moned, by the Archbishop's request, to give evidence
about the licensing of the u Historicall Narration," the
circumstances of which the Primate himself was unable
to recall. Archbishop ■ Laud asked that Drs. Martin,
Haywood and Sterne should be allowed to attend him
before his execution ; this was refused, but in the end
Dr. Sterne was permitted to go accompanied by Stephen
THE ROYALIST PRESIDENT 167
Marshall and Herbert Palmer. Thus Archbishop Laud
asked for the Royalist President of Queens 1 and got the
intruded Parliamentarian in his stead. When Ely
House was given up to wounded soldiers, Dr. Martin
was to have been sent to the Marshalsea, but again his
old pupil, Sir Philip Stapleton, contrived to arrange
that with Dr. Sterne he should be returned to Lord
Pete's, where he continued to the end of his captivity.
He drew up a clever but sarcastic petition, unfortunately
too long to be quoted here, in June 1647, which he
begged the Earl of Manchester to present to the Lords
(Searle, pp. 496-503). Shortly afterwards Drs. Martin
and Sterne were brought before the Committee of the
House of Commons for Prisoners. Dr. Sterne was
released on bail, but Dr. Martin remained in confine-
ment, until he escaped by the help of Mr. Welden, a
sequestered Leicestershire parson. This was about
Aug. 1648, and for nearly two years he lived in disguise
under the name of Matthews, at Thorington, Suffolk,
with Henry Coke, a younger son of Sir Edward Coke,
who had been a fellow-commoner at Queens'. In 1650
he was captured by some soldiers from Yarmouth, taken
to London and committed prisoner to the Gate-house,
Westminster, by Bradshaw, President of the Council.
During Bradshaw's absence, by means of Colonel Walton,
a member of the Council, he was released, and returning
into Suffolk, remained there under his own name until
he went beyond sea. He lived for the most part at
Lord Hatton's house in Paris for seven or eight years
before the Restoration. He was distinguished during
,this time of exile for his unshaken fidelity to the Church
of England. He would join neither Calvinists nor
168 QUEENS' COLLEGE
Papists, but consorted with a body of his brother
Churchmen, and, taunted as he had been with Popery,
refused, it is said, overtures from the Church of Rome,
saying " He had rather be a poor son of the afflicted
but primitive Church of England, than a rich Member
of the flourishing but corrupt Church of Rome." (See
Searle, p. 505.) In a letter to Mr. Richard Watson,
written in 1660 shortly before his return, Dr. Martin
speaks of his long sufferings in the following terms : —
" But in answer to your very necessary interrogatories : I
can answer but for one, who having been habituated these
eighteen years, to nothing but prisons, ships, wanderings
and solitude, hath alwaies been very well satisfied with one
Meal a day, and at night a Crust of Bread, and a Cup of
any Drink. That I most desire everywhere is Cider, or, in
defect of that, water (if it bee anything neer so good as
here at Paris) for I drank no wine for thirteen years
together, before I came out of England" (Searle, p. 507).
From this narrative of Dr. Martin's long and cruel
imprisonment it is time to return to the fortunes of the
College of which he was President. The Colleges were
in a deplorable condition during the year 1643. The
work of fortifying Cambridge was pushed on. The
town was full of the troops raised by Cromwell from the
Associated Counties. The Querela Cantabrigiensis
complains that " the soldiers have seized and taken
away materials of our intended buildings of the worth
of £300 or £400. . . . have pulled down, demolished
and defaced five or six fair bridges of stone and timber,"
i.e., the bridges of St. John's, Trinity, Garret Hostel^
King's and Queens'. Some Colleges were turned into
THE ROYALIST PRESIDENT 169
prisons for Royalists, others were converted into barracks
for Parliamentarian troops, " who took the beds from
under the scholars." Heads and Fellows were seized,
students were frightened away, the University cere-
monies were pretermitted from fear of violence, books
and furniture were carted off, " blankets, 1 ' " leather
chairs" and "fire-irons 11 were scheduled, e.g., the
books of Mr. Coldham of Queens 1 are set down at £\0.
The Royalist verses of Francis Quarles do not greatly
exaggerate the sentiments of the Parliamentarian troops,
as reflected by their actions in Cambridge.
" We'll pull down Universities
Where learning is profest,
Because they practice and maintain
The language of the beast ;
We'll drive the Doctors out of doors,
And all that learned be,
We'll cry all arts and learning down,
And hey, then up go we."
Parliament demanded a loan of i?6000 from the
University, and when, the Vice-Chancellor being a
prisoner, such Heads as were still left in Cambridge
declared that it was "against true religion and good
conscience for any to contribute to the Parliament in
this war, 11 the officers of the Parliament took the money
by force from the bursars and from the tenants of the
Colleges. Even Lord Manchester, the Parliamentarian
general, supported the petition of the University against
sequestration ; " he doubts not that your Lordships in
your wisdoms will think it better to endeavour the
reforming of the University rather than to hazzard the
170 QUEENS' COLLEGE
dissolving of it." The Parliament then issued orders
protecting the University and Colleges from the
sequestration of their property, and directed the Earl
of Manchester " to make them orthodox. 11
It had been ordained in September 1641, as already
stated, that in all churches and chapels altars and stone
tables should be demolished, that the Communion Table
should be removed from the east end, the chancel
levelled, all crucifixes, crosses, pictures, &c, taken away.
At first the heads of the several Colleges were left to
execute this order in Cambridge, but as they were not
zealous enough a more active agent was employed. In
December 1643 the infamous William Dowsing was
commissioned by the Earl of Manchester to remove all
vestiges of popish superstition from the churches in the
Associated Counties. What he did may be given in
the words of his own journal, in which he recorded his
proceedings :•
"At Queens' College, December 26th, we beat down
about a 110 Superstitious Pictures besides Cherubims and
Ingravings, where none of the Fellows would put on their
Hatts in all the time they were in the Chapell, and we
digged up the steps for three hours and brake down ten or
twelve Apostles and Saints within the Hall" (Cooper,
"Ann.,"iii. 365).
The "ingravings, 11 as Mr. Searle says, p. 526,
probably included some of the brasses on the slabs
in the floor.
On January 22nd, 1644, was passed an Ordinance for
Regulating the University of Cambridge, and for re-
moving of Scandalous Ministers in the seven Associated
THE ROYALIST PRESIDENT 171
Counties (Cooper, " Ann.," iii. 369-370). By this the
Earl of Manchester was empowered to examine all
members of the University and also the clergy, to
enforce the Solemn League and Covenant upon them,
and to constitute Commissions of Inquiry ; and again,
February 5, both Houses advised that the Earl should
exercise special care that the Covenant be taken in the
University. Accordingly, Lord Manchester arrived,
accompanied by his Chaplains ; he took up his quarters
at Trinity College, and the Commission of Inquiry sat
at the " Bear," in Market Passage. On February 24 he
demanded the Statutes and a list of the members of the
different Societies, with a statement whether they were
resident or not ; on February 26 notice was given to the
Heads to order all members of their Colleges to be in
residence on March 10 ; and on March 11 he sent for
the names of all who had left or returned to Cambridge
since February 24. On the same date, March 11, Mr.
Coldham, Fellow of Queens', was directed to send him
the notes of his sermon preached at Great St. Mary's
on the previous day. Then the work of " reforming "
the Colleges and " making them orthodox " began in
earnest. On March 13 Dr. Martin, who had been a
prisoner since the preceding August, was formally
deprived of the Presidentship of Queens 1 . On April 3
the Fellows of Colleges were summoned to appear at
the " Bear " on the 5th, or else, unless a good reason
were given for their non-appearance, he would proceed
to eject them. Accordingly, some sixty Fellows of
Colleges were ejected on April 8, among them
Anthony Sparrow, Samuel Rogers, Richard Bryan, and
Heigham Hills, of Queens', for non-residence and not
172 QUEENS' COLLEGE
returning to Cambridge on summons. On April 9
Ambrose Appleby, John Coldham, Edward Natley, and
Edward Kemp were removed for refusing to take the
Solemn League and Covenant. On April 11 Thomas
Marley, Vicar of Eversden, was deprived for refusing to
take the Covenant ; on June 1 Daniel Chandler, Vicar
of Oakington, Daniel Wycherley and Jasper Whitehead,
for refusing to take the Covenant; on August 26th,
1644, George Bard sey, Thomas Cox and Michael Freer,
for non-residence and not appearing on summons ; on
September 26 William Wells and Arthur Walpole, for
refusing to take the Covenant. One Fellow, Dr.
Gamaliel Capel, was declared non-socius by the Society
itself on August 2 for immorality (Searle, p. 549), and
then the Royalist President and all the eighteen Fellows
had been removed. All the scholars also were deprived
— in fact, a clean sweep was made of the whole founda-
dation. No doubt in part through Dr. Martin's
influence, Royalist views were very strong in the
College. No other College, except Peterhouse, suffered
at the hands of Lord Manchester's Commission to
anything like the same extent. Thus it does not
appear that at Trinity Hall or St. Catharine's any of
the Fellows were ejected; at Corpus only three, at
King's only six were removed (Cooper, "Ann.," iii.
374-379).
And now that the College had been purged of its
Royalist inmates, men of views more consonant with
the Parliament's were thrust into their places. The
person chosen to succeed Dr. Martin as President was
Herbert Palmer, a member of the College, a gentleman
and a scholar. He was the son of Sir Thomas Palmer,
THE ROYALIST PRESIDENT 173
of Wingham, near Canterbury, had been carefully
educated at home by an accomplished father and a
very religious mother, learnt French almost as soon as
he could speak, and could, as he afterwards proved,
preach in French as well as in English. He entered St.
John's College as a fellow-commoner, but, "being
denied his degree at St. John's on account of personal
deformity," migrated in 1622 to Queens', where he was
elected Fellow in 1623 by a Royal mandate from
James I. It is curious that Edward Martin was one
of the minority who refused to obey the mandate and
voted for Warner Marshall. In the life by Samuel
Clarke ("Lives of Thirty-Two English Divines")
Herbert Palmer is said to have taken many pupils, to
have been a most exemplary tutor, most extraordinarily
solicitous about his pupils' welfare, and, in particular,
about their religious instruction. He had private
means, and was very liberal in money matters. While
on a visit to his brother he preached at Canterbury
and was so acceptable that he was asked to take a
weekly lecture at St. Alphege's. His uncanonical
method of performing the service brought complaints
against him, but he was continued in the lectureship by
Archbishop Abbot, preached to the Huguenots at
Canterbury in French, and was presented by Laud,
then Bishop of London, in 1632, to Ashwell, Hertford-
shire, an appointment which the Archbishop cited at
his trial as an instance of his impartiality. Herbert
Palmer vacated his fellowship shortly afterwards
(Searle, pp. 532-535). At Ashwell he continued to
show his love of teaching, and took the sons of noble-
men and gentlemen into his house as pupils. He was
174 QUEENS' COLLEGE
called in 1643 by Parliament to be a member of the
Assembly of Divines at Westminster, acted with great
wisdom as one of the Assessors, and was one of the
favourite preachers of the Parliamentarians. Palmer
was one of a sub-committee of five appointed to draw
up the Directory of Public Worship. His share was
the catechising ; " yet though he was the best catechist
in England, his paper on it was not liked.''' Altogether
he was a cultivated, strenuous and high-minded man.
Whatever may be thought of some of his views, he
stood high in aims above most members of his party,
and no one would have regretted more sincerely or
spoken out his mind more frankly about later events
than Herbert Palmer, had he lived to see the end of
the War and what followed it (see the quotations given,
Searle, pp. 544, 545). But his restless, fiery spirit
wore out the puny body, and he died September 1647,
aged 46.
Herbert Palmer, then, was appointed President of
Queens' by the Earl of Manchester and installed by
the Earl in person in the College Chapel April 11th,
1644. The following " Solemne promise or protesta-
tion was made by the Master in the Chappell at the
time of his admission or installment " :
" I, Herbert Palmer, being called and constituted by the
Right Honorable Earle of Manchester (who is authorised
thereto by an ordinance of Parlyament) to be Master of
Queenes Colledge in the University of Cambridge, with
the approbation of the Assembly of Divines now sitting at
Westminster, doe solemnly and seriously promise in the
presence of Almighty God the searcher of all hearts, that
during the time of my continuance in that charge, I shall
THE ROYALIST PRESIDENT 175
faithfully labour to promote piety and learning in myselfe,
the fellows, sehollers and students, that doe or shall belong
to the said Colledge, agreeable to the late solemn National
league and covenant by mee sworne and subscribed, with
respect to all the good and wholesome statutes of the said
Colledge of the University, correspondent to the said
Covenant, and by all means to procure the good, welfare,
and perfect reformation both of that Colledge and University
so farr as to me appertaineth.
"Herbert Palmer."
"April 11, 1644."
The Society, at the date of Mr. Palmer's admission
consisted of the ten Royalist Fellows, who had not yet
been ejected and who were mostly non-resident.
There were no scholars, probably there were hardly
any students and little or nothing was done in the
College. A sizar, a pensioner and a Bible-clerk were
admitted (Searle, p. 540). But on June 11th Lord
Manchester appointed nine new Fellows, John Wallis,
Samuel Sillesby, John Wells, Nathaniel Ingelo, John
Smith, John Hoare, Samuel Glover, William Ames and
William Whittaker. Of these Hoare and Glover were
members of St. Catherine's, all the other seven came
from Emmanuel. The " Puritan College " was naturally
regarded with great favour by the Parliament, and
Emmanuel men got at this time at least six Headships
and innumerable Fellowships. The most famous of
them Benj amine Whitecote, who was made Provost of
Kings', set a fine example by allowing his dispossessed
predecessor, Dr. Collins, "a yearly stipend out of the
dividend allotted to the Provost." It may also be
remembered to his credit that he never took the
176 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
Solemn League and Covenant (Cooper, " Ann.," iii. 377).
However, the Emmanuel men sent to Queens 1 were
either more robust Roundheads or less scrupulous, for
they all subscribed the Covenant and made before Lord
Manchester's Committee a promise similar to that
undertaken by the intruded President, with the
addition of a clause, whereby they engaged themselves
to "yield unto Mr. Herbert Palmer, Master of this
Colledge, all such respect and obedience as the Statutes
of the said house and laudable customs of the said
University do require to be given to the Master. 11
Upon this they were admitted Fellows. Two of them
were really distinguished men of whom any College
might be proud, viz., John Wallis and John Smith.
Wallis, one of the best mathematicians of the time, has
been already mentioned as a witness against Archbishop
Laud, from which it may be inferred that his " Puritan "
views were very strong. He became Savilian Professor
of Geometry at Oxford in 1649, was one of the earliest
Fellows of the Royal Society, and, dividing his long life
between his mathematics and his clerical duties, died at
the age of 85 in 1703. John Smith was the Cam-
bridge Platonist, 11 the author of the famous "Select
Discourses,' 1 published after his death by Dr. Worth-
ington, in 1660, and highly praised by the late
Matthew Arnold, as being " much the most considerable
work left by the Cambridge Platonists and deserving of
a place in English literary history." John Smith was
Hebrew Lecturer and Dean. "He was," says Dr.
Plumptre, " a very useful member as Fellow and Tutor and
of great reputation for his learning, exemplary conduct
and singular sweetness of temper." He died Fellow Aug.
THE ROYALIST PRESIDENT 177
7th, 1652, and was buried in the College Chapel, Dr.
Patrick, then Fellow, preaching his funeral sermon.
John Smith was also a great benefactor to the Library,
to which he left about six hundred volumes. All his
contemporaries unite in praising alike his great ability
and his charming personal qualities. John Smith must
indeed be reckoned among the men of the past whom
one would wish to have known. But what a pity
that he took the Covenant !
The College now recommenced its life. On June
20th eleven students, most of them Oxford men, were
admitted ; on June 21st the first College meeting was
held and Samuel Sillesby appointed Vice-President;
on June 24th a fresh election of officers took place.
Two more Fellows were appointed by Lord Manchester
on Sept. 13th, viz., Francis Barkdale of Magdalene
Hall, Oxford, and John Jackson of St. Catharine's ; on
Dec. 20th, two more Magdalene Hall men, John
Pypard and Samuel Rayner ; on January 2nd, 1645,
George Griffith, and on January 4th Nathanial Debanke
and John Watson of Emmanuel. This makes a total
of sixteen appointed by Lord Manchester, but as John
Wallis vacated his Fellowship by marriage in March
1645 the number of actual Fellows was soon reduced
to fifteen. After this by an Ordinance of Parliament,
Feb. 13th, 1646 (Cooper, "Ann., 1 ' iii. 398), the College
was allowed to fill up the vacancies made by eject-
ment, and three Fellows were elected in Januar} - , four
in August 1647.
Fuller's complaint (" Univ. of Camb.," viii. 40) of the
character of these intruded Fellows, that " short of the
former in learning and abilities they went beyond them
178 QUEENS' COLLEGE
in good affections to the Parliament,'" as if in the
language of the Querela Cantabrigiensis "the garland
had been torn from the Head of Learning and placed
on the dull brows of Disloyal Ignorance," is not wholly
true of the new body at Queens'. Besides Palmer him-
self, Wallis and Smith, Ingelo was a cultivated man
and a highly skilled musician. The most marked
exception appears to have been Pypard, who was " found
disorderlie at a taverne in disorderlie companie at eleven
of the clocke of the night " and admonished. The new
President was an able and energetic Head. His personal
character inspired respect even in those whose views
differed most widely from his own. His influence and
weight with his party brought him at once a leading
position in the University. When on April 11th,
1645, the Heads preferred a petition to Parliament
(which was granted), praying for exemption from public
contributions, taxes and impositions, Mr. Palmer was
the spokesman of the deputation (Cooper, " Ann., 11 iii.
386). And when the Town endeavoured to upset the
privileges of the University, Mr. Palmer was one of the
Heads who again successfully petitioned Parliament on
the subject. The high praise given to Palmer by
Clarke in his Life (Searle, p. 551) for his management of
the College, was on the whole well deserved. He took
especial pains for the advancement of religion and piety,
and under his rule the Fellows were as zealous and
as diligent as the President himself. He was not less
anxious for the promotion of learning, improved the
Library and was very liberal to poor scholars.
" Indeed his resolution was, that so long as he was
hindered from residing constantly amongst them, by reason
THE ROYALIST PRESIDENT 179
of his attending on the Assembly at Westminster, he would
not be a gainer by the place ; but whatsoever profits he
received, more than would defray the charges of journeys
and other expenses occasioned by it, he would bestow some
way or other for the good of the Colledge."
The College orders of the time attest the general
care of the new Society. There were to be two
"common-places " weekly in the Chapel and all resident
M.A.s were to take their share of these ; the College
servants were to be looked after " to see if they have
understanding in religion " ; an " Ethicke " lecture was
to be delivered daily ; and an examination was to be
held for scholarships ; candidates for Fellowships were
to be publicly examined ; and, though the Prayer-book
was abolished and the Directory for the Public Worship
had been set up, provision was made for Divine Service
in the Chapel (Searle, pp. 554-555). One of the first
persons admitted to the College, as a sizar, after Palmer
was made President, was Simon Patrick, afterwards
Bishop of Ely. Patrick in his Autobiography
("Univ. Lib." Patrick Papers, quoted Searle, pp. 541-
542) describes the condition of the College under
Palmer.
" I found myself in a solitary place at first ; . . . there
were about a dozen scholars, and almost half of the old
Fellows, the Visitors at first doing no more than putting in
a majority of new, to govern the College. The other
rarely appearing were all turned out for refusing the
Covenant, which was then so zealously pressed, that all
schollars were summon'd to take it at Trin. Coll. (where
Lord Manchester had his quarters). Thither I went and
had it tendered to me, but God so directed me, that I
180 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
telling them my age — eighteen years — was dismiss'd and
never heard more of it — blessed be God.
" I had not been long in the College before the Master,
Mr. Herbert Palmer, took some notice of me, and sent for
me to transcribe some things he intended for the press ;
and soon after made me the College Scribe, which brought
me in a great deal of money, many leases being to be renew'd.
It was not long before I had one of the best Schollarships in
the College bestow'd upon me, so that I was advanced to a
higher rank, being made a Pensioner. But before I was
Batchellor of Arts this good man dy'd, who was of an
excellent spirit, and was unwearied in doing good. Though
he was a little crooked man, yet he had such an authority,
that the Fellows reverenc'd him as much as we did them,
going bare, when he passed thro' the Court, which after
his death was disus'd.
" I remember very well that being a member of the
Assembly of Divines, he went oft to London ; and some-
times stay'd there a quarter of a year. But before he went
he was wont to cause the Bell to be toll'd to summon us
all to meet in the Hall. There he made a Patheticall
Speech to us, stirring us up to pious Diligence in our
studies, and told us with such seriousness as made us believe,
that he should have as true an account from those he could
trust of the behaviour of every one of us in his absence, as
if he were here present to observe us himself. This he
said we should certainly find true at his return. And truly
he was as good as his word, for those youths whom he
heard well of, when he came back to College, he sent for
to his Lodgings, and commended them, giving books to
them that were well maintain'd and money to the poorer
sort. He was succeeded by a good man, but not such a
Governor.
THE ROYALIST PRESIDENT 181
After a short illness, in which his deportment " was
holy and heavenly," and he prayed that " God would pro-
vide a faithf ull man for Queens' 1 College,' 1 Herbert Palmer
passed away in Sept. 1647, and was buried in the new
church at Westminster (Christ Church), of which he had
been in charge since its completion. (A list of his works
will be found Searle, pp. 546-547.) Thomas Horton
B.D., formerly Fellow of Emmanuel, was by free election
of the Society chosen to succeed him. Thomas Horton,
son of Lawrence Horton of the Mercer's Company, had
been (1638-1640) minister of St. Mary Colechurch,
London, a donative in the gift of the Mercer's Company,
he was Professor of Divinity in Gresham College, one of
the twenty-eight Triers or " Commissioners appointed for
approbation of publique preachers,'' and had recently
been appointed preacher to Gray's Inn. In 1649 he
took the degree of D.D., and was chosen Vice-Chancellor
in the same year. In the Easter-term of 1651 he
resigned the Preachership of Gray's Inn and married.
His marriage, by the Statutes of Gresham College,
should have vacated his Professorship there, but he had
sufficient interest, first with the Committee of Parlia-
ment for reforming the Universities, and afterwards
with Cromwell as Lord Protector, to get dispensations.
At the time of Horton's election the University was
beginning to settle down again. By the end of 1648
the normal life of the University may be said to have
been resumed. The walks were laid out again, bridges
rebuilt (the bridge near Queens' College was rebuilt by
the Corporation, Cooper, "Ann.," iii. 425), buildings
repaired, money unearthed, and the students returned
to their avocations. Thus in the accounts appear such
182 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
items as " for setting up y e organs in y° Parlour (Com-
bination-room), ,£11 6s. hd.? " for a Kath. peare tree
wee set in y e Orchyard, 3s. Oct.," " a bush, and a halfe of
strawberryes and seedes, 5*.," " Christmas boxes (1656),
11*. 6rf.," "given away to Coll. servants for their Chr.
boxes (1658), 10,?. 6d." It is clear that the last thing
the Parliament desired, once their arms were triumphant,
was to estrange the University. On the contrary they
were anxious to satisfy and conciliate it, that they
might boast the support of Cambridge as a set-off
against the Royalism of Oxford. Hence it was that in
March 1648 a sum of £2000 was voted by the House of
Commons towards building and finishing the University
Library, and a further sum of £500 for buying a
collection of books, " in the Eastern languages of very
great value, late brought out of Italy," for the Library
(Cooper, " Ann./' iii. 421). Again in April 1650, by
the Act for further provision for ministers and other
pious uses, £2000 per annum was allocated out of the
seized tithes for the maintenance of the Heads in the
Universities, whose incomes were found to be insufficient,
now that Headships were no longer held in combination
with Deaneries, Canonries and the like. From the
statement then drawn up it appears that the value of
the Presidentship of Queens' was £68 3*. 3d. It was
proposed to add an augmentation of £50, and so make
the value £118 3*. 3d. (Cooper, "Ann.," iii. 432).
Thomas Horton, like his predecessor, was a favourite
preacher with the Parliamentarians, and the influence
which he enjoyed with his party was a qualification for
the post which he had now been elected to fill. He
was prominent in the various movements of the time.
THE ROYALIST PRESIDENT 183
When Visitors were appointed for the Universities in
September 1654, Dr. Horton was one of the Cambridge
Commissioners (Cooper, " Ann., 11 iii. 461). When the
University petitioned against the erection of a new
University at Durham in April 1659, Dr. Horton was
one of the five delegates then appointed to exhibit the
petition to Richard Cromwell (Cooper, " Ann.," iii. 473).
And he was not devoid of scholarship, but could write
a well-turned set of Latin verses. Verses were written
by him on the conclusion of the peace with Holland,
1654, on the death of Oliver Cromwell, 1658, and on
the Restoration of Charles II., 1660. These last are
given by Mr. Searle (p. 562).
To secure the Republican form of government Parlia-
ment ordained in 1649 that Heads, Fellows, graduates
and officers of the Universities should subscribe the
"Engagement." The form prescribed was, "I do
declare and promise that I will be true and faithful to
the commonwealth of England, as the same is now
established without a King or House of Lords. 11 It was
ordered that no person should be admitted to a degree
or bear any office in the Universities, who had not
taken this Engagement. In the following year (1650)
the Committee for regulating the Universities was
empowered to eject all who refused to make this
promise, and to place other able and fit persons in their
room (Cooper, " Ann., 11 iii. 435). The first sufferer under
this order was Dr. Rainbow, Master of Magdalene,
afterwards Bishop of Carlisle. Dr. Rainbow appeared
before the Committee and declared that he could not
conscientiously take the Engagement, though he would
undertake to live quietly under the Government. But
184 QUEENS' COLLEGE
this was not considered satisfactory, and Dr. Rainbow
was deprived. There is a most interesting letter written
at this juncture by William Sancroft, afterwards Arch-
bishop of Canterbury, to his brother. He describes the
pressure put by the Committee at the Bear upon mem-
bers of the University to force them to the Engagement.
"It seems the gentlemen think that their victories
resolve our cases of conscience to their advantage ; and
that it is but to rout the coward Scots, and all our arguments,
are answered. But I hope God will enable us to let them
see they are deceived ; and to teach them that swords and
pistols, though they may overthrow kingdoms, yet alter no
principles in divinity."
Two Fellows of Queens', Jackson and Hore, who had
been put in by Lord Manchester in 1644, were deprived
November 14th, 1650, for refusing to take the Engage-
ment, and Thomas Hunt and William Gore, both
members of the College, were appointed by the Visitors
in their stead. William Gore was an intimate friend of
Simon Patrick's, who had become a Fellow in 1649 and
in 1652 preached the funeral sermon of the incom-
parable John Smith. Perhaps the most eminent person
who refused the Engagement was the Chancellor of the
University, Lord Manchester himself, who after having
ejected and intruded so many persons was, November
27th, 1651, deprived by the Committee of his office. In
his room a member of Queens' College was appointed
Chancellor, viz., Oliver St. John, who had entered the
College as Preston's pupil in 1615, had been Hampden's
counsel in the Ship-money case, had sat in Parliament,
had been Solicitor-General, and was now Chief Justice
THE ROYALIST PRESIDENT 185
of the Common Pleas. Oliver St. John held the
Chancellorship until the Restoration, when Lord
Manchester was reinstated, and , St. John resided in
retirement at Long Thorp, Northamptonshire. St.
John is one of the very few members of the College who
were ranged against the King. John Goodwin was a
strong Republican, and there are a few Puritans, like
Thomas Edwards and Samuel Fairclough, but they are
lost in the crowd of Royalists. Among the Royalists
are Spencer Compton, Earl of Northampton, killed at
Hopton Heath, John Towers, Bishop of Peterborough,
Arthur Lord Capel, one of the bravest of Charles' 1
commanders, Dr. Robert Cottesford, Rector of Had-
leigh, whose sufferings for the King have made him
famous, Sir Hamon le Strange, Sir Henry Slingsby,
Dr. Laurence Bretton, Henry Lord Hastings, Sir
Orlando Bridgman, Thomas Cawton, and Colonel
Richard Neville. Altogether the members of the
College were almost as unanimous as the Fellows in
their devoted loyalty to the King.
Bishop Patrick's account of himself throws light on
the state of things at this time.
"Being Master of Arts I bent my studies chiefly to
Theology, and the manner of those times was for young
men to preach before they were in Holy Orders, and the first
sermon I preached was at Okeington, April 6, 1651. . . .
After this I had occasion to go to London, and being bound
by the Statutes of the College to enter into Holy Orders
when I was two years Master of Arts, I knew no better
than to go to a Classis of Presbyters, who then sat at
London, and was examined by them, and afterwards
received the imposition of their hands. This afterwards
186 QUEENS' COLLEGE
troubled me very much, when not long after I met with
Dr. Hammond upon Ignatius' Epistles and Mr. Thorndike's
Primitive Government of the Church, whereby I was fully
convinced of the necessity of Episcopal ordination. This
made me enquire after a Bishop to whom I might resort,
and learning that Bishop Hall lived not far off from
Norwich of which he was Bishop, thither I went with two
other Fellows of our College and a gentleman (Mr. Gore,
with whom I had contracted a great Friendship), as a com-
panion and ^witnesse of what we did. There we were
received with great kindness by the Reverend old Bishop
who examined us and gave us many good exhortations, and
then ordained us in his own parlour at Higham about a
mile from Norwich, April 5, 1654" (Searle, p. 566).
The College orders show that the Chapel Service was
maintained, and if the words are to be understood
strictly, that the Prayer-book was still used, but
probably the inference would be hazardous : " December
19. 1648. It was determined by the Master and
major part of the Fellows, that chappell should bee
observed onlie according to statute, notwithstanding
anie decree to the contrarie.'"
" From an entry in the Old Parchment Register made in
Dr. Horton's time, it appears that the strenuous assertor
of liberty and enemy of arbitrary power, Oliver Cromwell
(like many others who have supported that character when
out of power), was far from being the most indulgent to
liberty, or a strict observer of the rights of men when in it,
but even followed the example of the House of Stuart and
of former Princes, in sending his Mandates for the Election
of Fellows, &c The Entry is as follows : — Resolved by the
determination of the major part of the Fellows, that Mr.
THE ROYALIST PRESIDENT 187
Lausun be not admitted Fellow upon the Mandate of my
Lord Protector, till further addresses made to his Highness
in that behalf, for as much as they are not satisfy'd in the
condition mentioned in the sayd mandate,"
So Dr. Plumptre in his MS. He concludes that, as
there is no mention of the President in the order, he
had no share in it. But the order is in his handwriting,
so that it is hardly safe to infer this. John Lawson,
the person for whose election the mandate was sent, had
been admitted pensioner 1648, B.A. 1652, M.A. 1656.
He was afterwards a distinguished physician, Treasurer
of the College of Physicians 169a, President of the
College of Physicians 1694.
The Old Parchment Register records a curious order
of slightly later date, October 4th, 1658, viz., that " it
was ordered by the Master and the major part of the
Fellows, that the two gilded candlesticks be changed for
other plate and a colledge signet. 1 ' Naturally, as nearly all
the plate had been sent to the' King, the College could
have had little at this time. Still the order gives an im-
pression that things could not have been very flourishing
when the order was passed, and this impression is con-
firmed by an order of January 14th, 1653, to reduce the
number of Fellows to seventeen, the profits of the
other two to go to the College, till it should be decided
otherwise.
At the approach of the Restoration Dr. Horton
began to trim his sails to catch the new breeze. He
contributed, as did John Wilson, James Spering and
N. Wragge of Queens', to the Cambridge Verses which
celebrated that joyful event. There is not much of the
true Roundhead ring in his lines.
188 QUEENS' COLLEGE
" Sic tandem, Rex magne, redis, properasque recursu
Sperato populum conciliare tuum.
Nee poteras aliter, cum turbida cunctajuissent,
Teque absente diu turbidiora foreni," 8fc.
On May 26th, 1660, the House of Lords ordered that
the Earl of Manchester be admitted to the exercise of
his Chancellorship of the University of Cambridge, on
June 1st the Chancellors of the Universities were
directed to give order that all the Statutes in the Uni-
versities be put into due execution, and on June 4th
that the several Colleges in the said Universities shall
be governed according to their respective Statutes ; and
that such persons who have been unjustly put out of
their Headships, Fellowships, or other offices relating to
the several Colleges or Universities shall be restored
(Cooper, "Ann.,'' iii. 479). On Aug. 2nd, 1660, Dr.
Edward Martin was restored to his Mastership after his
long deprivation, and Dr. Horton on receiving Lord
Manchester's warrant for Dr. Martin's re-instatement
quietly retired. But he was still holding his Professor-
ship at Gresham College and obtained a fresh dispen-
sation from Charles II. to enable him to retain it. In
March 1661 when the King's commission was issued for
the Savoy Conference, Dr. Horton was nominated as
one of the assessors on the Nonconformist side. But
according to Baxter, "he never came among them. 11
However occasion was taken to apply to the Crown to
vacate his Professorship. George GifFord, who had been
chosen Professor in 1656 but had been set aside by the
Protector's dispensation, now laid his case before the
King. In consequence Dr. Horton's dispensation was
THE ROYALIST PRESIDENT 189
revoked May 26th, 1661, Mr. Gifford was re-chosen by
the Trustees and ordered by the letters of revocation to
be admitted into possession of the Professorship.
Horton was likewise silenced by the Act of Uniformity
in 1662. But he afterwards conformed and was pre-
sented by the Dean and Chapter of St. Paul's to the
Vicarage of St. Helen's, Bishopsgate Street. If Baxter's
statement is correct that " he had seen Dr. Horton give
the Lord's Supper to the greater part that sat," Horton's
conformity was not very strict, but it was sufficient to
keep him in possession of St. Helen's until his death in
1673. John Wallis, who had been his pupil at
Emmanuel, published in 1679 "A Hundred Select
Sermons upon several Texts " with some account of
Dr. Horton's life. Dr. Wallis speaks very highly of
his former tutor. No doubt Horton was a man of mark
and ability, but in character he does not bear comparison
with his Parliamentarian predecessor, Herbert Palmer,
any more than with the Royalist, Edward Martin, who
resumed the Presidentship on his retirement.
At the Restoration Dr. Martin returned to England
and was reinstated in his Mastership, Aug. 2nd, 1660,
by a warrant from the same Earl of Manchester who
had ejected him, and " who (says Dr. Plumptre) after
having alleged the Doctor's scandalous acts as the
ground of that proceeding, now sets forth that he was
informed that he was wrongfully put out of his Master-
ship." When he had been restored Dr. Martin entered
into the Register after the warrant for his expulsion the
warrant for his restoration with the following note in his
own hand, one of the most beautiful hands that man ever
wrote.
190 QUEENS' COLLEGE
"Aug. 20, 1660.
"Hucusque ab anno 1643 Martii 13mo., Cantabrigia a
Perduellibus et Latronibus occupata, Musae suis sedibus el
domiciliis pulsae sunt; omnia tarn sacra quam prophana
exinanita, publicata et populata : ipsa statuta et quibus nitebantur
sacramenta universa explosa sunt et interdicta : Praesidens in-
super, socii, scholares et quicunque sub habitu scholastico bonis
Uteris operant navantes ad unum omnes rebus suis omnibus
spoliati aut in exilium aut in vincla et ergastula sine ulla causae
dictione missi sunt. In cuius reijidem et testimonium conferat
Lector prascedentia cum subsequentibus, autographa cum auto-
graphis. Nolumus enim gravius quicquam dicere quam quod
Adversariorum calamo exciderit."
Edvardus Martin, Prxs.
As a statement of the treatment of the University
generally and the sufferings of Queens' College in par-
ticular at the hands of the Parliament and its agents,
this note, burning with the deep feeling of the writer,
is not a whit too strong. But, in Dr. Plumptre's words,
"the impartiality of an historian does not permit me to
proceed without observing that^-the outrages arid injuries
here complained of by Dr. Martin are to be imputed to
those at that time in the supreme power of the nation, and
the agents employed by them ; not to either the Masters
or the Fellows they had placed in the College. These,
though intruded indeed contrary to Law and Statute, yet
do not seem chargeable with misconduct in the exercise of
their power, either in the government of the College or the
management of its affairs. On the contrary many good
rules for the improvement of its government were made
while they were in possession, and much attention seems
THE ROYALIST PRESIDENT 191
to have been paid by them to the preservation of discipline
and good order. The only abuse I have heard, or read of,
laid to their charge, is the wasting of the College Woods,
and no proofs in a pretty exact examination of its books
and papers have occurred to me to justify that accusation."
By the date at which Dr. Martin's note was written
the College had been fully reconstituted. Michael
Freer, one of the ejected Fellows, had been the first
to obtain restitution.
" Whereas Michaele Freer, Master in arts and Fellow of
Queens' Colledge in Cambridge hath been wrongfully
ejected from his fellowshipp for refusing to take ye ingage-
ment, these are to require you forthwith to restore to his
sayd fellowshipp and seniority therein, and that from
henceforth hee enjoy all rights and priviledges and profitts
thereunto belonging. And for so doing this shall be your
warrant. Given under my hand this 27th day of June
1660, in y e twelfth yeare of ye reigne of our soveraine Lord
y e King.
E. Manchester.
"To ye master and fellowes of Queenes College in
Cambridge."
Michael Freer had been ejected in 1644 for non-
residence and not appearing on summons (p. 172),
not in 1650 for refusing to take the Engagement.
However he was not likely to quarrel with the form
of restitution used, as it brought him back five weeks
earlier than any of his brethren. He resumed residence
and entered upon College work at once ; as early as
July 3rd two pupils were entered under him. Arthur
Walpole was restored August 2nd, Edward Kemp
192 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
August 3rd (Searle, p. 573). And now that Dr.
Martin had returned, he set to work to reconstitute
the society on the principles laid down for him by
the Chancellor's letter.
" Reverend S r .
" By virtue of an order from y° Kings Maj tie directed
to me for y" confirmation of fellowes and schollars in theyr
respective preferments and allso of authority given me by
y° Lords assembled in Parliament to restore persons here-
tofore ejected, These are to require you to take care not
to remove any from being fellows or schollers in Queens'
College that are in places vacant by death or other in-
capacities, and likewise yt none be removed from being
fellowes or schollers till those places be filled which are
allready void or may immediately (be) made void by
voluntary resignations, and if such vacant places shall not
be enough for the reception of all who are to be restored,
then to make roome for y e rest by y e removall only of so
many of y e juniors as shall be necessary. Thus with my
kind respects to you I rest.
" Your friend to serve you,
"E. Manchester."
" From Warwick House,
the 13 th of August,
1660."
This was a moderate and reasonable proposal for the
reconciliation, so far as possible, of the interests of the
ejected Fellows with those of the present occupants.
Three of the deprived Fellows — Freer, Walpole, and
Kemp — had been already restored by the Chancellor.
Three more — Richard Bryan, Samuel Rogers, and Am-
brose Appleby — who had also been ejected, appear to
THE ROYALIST PRESIDENT 193
have reclaimed their Fellowships, and had their claims
admitted. Thus the Society, as legally constituted, con-
sisted of the President and these six Fellows. Thomas
Edwards and John Davenant had been elected to Fellow-
ships the very day before Dr. Martin's arrest in 1642,
but had never been admitted. Their claim came next.
John Davenant now declined the Fellowship ; Thomas
Edwards was admitted August 20. Of the remaining
Fellows, James Speering and Daniel Nicols had been
elected in the Mastership of Mr. Palmer ; Andrew
Pascall, John Wilson, Zachary Cradock, James Code,
Thomas Belk, Richard Wind, Joseph Kelsey, Robert
Sayer, Phineas Fowke and John Newberry (super-
numerary) had been chosen in the time of Dr. Horton.
All these were now re-elected and re-admitted, taking the
oath of allegiance and supremacy, and the oath pre-
scribed by the Statutes, in place of the Covenant and
the Engagement which they had previously taken and
made. This was due to Dr. Martin's wish that these men
should have as good a legal title as the older ejected
Fellows. He did not consider that Lord Manchester's
permission constituted a full legal title, and therefore
called together the old Fellows, who had been ejected
and now restored, " who chose every man of them regu-
larly according to the Statutes." Even the ejected Fellows
were all re-sworn on re-entering into their Fellowships.
When these formalities had been duly performed, and
the College was thus legally reformed, Dr. Martin wrote :
" Divina igitur Ope, Misericordia et Providentia, Col-
legium hoc.e captivitate quadem Babylonica ereptum,
integris et legitime suis membris constituitur. Aug.
95, 1660?
194 QUEENS' COLLEGE
Dr. Martin was restored at least to the living of Con-
ington, was appointed one of the managers of the Savoy
Conference, and was elected Proctor for the Diocese of
Ely for the Convocation of 1661 (Searle, p. 516). When
Dr. Henry Feme was promoted to the See of Chester,
Dr. Martin was preferred to the Deanery of Ely. He
was instituted March 21st, 1662, and being ill at the
time, was installed by proxy April 25, but died only three
days later, and was buried in the College Chapel.
Thus there is a strange similarity between the destinies
of the Royalist President and his predecessor of a
century earlier, the accomplished Dr. William Mey.
Both suffered deprivation, both lived to be restored,
both survived their restoration just long enough
to have their merits recognised by promotion, and
then passed away from the scene of their chequered
existence.
Dr. Martin at any rate lived long enough to accomplish
one piece of work which lay very near his heart, viz., the
restoration of the Chapel after the fanatic iconoclasm of
William Dowsing. The cedar for wainscoting the east
end was given by the President's tried friend, Henry
Coke, in 1661. President Palmer's legacy of £53 was
devoted to the Chapel. Dr. Bryan Smith gave £5 per
annum for the use of the Chapel, and an organ was re-
introduced.
The draft of a petition to Parliament in Dr. Mai*tin's
own handwriting is worth quoting, because it gives strong
and characteristic expression to the old Royalist's feel-
ings on the subject of the sufferings of the College and
himself.
THE ROYALIST PRESIDENT 195
" Most humby sheweth,
" That whereas their whole Corporation of Master
and Fellowes were every man ejected and banished thence
for refusing to take the Scotch League and Covenant, and
their places fill'd with such strangers as had never beene
students in that College, nor ever understood the state of
any other ; and were all of them moreover discharg'd from
all oathes, and locall statutes of the College ; and swome
every man to the Scotch League and Covenant, and to
regulate all things agreeably to the same ; all which Vasta-
tion and Calamity (the like whereof no other College in
England by God's great mercy and goodness ever suffer'd)
appears to this day in the Register book under the hand of
the Authority of that temporary new foundation ; together
with an acknowledgment of our wrongfull ejectments ; by
which meanes the whole College stock is entirely consum'd
and lost : the woods and timber upon the grounds fell'd
and sold without any account : the Covenants of Leases
alter 'd ; rents extinguished ; Royaltyes alienated (which
should have belong'd to the maintenance of the Chappell,
and God's service and work amongst us) the very situation
in a great part let out to lease ; and the College itselfe so
ruinated in edifices and otherwise, that we are in no wayes
able to maintaine it, together with the Composition of the
Founders and Allowances of Fellowes and Schollars.
May it therefore please the Right Honorable High
Court in compassion of our singular and miserable Case
and Condition, that these Amendments may be added
to the Act for confirming of College Leases, that no
Lease made by those strangers in this College since the
yeere 1644, containing a longer or greater terme or
other or less beneficiall covenants or conditions for the
Coll. than were used in leases for the same lands or
196 QUEENS' COLLEGE
tenements before the yeere 1644, And that no lease
of any such houses or lands or Royaltyes, which before
the said yeere 1644 had never been let by the said
Coll. or if let, yet had beene renewed again at their
owne cost, be confirm'd, but declar'd utterly void.
" And y r Humble Pet" shall ever pray, &c."
" This petition was drawn up by Dr. Martin after his
return, but never presented to the Parliament, 11 no doubt
because the Bill of 1660 contained a clause similar to
that desired (see Cooper, " Ann.," iii. 489).
Dr. Martin enriched the Library by a present of
thirty volumes, oddly enough the same number as had
been given by Herbert Palmer. A list of them is given
in the manuscript account of donations to the Library,
in the hand of Richard Bryan, who has preserved much
of the information about Dr. Martin's sufferings in exile,
with the following heading : —
" Muswum D™ Edvardi Martin, huius collegii prwsidentis
doctissimi juxta et prudentissimi, in nuperis Ecclesice tempesta-
tibus turn in vinclis, turn liberi, domi peregreque Confessoris
invictissimi, et per aliquot (proh dolor) dies Eliensis Decani,
Bibliothecam hanc nostram his libris adauxit."
A number of other books were added to the Library
" to balance all his accounts for the Library, " to which
it appears Dr. Martin owed £&2 10s. 9d. (Searle, pp.
577-588.) A finely-illuminated manuscript of the
" Soliloquies of St. Augustine " in the Library was
formerly in the possession of Dr. Martin.
It might have been thought that Dr. Martin's long
sufferings would move even his opponents to compas-
sion. But this was not the case. He was doubtless
THE ROYALIST PRESIDENT 197
stern and unyielding in the assertion of his principles,
and this feature of his character perhaps provoked an
animosity which a more conciliatory temper might have
disarmed. However, since in Mr. Searle's words (p.
580) " Neal (in his " History of the Puritans ") is most
ingenious in his attempt to vilify the character of Dr.
Martin," it is only fair to quote Lloyd's estimate of him
(Mem. 461-63, quoted by Searle, p. 581), which is careful
and just :
" his parts, as his nature, inclining to Solidity, rather than
Politeness, he was for the exact Sciences, Logick and
Mathematicks, in his Study, as he was for strict Rules in his
Conversation. His exact obedience to publick establish-
ments in his own person raised him to a power and trust to
see them obeyed by others, being incomparably well skilled
in the Canon, Civil and Common Law, especially as far as
concerned the Church in general, and in the Statutes of the
University of Cambridge in particular."
Lloyd sums up his account with an inscription :
Edvardus Martin, S. Th. Dr. Cato sequioris
seculi, qui nihil adfamam,
omnia, ad conscientiam fecit.
Rigide plus vir, et severe
Justus ; sibi theatrwm, omnia
ad normam exigens, non
amplius ambivit quam ut
sibi placeret et Deo.
Edward Martin may be described in two words as
semper idem.
"It is but justice to his memory to observe," writes Dr.
Plumptre, "that whatever difference of opinion there may
198 QUEENS' COLLEGE
be respecting the propriety and rectitude of his principles,
yet all must agree that he gave the most unequivocal and
indisputable proofs of his sincerity in them. The College
books furnish sufficient proofs of his abilities, of his know-
ledge and taste in classical learning, of his attention to the
duties of his office, and of his faithful discharge of them."
Poor Edward Martin, he was buried "without any
monument or memorial," yet surely such a life as his
needs no tombstone panegyric, for his every deed pro-
claimed him to have been " faithful unto death."
CHAPTER VIII
ELECTION BY ROYAL MANDATE
" The King can do no wrong."
Presidents: Anthony Sparrow, 1662-1667; William Wells, 1667-
1675 ; Henry James, 1675-1717.
The subject of royal mandates for the election of
Heads, Fellows and Scholars has been mentioned inci-
dentally in the earlier history of the College. The
Queens, who were the Foundresses and Patronesses of
the College, perhaps not unreasonably thought them-
selves entitled to issue letters of recommendation, which
were tantamount to a command for the election of the
person recommended. The same privilege had been
exercised by Anne, Queen of Richard III., and, as she
was Patroness of the College, in her case also something
might be said in extenuation of the practice, provided it
were confined within due bounds. Elizabeth of York,
Queen of Henry VII., however, did not formally take
the position of Patroness, but still seems to have thought
that as Queen she had some right of nomination in ' the
Queens 1 College'' ; and if we may judge from the request
preferred by the College through Sir Thomas Smith for
the Queen's protection in the reign of Henry VIII.
(p. 90), the President and Fellows were not adverse to
200 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
allowing the Queen, if not the King, some rights of
patronage and consequent privilege. However, the
whole question of royal interference reached a climax in
the reign of Elizabeth. We find the Heads petitioning
the Chancellor, the great Burghley, against the gross
evils of a system of royal nomination, which set aside
the claims of merit in favour of persons whose only
qualification was the possession of influence at Court.
Even so consistent an exponent of the doctrine of
passive obedience as Andrew Perne is found refusing to
elect to a Fellowship a person so put forward for election.
The protest of the University checked the system for
the time, but it revived again. Herbert Palmer owed
his Fellowship to a mandate from King James, and
Protector Cromwell had issued letters for the election of
John Lawson. If Cromwell thought himself entitled to
act in this way, it is hardly a matter of wonder that
the House of Stuart after the Restoration resumed the
custom of an earlier date. And as a matter of fact the
three Presidents whose names stand at the head of this
chapter were all elected by royal mandate.
On the death of Dr. Martin there were two competitors
for the Presidentship, whose claims were nearly as well
balanced and whose careers were almost as distinguished "
as those of John Davenant and George Mountaigne had
been fifty years earlier. Anthony Sparrow, b. 1612,
had been elected Fellow in 1633, had been at different
times Dean, Bursar, Hebrew and Greek Prselector and
was deprived in 1644 ; Simon Patrick, b. 1626, became
Fellow in 1648, and Vicar of Battersea in 1658. His
Fellowship was vacated Jan. 18, 1658. Thus, Sparrow
was considerably the senior of the two, and now that
ELECTION BY ROYAL MANDATE 201
the Headship was vacant the seniors supported Sparrow
and the juniors Patrick for the office. The day
appointed for the election was May 5th, 1662. The
Fellows assembled in the Chapel, the Statute was read
and the Veni Creator Spiritus recited. Then (three
scrutinies being allowed by the Statute) the election
was proceeded with, Richard Bryan, B.D., Vice-President,
standing in scrutiny. The five senior Fellows voted for
Dr. Sparrow, " an antient member of our society and
known to be, a constant loyall subject to the King and
true to the Church." Some others then voted for Mr.
Patrick, but before five of them had written their votes
the Senior Fellow broke off that scrutiny, produced the
King's letters commendatory for Dr. Sparrow and read
them in the presence and hearing of the whole Society.
A statement, drawn up by Dr. Sparrow's supporters,
found among the MSS. of Archbishop Sancroft, who
was then Master of Emmanuel, continues the narrative
in these words.
" After these (letters) were read, we went to a second
scrutiny, and the seniors writt as before for Dr. Sparrow,
some others for Mr. Patrick : but before they had written
so many suffrages for Mr. Patrick, as had been given for
Dr. Sparrow, the senior Fellow broke off that scrutiny and
read His Majesties Mandate for the electing Dr. Sparrow.
After that, the seniors againe according to their Duty
writt their suffrages for Dr. Sparrow, and the Senior
Fellow, seeing that others were disobedient to his Majes-
ties command, broke off that scrutiny, Dr. Sparrow having
then two suffrages more than Mr. Patrick. After this the
senior Fellow pronounced Dr. Sparrow Master or President
virtute Regii Mandati. The truth of this we do attest by
202 QUEENS' COLLEGE
the subscription of our hands, ready to confirm it by oath,
when required. Ambrose Appleby, Edward Kemp, Richard
Bryan, Sen. Fellows." »
" The Mandate being published to the society before the
election was made, Dr. Anthony Sparrow claymes the
right of the Presidentship or Mastership of Queens'
Colledge by virtue of that Mandate. For the Statute of
the Colledge for election, being made by the King's sole
power and never confirmed by Act of Parliament, may,
when he pleaseth, be abrogated, and by the same reason
be suspended for a time, and- de facto hath usually upon
emergent occasions been suspended or abrogated. And
being so, the society hath no power to contradict his
Majesties Authority. And therefore the Mandate being
for the election of Dr. Sparrow, the society had no power
to chuse any other for that time ; and if they did, that
election was void. The seniors and some others did in
obedience to the King's command elect and admitt the
said Anthony Sparrow."
With the facts as here stated Dr. Patrick's own
account (Autobiography 41-45 quoted Cooper, " Ann.,"
iii. 479-499) sufficiently agrees. The Bishop narrates
how he heard the news of the vacancy and that the
major part of the Fellows wished him to be elected ; he
had prayed that God would direct the issue as should
be most beneficial to the place of his education. He
was desired to come to the College,
" and on the fifth of May word was brought me to Trompe-
ton (Trumpington) within a mile of Cambridge, that I was
legally chosen by the majority of the fellows, but another
admitted, contrary to the statutes. For thus the election
was managed. The senior fellow Went up to the Com-
ELECTION BY ROYAL MANDATE 203
munion table, and read the statute, and invoked the Holy
Ghost to direct their choice, and they were sworn to choose
him whom they knew most worthy. Then he read a letter
from the King recommending Dr. Sparrow to their choice,
and standing in scrutiny, the fellows came up one by one,
and in a paper wrote their suffrages (which I have still to
shew) ; and when he saw that eleven of nineteen had
wrote for me, he snatched up the paper, and read a
mandamus from the King to choose Dr. Sparrow. They
told him he should have produced it sooner, for now it was
too late, another being chose by the major part of the
fellows, before they knew the King's mind. But the old
man, one Mr. Brian, pronounced Dr. Sparrow to be chosen
by the King's authority and admitted him. I came to the
college when this was done, and staying one night with
my friends returned to London, to advise what was to be
done in this case."
The supporters of Mr. Patrick were naturally not
satisfied. Whatever the rights of the Crown in the
matter might be, no one will doubt the justice of the
criticism, that, if the election was to be by mandate,
Mr. Bryan " ought to have produced it sooner.'" As
Dr. Sparrow's position was called in question, the King
sent down a commission to the Vice-Chancellor, the two
Divinity Professors and the Provost of King's to con-
vene the new Master and the Fellows on a fixed day
(May 12) in the College Hall, and there first to confirm
the election and admission of Dr. Sparrow, and then to
suspend the Fellows who had voted for Mr. Patrick,
from all their rights and privileges, excepting their
chambers and the liberty of attending Chapel, till the
Vice-Chancellor and his assistants and the Master of the
204 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
College should certify their hopes of their better be-
haviour.
In Cambridge there was no further opposition to
Dr. Sparrow, and he remained in undisturbed possession
of the Mastership. But Mr. Patrick acting on the
advice of his friends was moving in London. He
applied for a mandamus for admission as President in
the King's Bench on May 9, which was not granted by
the Judges. The application was renewed May 12 —
the day of the commission in Cambridge — and this time
the application was successful. However, as no return
was made to the writ of mandamus, further proceedings
were necessary. Bishop Patrick shall tell his own
story.
." On the 22nd of October I was summoned to appear
before some commissioners, whom the King appointed to
hear our business. I was advised by some hot persons not
to go. But both I and the fellows who chose me appeared
on the SOth at Worcester house, before the Lord Chancellor,
the Bishops of London, Winchester, Ely and others, whose
names I have forgot, where I was thought to speak very
pertinently in my own behalf. And the Lord Chancellor,
after some sharp words, bade us bring what friends we
pleased with us the next time they met to examine the
business, and they should see whether they did not do us
justice. But on the 3rd of November, when we appeared
again, they were all shut out : and I having then thought
fit to entertain counsel, when I came to call Serjeant
Keeling to go along with me, he told me he was ordered
at that hour to wait upon the King at the council table.
So I was forced to desire leave I might plead my own
cause as well as I could ; which was granted, and some of
ELECTION BY ROYAL MANDATE 205
the fellows had permission to speak, who made it so evi-
dently appear that I was duly chosen, that the counsel on
the other side had nothing to reply, but that they were
fellows only by the King's grace and favour, who sent a
mandamus that all should keep their fellowships at the
restoration who were not in sequestered places. To which
Dr. Cradock answered, that it was true his Majesty had
sent such a mandamus, but Dr. Martin the Master said this
was not sufficient to give them so good a title as he desired
they should have ; and therefore called all the old fellows
together, who had been rejected and now restored, who
chose every man of them regularly, according to the
statutes, an,d admitted them fellows. At which the
Chancellor said, ' Well then, he is legally chosen ; but will
he yield nothing to the King ? ' I humbly told him I had
nothing to yield, but if they pleased to put me in posses-
sion of that to which they acknowledged I had a right,
they should see what I would do. Upon which he was
angry, and bade all our names to be taken and set down in
writing, that we might be noted as a company of factious
fellows ; and then bid us withdraw ; and we heard no more
of this commission, by which we were heard and nothing
determined. I have not set down here a great many
strange things that were said at this hearing, because I
reverence the memory of that great man (the Lord Chan-
cellor, the great Lord Clarendon) who hath deserved highly
of this nation. His intention was only to discourage me
from proceeding in my action in Westminster Hall, which
I plainly signified I would pursue; though I did not
decline their judgment.
" On the 10th (of November) I was told that my counsel
was taken off; and when I went to him to know the truth,
he freely confessed he had received instructions to meddle
no more in my business, which was moved again by another
206 QUEENS' COLLEGE
person on the 27th of November in Westminster hall.
But after a long attendance there, for two years or more, I
found it was to no purpose ; for after three arguments by
Sir William Jones, Sir Thomas Raymond and another, the
judges were divided; two being of opinion the manda-
mus did lie, and I ought to be admitted, the other two
were against it ; so that it was to be an exchequer case
before the judges, who it is likely- would have been equally
divided. Therefore I let it fall, being settled in a better
place, wherein I hope I did more good than I should have
done there."
The "better place" to which the Bishop refers is
the living of St. Paul's, Covent Garden, to which he
was appointed in 1662. He won the affection of his
people by his devoted ministrations to them during the
plague. Afterwards Simon Patrick was successively
Prebendary of Westminster, Dean of Peterborough, and
Bishop, first of Chichester (1689) and then of Ely
(1691). He lived until 1707, and fully deserved his
high reputation for learning and piety. The Church of
England had few abler champions even at the time of
" clerus Anglicanus stupor mundi."" Among his works
were "Christian Sacrifice," "The Devout Christian,"
"Jesus and the Resurrection Justified," with Com-
mentaries, &c, in all 10 volumes.
The contention of Dr. Sparrow's supporters was, that
the King's mandate having been given, and Sparrow
elected and confirmed by the King's commissioners,
"no other Court ought to intermeddle with the debate,
since the King is jure communi visitor of the said Colledge,
being Heire to the Foundresse Queen Elizabeth, wife to
King Edward the 4th. And the Common Lawe saith, that
ELECTION BY ROYAL MANDATE 207
where the King is Founder, or Heire to the Founder or
Foundresse, he is visitor of that Foundation, and as visitor
judge of Differences about the Statutes of the Colledge."
It is easy to understand that Dr. Sparrow was recom-
mended to the King by his sufferings in the Royalist
cause, and it may well be supposed that, knowing
nothing of the wish of the junior Fellows to have
Mr. Patrick, his Majesty supposed that Dr. Sparrow
would be as acceptable to the Society as he was in-
dubitably well qualified for the Presidentship. On his
deprivation by Lord Manchester in 1644, Anthony
Sparrow, then thirty-two, was reduced to great straits.
Four years later he was instituted by Bishop Hall into
the living of Hawkden in Suffolk. But he was driven
out by the Long Parliament, and, says Dr. Plumptre,
" during the remainder of the usurpation he skulk' d from
one place to another. After the Restoration he resumed
possession of his living, but was soon afterwards called up
to London to consult with other divines upon the altera-
tions to be made in the Service-Book. He was likewise
prevailed with by the earnest request and importunity of
his friends to become one of the Ministers and Preachers
at Bury St. Edmund's."
At the time of his appointment to the Presidentship
Dr. Sparrow was Archdeacon of Sudbury and Chaplain
to the Kingi On January 27th, 1663, he signed a decree
of the Vice-Chancellor and Heads for " the more solemn
observance of the 30th day of January," the date of the
execution of King Charles I. It is ordered that the
Heads being Doctors in Divinity shall in turn according
to seniority preach upon that day at 9 a.m., and that
208 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
there shall be a speech at 2 p.m. (Cooper, " Ann.," iii.
510). In 1663 Dr. Sparrow was also made a Prebendary
of Ely by Bishop Wren. In 1664 he signed a decree,
as one of the Heads, ordering " that all in statu pupiUari
that shall go to coffee-houses without their tutor's leave
shall be punished according to the statute for haunters
of taverns and alehouses " (Cooper, " Ann., 1 ' iii. 515).
Evidently the coffee-house of the present day differs not
a little from its seventeenth-century prototype. And
after this it became very common for the gravest
graduates to go to the coffee-house to read the journals
and newsletters, when the coach had come in. A coach
first plied between Cambridge and London in 1653 : in
1654 a coach called " The Fly " left the " Swan " in
Holborn every Monday, Wednesday and Friday, and
the "Rose" in Cambridge every Tuesday, Thursday
and Saturday, the fare being 10*., and twelve hours,
"not counting the time for dining" being spent on
the journey (Cooper, " Ann.," iii. 454 and 463). Dr.
Sparrow was Vice-Chancellor 1664-1665 and received
in that capacity an invitation which he did not accept.
On March 23, the Mayor, the Recorder and the Alder-
men " went on fishing according to custome." They
had three boats with nets, they drew Newnham Pit,
Cambridge Mill Pit, and so fished down to Bullen
Grove, at the east end of Stourbridge Common. There,
continues Alderman Newton,
" we had our fish dressed, ye charge of this for wine bread
and cheese in ye boate and after at Bullen together with
boatehire came to £5 od money. Ye Mace did not goe
with ye Mayor, none were in Gownes. The Mayor and
Aldermen invited with them ye Vice Chancellor then Dr.
ELECTION BY ROYAL MANDATE 209
Sparrowe but he went not, also Dr. Fleetwood, Dr. Dill-
ingham and Dr. Stoyt (Provost of King's, Master of Clare,
and Edward Stoyte, M.D.), who went and dyned with them
at Bullen."
The plague was so bad in Cambridge in the latter
part of the year that the sermons at St. Mary's and the
exercises in the Schools were discontinued. At this
crisis Mr. Tennison, afterwards Archbishop, then Vicar
of Great St. Andrew's, was actually left alone in Corpus
with two scholars and a few servants. In March 1666
the place was pronounced to be free from infection and
the students were summoned back into residence ; but
the plague broke out again with great violence in the
summer, Stourbridge Fair was put off and all public
meetings in the University and town were suspended,
and as late as February 1667 the King by letter
reserved the seniority of all persons- who by reason of
contagion were unable to come to Cambridge on Ash
Wednesday to be created Bachelors (Cooper " Ann.," iii.
517, 520, 522). In this year, 1667, Dr. Sparrow on being
appointed Bishop of Exeter resigned the Headship of
Queens'. Bishop Sparrow was translated to Norwich in
1676, and died there in 1685.
" After he was Bishop he published a Collection of
Articles, Canons, &c, of the Church of England, with a
Preface, and a Rationale of the Common Prayer. He
married Susanna Coel, daughter of Thomas Coel, Esq., of
Depden (his native" place), by whom he had six daughters.
He was a man of a very ready apprehension and good
judgment, hut complained of the weakness of his memory.
He was very strict in his devotions, public and private.
Besides those in his retirements, he never failed to have
o
210 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
the Litany read in his family every evening about six or
seven o'clock " (Dr. Plumptre, from Gearing's MS. History
of the Bishops of Norwich).
Bishop Sparrow's " Rationale " is an important and
valuable work. The quotation given above from Dr.
Plumptre conveys the impression that the work was
first published after Dr. Sparrow's elevation to the
episcopal bench. The date of the book seems to be
1655, but no copy of that edition is known to be extant.
A copy of the edition of 1657, the earliest known to be
in existence, is appropriately in the Library of Queens'
College.
Some items from the accounts of this period are of
sufficient interest to be quoted. In 1664 the Fellows'
Garden was taken in hand, for £6 0s. %d. was paid
"for heightening ye walls," 19*. for "jasmins, gilli-
flowers and strawberies," £1 14?. "for Peach and
Apricote-trees," 6s. 6d. "for 5 apple-trees and setting;"
there were 12 elms set in the grove, and items for seeds,
more apple-trees, for walks and hedging about the
walks, which show that the Garden had been somewhat
neglected during the preceding years. There are more
purchases of fruit-trees, &c, in the following years. The
lime-house at the Orchard-gate was built at a cost of
£12 6s. 8d., the carpenter's bill for, the same amount-
ing to £12 8s. 6d. " Curtains for the lodging " cost
16*., " 12 Russia-leather chairs in ye lodgings " £5 Is.
For paving the Hall with stone at 7d. per foot
£$6 15*. 6d. is paid. A sum of 9*. M. is given to
" S re Paolo Sejalitti ye converted Jew," and there is the
naive entry " for 2 or 3 odd things 3*. 2d." (" Magn.
ELECTION BY ROYAL MANDATE 211
Journ.," vi. 120-121). In June 1665 £9, 10s. was paid
to the organ-mender, and "6d. for a booke for ye Butler
to enter ye beere;" v in September £3 5s. for painting
the Bridge, £2, 8s. for " sixe turky chaires for ye
lodging," and £% 15*. for table-linen (" Magn. Journ.,'"
vi. 124). In December 1665 is a payment of 2*. " for
dressing ye bore, 11 i.e., presumably the boar's head for
Christmas Day; in June 1666 i?l to the upholsterer for
chairs and mats in the Lodge, in August 2*. "for
powder on ye thanksgiving day," in September £2 10*.
to the upholsterer for work in the Lodge and £1 14?. 8d.
to the svhcoquus for scouring the pewter ("Magn.
Journ./' vi. 127-129). In June 1667 £31 is paid for
building the Orchard Wall (" Magn. Journ.," vi. 132).
On the promotion of Bishop Sparrow a President was
again elected by royal mandate, on this occasion without
the previous ceremony of a commendatory letter. The
author of the " Memoirs of Bishop Sparrow " says that
the King gave him the nomination of his successor in the
Presidentship and that he nominated William Wells.
There seems to be no evidence to support this statement,
but even without any suggestion from the outgoing
President, William Wells was a person very likely to be
selected by the King, as having proved his loyalty by
something more than words. He had been elected
Fellow of Queens' in 1638, and had been ejected by Lord
Manchester for refusing to take the Covenant in 1644.
At this time he was Rector of Sandon in Essex (a living
which came into the gift of the College in 1736), and
Archdeacon of Colchester. He was a married man and
left two daughters. There was no opposition to his
election, although the Fellows, or some of them, were, it
312 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
is said, again anxious to elect Dr. Patrick. Dr. Wells
was elected Sept. 36th, 1667. There was apparently a
feeling in the University that the Crown was inclined to
interfere overmuch by means of these royal mandates
for offices and degrees, and the existence of the feeling
must have become known to the King. For in 1668
Charles II. addressed a letter to the Chancellor, Vice-
Chancellor and Caput, declaring his Royal Pleasure that
all persons who shall come with letters mandatory for
degrees shall personally subscribe the usual forms and
pay the usual fees (Cooper " Ann.," iii. 530), a letter
clearly meant to remove as far as possible an angry
feeling on the part of the University. Dr. Wells, as one
of the Heads of Houses, had the honour of assisting in
the reception of Cosmo de Medicis, Prince of Tuscany,
in 1669, the Duke and Duchess of York and the Prince
of Orange, afterwards King William III., in 1670. The
illustrious champion of Protestantism and freedom is
described by one who saw him on this occasion as being
" between 19 and 20 years of age, a well countenanced
man, a smooth and meeger face, and a handsome head
of hayre of his owne " (Cooper, " Ann., 11 iii. 545). In
1671, the King paid his long-promised visit to Cambridge
and was magnificently entertained by the University at
a cost of more than a thousand pounds. It is significant
that, " through his Majesties great favour, and his Grace
the Chancellor's (the Duke of Buckingham) care of the
University, no degrees were conferred upon any, by his
Majesties command, though much desired by many 11
(London Gazette, Oct. 5, 1671). A list of the members
of the University published in 1672 gives the total
number as 2522. Queens 1 College is set down as
ELECTION BY ROYAL MANDATE 213
consisting of "a President, 19 Fellows, 27 Scholars,
12 Bible Clerks, and three Lecturers of Hebrew,
Arithmetic and Geometry (i.e., John Joscelyn's Hebrew
Lecturer and Sir Thomas Smith's Arithmetic and
Geometry Lecturers), besides other officers and servants
of the Foundation and Students. The whole number
being about 120." This is almost the same number as
on the eve of the Civil War, 1641, but there is a terrible
declension from the palmy days of Bishop Davenant,
when the College numbered two hundred and thirty
(p. 106). Nevertheless the College could show at this
time a long list of distinguished members, who had made
their mark, most of them in the Church, but some in
other departments. Such were Robert Stapleton,
(d. 1669), who was knighted by Charles I. for his
gallantry at Edge Hill, translated Juvenal and Musaeus,
and was a dramatic author of eminence ; Thomas Mocket
(d. 1670), a writer on practical divinity; Joseph
Truman (d. 1671), author of the " Discourse of Natural
and Moral Impotency." Dr. John Sherman (d. 1671),
Archdeacon of Salisbury, author of " Historia Collegii
Jesu Cantabrigise " ; William Shef win, a writer of
millenarian views ; Oliver Bowles, Fellow (d. 1674), an
exemplary divine who wrote "Tractatus de Pastore
Evangelico " ; Sir Orlando Bridgman (d. 1674), Lord
Keeper of the Great Seal ; William Whitaker, Fellow,
a famous preacher of exemplary life; Sir John King
(d. 1677), Solicitor-General to the Duke of York ; Dr.
Robert Mapletoft (d. 1677), Fellow, Master of Pembroke,
and Dean of Ely; Charles Smith (d. 1678), Fellow,
Archdeacon of Colchester; Sir Moundeford Bramston
(d. 1679), Master in Chancery ; Dr. Edward Davenant
214 QUEENS' COLLEGE
(d. 1679), Fellow, Archdeacon of Berks, &c. ; Nathanael
Ingelo (d. 1683), Fellow, author and musician ; Francis
Bramston (d. 1683), Fellow, Baron of the Exchequer ;
Roger Coke, who wrote the " Detection of the Court and
State of England"; Sir Charles Cotterell (d. 1687),
French and Spanish Scholar ; Heneage Finch (d. 1689),
Earl of Winchelsea, Ambassador to Turkey ; Dr. Walter
Needham (d. 1691), Fellow, a famous anatomist; Dr.
Richard Meggot (d. 1692), Dean of Winchester;
Benjamin Rogers, the musical composer; Dr. Zachary
Cradock (1695), Fellow, Preacher at Grays' Inn, Provost
of Ebon, a learned and eloquent divine; Dr. John
Patrick (d. 1695), Preacher at the Charterhouse, author
of a " Century of Psalms," etc. ; John Fielding (d. 1697),
Fellow, Archdeacon of Dorset; Charles Hopkins
(d. 1699), author of dramas, poems and translations;
Edmund Bohun (d. 1699), Chief-Justice of South
Carolina, a well-known political writer; Dr. Samuel
Croborrow, Fellow, Archdeacon of Nottingham, a non-
juror ; John Pomfret(d. 1703), who wrote the " Choice,"
a once popular poem ; Sir Thomas Jenner (d. 1707),
Justice of the Common Pleas ; Joseph Kelsey (d. 1710),
Fellow, Archdeacon of Wilts.
In 1673 Dr. Wells had a curious experience. The
Official of the Archdeaconry of Ely suspended Dr.
Spencer, Master of Corpus and Vice-Chancellor at the
time, and Dr. Wells, President of Queens', "for not
appearing at the Archdeacon's Visitation, they being
incumbents of benefices iu the archdeaconry " (Cooper,
" Ann./' iii. 556). The official must have been a busy-
body and made a very bad mistake on this occasion.
His action was complained of as being not only a breach
ELECTION BY ROYAL MANDATE 215
of the privileges of the University, but also of the
rights of Convocation, which was then sitting, and of
which Dr. Spencer and Dr. Wells were ex-offlcw
members as Archdeacons respectively of Sudbury and
Colchester.
In 1674 the Duke of Buckingham was removed from
the Chancellorship and the Duke of Monmouth recom-
mended for election by the King. At his installation
at Worcester House on Sept. 3 Dr. Wells no doubt
took part in the splendid ceremonies of the occasion.
Dr. Wells was Vice-Chancellor the following year and
presumably to him were addressed the Duke of Mon-
mouth's inquiries on the state of the University and the
way in which certain Statutes were observed (Cooper,
" Ann.," iii. 567 ff.). The first inquiry " whether my
last letter of the delivering of sermons by memory and
the decent wearing of hair had its due effect or not ? "
refers to a letter written by the Duke, October 8th, 1674,
when the King had been scandalised by a preacher, who
wore a " peruke of an unusual and unbecoming length,"
and read his sermon. " The Merrie Monarch " was at
Newmarket when his feelings were thus harrowed, and
the rebuke to the University on these practices which
occasioned Majesty so much displeasure is dated from
Newmarket. The reply of the Heads was, " That his
grace's letter of delivering sermons by memory and the
decent wearing of hair hath had very good effect with
many, and that it may have its due and full effect with
all, it shall be our care to our power in our several
places." To the eighth question " whether that statute
which forbids any persons to come to the taverns, unless
to meet some friends out of the country, be duly observed
216 QUEENS' COLLEGE
or not ? " the answer is : " The statute for scholars (of
whatsoever profession or degree) not going to taverns
(saving in some cases in the same statute allowed) is too
frequently transgressed, notwithstanding the endeavours
of the vice-chancellor and other officers of the Uni-
versity." And to the twelfth question " whether the
coffee-houses be much frequented or not, by what sort
and degree of men, and at what hour?" answer was
made, " The coffee-houses are daily frequented and in
great numbers of all sorts (the heads of houses and
other doctors excepted ! !) at all hours, especially
morning and evening." In the drafting of these replies,
however, Dr. Wells can have taken no part, for he died
about July 20th, 1675.
And now for the third time in succession a royal
mandate supplied the College with a President. A
curious story is told in connexion with this appoint-
ment. The Fellows, it is said, were still, as they had
been at the two previous vacancies, desirous of electing
Dr. Patrick to be President. To secure a free election
Henry James, B.D., Fellow and Chaplain to the King,
was sent by the Society to make interest with proper
persons about the Court that no mandate might be
sent. However this may be, a mandate was sent,
Henry James was the person named in it and by virtue
of the mandate he was admitted President, July 29th,
1675. This, notes Dr. Plumptre, "was the last
mandate that came to the College to this time (1784),
and may it ever continue so." James II. sent two
mandates for the election of Fellows in 1686 and 1687
but this was the last occasion on which the choice of
a President was suggested or dictated by the Crown.
ELECTION BY ROYAL MANDATE 217
The new President was the son of Henry James, Rector
of Kingston in Somersetshire, and also of Crocombe, to
which last he was promoted by the Committee of
Parliament during the Civil War. Henry James the
younger was educated at Eton, entered Magdalene
College in 1660, removed to Queens 1 1661, and was
elected Fellow 1664. As he was seventy-five at the
time of his death in 1717, he was less than thirty-four
when he became President. His rule of more than
forty-one years is the longest in the history of the
College, unless indeed Andrew Dokett's tenure of the
Headship be reckoned from 1442, though it is more
reasonable to count it from the date of the actual
foundation of Queens 1 College in 1448. After his
election as President, Henry James took the degree of
D.D., was further promoted to Prebends at York and
at Canterbury, and became in 1700 Regius Professor of
Divinity. He was three times Vice-Chancellor, in' 1683,
1696 and 1697. In the year after his appointment, his
name appears last as the junior Head among the
signatories of a decree forbidding scholars to resort to
houses of ill-fame, one of which is the Saracen's Head
"upon the causeway to Queens 1 College'" (Cooper,
" Ann.," iii. 571). In 1681 his name is signed, now half-
way up the list, to the decree
" that none residing in the University (under the degree
of master of arts) shall hereafter upon any pretence what-
soever be allowed to appear publicly either in or out of
colleges in mourning gowns, or gowns made after that
fashion, or any other but what by custom and order of the
University belongs to their degree and standing " (Cooper,
"Ann.," iii. 588).
218 QUEENS' COLLEGE
In the same year the King and Queen visited
Cambridge and were enthusiastically received.
" The whole [entertainment] was so great and magnifi-
cent, and withal so zealous and hearty, to the Nobility as
well as their Majesties, that the Court was never better
satisfy'd with any Entertain/nent, of which the news soon
resounded through the whole Kingdom " (Echard, Hist., iii.
638).
The accounts of the Vice-Chancellor (Dr. Gower,
Master of St. John's) contain expenses amounting to
^500 in connexion with this royal visit. In 1683, when
Dr. James was Vice-Chancellor, the University presented
an extravagantly loyal address on the discovery of the
Rye House Plot. "All the unnatural and devilish
conspiracies of wicked and execrable men serve only to
convince the world how much your Sacred Majesty is
the Darling of Heaven and the peculiar care of
Providence " (Cooper, " Ann.," iii. 598). It appears that
the Colleges still at this period paid the poor of
Cambridge the sum of ,£126 8*. by quarterly payments.
The payments are ranked in a scale descending from
Trinity College, which contributed £21 6s. 8d., to
Catharine Hall, which gave £1 12*. : Queens 1 College,
which comes sixth on the list, is assessed at £1 9s. 4sd.
Under James II., the Jesuits were very anxious to
gain a footing in the Universities. They fancied that
once admitted they would gain such a reputation by
their methods of instruction, that they would attract
the men away from the University tutors, " who were
certainly too remiss. 1 ' Various plans were suggested,
amongst others that the King should endow a new
ELECTION BY ROYAL MANDATE 219
college for them in each of the Universities, "which
need not have cost above two thousand pounds a year. 11
The King was not prepared to do this, but he
endeavoured to conciliate or coerce the Universities into
admitting Papists. Joshua Basset was appointed
Master of Sidney by a royal mandate which dispensed
him from taking any oath. Basset was a Fellow of
Caius and generally reputed a Papist. When the
Fellows of Sidney refused to omit the Thanksgiving
Service on November 5, "he shut the door of the
College Chapel and hindered the service for that time. 11
Then followed the attempt to procure by mandamus
the M.A. degree for Alban Francis, "an ignorant
Benedictine monk. 11 In this Basset, as a member of the
Caput, was expected to help. But the Vice-Chancellor,
Dr. Peachell, Master of Magdalene, had the full support
of the University in declining to admit Francis, until
the King had been petitioned to revoke his mandate.
This revocation could not be procured : the influence of
the Chancellor, the Duke of Albemarle, and of Lord
Sunderland was exerted in vain, and the Vice-Chancellor
and deputies of the Senate were summoned to appear in
London before the Lords Commissioners. The Deputies
appointed were Dr. John Peachell, the Vice-Chancellor,
Dr. John Eachard, Master of Catharine Hall, Dr.
Humphrey Babington, Fellow of Trinity, Dr. Thomas
Smoult, Professor of Casuistry, Dr. William Cook,
Fellow of Jesus, Mr. John Billers, Fellow of St. John's
and Public Orator, Mr. Isaac Newton, Fellow of Trinity
and Mathematical Professor, Mr. James Smith, Fellow
of Queens 1 (elected 1679) and Mr. George Stanhope,
Fellow of King's. These delegates appeared before the
220 QUEENS' COLLEGE
Commissioners who were presided over by Lord
Chancellor Jefferys on April 21st, April 27th, and May
7th and 12th, 1687. In the end the unfortunate Dr.
Peachell was deprived of the Vice-Chancellorship and
his Mastership " for an act of great disobedience to the
King's commands," the others were dismissed with a
warning to be more obedient in future, a warning
delivered by Jefferys himself and ending with the words,
"Therefore I shall say unto you what the Scripture
says, and rather because most of you are divines ; Go
your way, and sin no more, lest a worse thing come
unto you " (Cooper, " Ann.," iii. 621-632). James Smith,
who was honoured by being chosen to represent the
University on this occasion, was preferred by the Earl
of Dorset to the living of Welford in Gloucestershire,
by which his fellowship was vacated in April 1690.
He was afterwards Chaplain to Bishop Patrick, Pre-
bendary of Ely and Rector first of Rettingdon in Essex,
then of Cottenham in Cambridgeshire. Queens' College
received two royal mandates from James II. for the
election of Fellows. One was for Josiah Alsop, Chaplain
to a Regiment of Foot, who was elected in 1686. He
was presented by William III. to Rendelsham in Suffolk,
August 1699, which vacated his fellowship. The other
mandate was in 1687 for George Geary, " who was
elected but never admitted." Probably the coming
change appeared near enough to warrant the Society in
a judicious postponement of the admission. And King
James II. soon saw the error of his ways. In 1688
Dr. Peachell was reinstated at Magdalene and "the
Popish Master" withdrawn from Sidney. But it was
too late, the King and the Lord Chancellor had soon
ELECTION BY ROYAL MANDATE 221
other things to think of besides browbeating the Uni-
versity. Just before the bloodless Revolution, on the
death of the Duke of Albemarle, Archbishop Sancroft
was elected Chancellor against his express wish. But
the Archbishop persisted in refusing to accept the office,
and, as having sworn loyalty to James II., he felt unable
to take the oaths to William and Mary. So he lost the
Archbishopric, and Charles Seymour, " the proud Duke
of Somerset, 1 " was elected Chancellor in March 1689,
and held the office for nearly sixty years. There is no
evidence that any of the Fellows of Queens 1 refused the
oaths to William and Mary, and the list of Fellows
elected seems to be conclusive that no fellowships were
vacated in this way. In 1689 only one Fellow was
elected, in 1690 two, and there was no election in 1691.
Archdeacon Croborow indeed was a non-juror, but his
fellowship had been vacated by his preferment as far
back as 1679. Still Dr. James must have been rendered
uncomfortable by a story about copies of James II.'s
Declaration found at Cambridge, which came before the
Houses of Commons on June 20 :
" One Thomas Fowler was called in and was at the Bar
examined concerning the same ; and gave an account that
they came down by Carriers in Boxes, directed to the
Master of Queens' College and Master of St. John's College.
But Sir Robert Sawyer, one of the Burgesses for the
University (the great Newton was the other) acquainted
the House, That he. had received Information, that both
the Boxes were carried to and now remain with the Vice-
Chancellor " (Cooper, " Ann.," iv. 6).
The King visited the University, October 7th, 1689,
when " an extraordinary commencement being held on
222 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
this signal occasion for conferring degrees on persons of
work in all faculties" among those admitted was
Monsieur Peter Allix, of Queens 1 College, afterwards
Dean of Ely. Peter Allix had something of a gift for
verse. He was one of the contributors to the Cambridge
Verses written on the death of the little Duke of
Gloucester in 1700, and again in 1702, to the Verses
written on the death of William III. and the accession
of Queen Anne, when Thomas Rymer, who was elected
Fellow of Queens 1 in that year, also contributed.
One of the most distinguished members of the College
showed at this time by his generosity that he had not
forgotten Cambridge. Simon Patrick, who was now
Bishop] of Ely, about 1691, the date of his translation
to Ely, established lectureships in the two churches of
St. Botolph and St. Clement, " allowing to each of them
thirty pounds a year, for an afternoon sermon every
Sunday. 11
While we are speaking of Bishop Patrick, it may be
recorded that on September 1st, 1704, as Bishop of Ely,
he consecrated the new Chapel of St. Catharine^. The
Petition to the Bishop and the Act of Consecration will
be found, Cooper, " Ann., 11 iv. 67.
Dr. Plumptre writes in his MS. history :
" The walk called Erasmus' Walk was, I believe, first
made in the time of Dr. James, viz., in the year 1685.
For in the Accounts of that year it is spoken of as made
and as planted, not replanted ; and King's College was at
the expense of planting the side next the ditch, Queens' of
that next the Common (' Magn. Journ.,' vi. 218, Dec. 1685).
The title was probably given it therefore in honour of that
distinguished Member of the College, rather than on
ELECTION BY ROYAL MANDATE 223
account of its being a favourite walk of his. If it was so,
he enjoyed I doubt no other shade there than what arose
from the adjoining Grove of King's College ; for I find no
direct mention nor anything which may seem to imply the
plantation or forming of any walk here till this time."
As late as 1779 the University paid i?50 to save the
trees in Erasmus' Walk from destruction by the town
(Cooper, "Ann., 11 iv. 389). These trees are described as
" the trees on Erasmus's Walk at the north end of
Queens' Green," and ,are presumably outside the College
property, otherwise it would have devolved on the
College to save the trees.
A subject that continually crops up at this period
and ' occasioned heart-burnings and litigation is the
question of "pontage lands," the proprietors of which
were supposed to be liable for the repairs of the " Great
Bridge." In 1694 Queens', together with Corpus, King's
and St. Catherine's Colleges, and a number of private
proprietors, had to undergo indictment at the assizes
for not repairing the Great Bridge. The town was
indicted in 1718 for non-repair of the Bridge and
pleaded that it ought to be repaired by the owners of
the pontage lands, while some of the proprietors who
were indicted claimed that the Corporation were liable
to maintain the Bridge, as they took a toll for passing
over it. The pontage rates were so heavy that it is not
to be wondered at if the proprietors rebelled against the
burdens, e.g., in 1738 the Commissioners assessed the
lands chargeable to the repair of the Great Bridge at
£5 13*. 6d. per hide, in 1752 on a rate of £6 per hide
the President and Fellows of Queens' were rated at
=£"33 for their Eversden property, and yet after all the
224 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
Great Bridge was rebuilt by public subscription in
1754 ! The Colleges subscribed i?191 and a Collection
in the University Church produced i?30 (Cooper,
"Ann., 11 iv. 26, 150, 240, 288, 292).
On November 19th, 1697, Dr. James as Vice-Chan-
cellor, accompanied the Chancellor, the Archbishop, a
number of Bishops and Heads of Houses, the Proctors
and the Members for the University, to Kensington
Palace to present a loyal address to William III. on the
conclusion of the Peace of Ryswick. And again the
Vice-Chancellor waited on the King, December 2, to
offer His Majesty the volume of poems written by the
University to celebrate the. King's return and the
restoration of peace. Dr. James is not mentioned as
one of the contributors to this volume, but in 1 708 he
was one of the writers in the collection of Greek and
Latin Verses composed on the death of Prince George
of Denmark. Dr. James had become Regius Professor
of Divinity in 1700, and in that capacity, when Queen
Anne came to Cambridge, April 16th, 1705, and an
extraordinary commencement was held in honour of her
visit, " opened that Ceremony with a very learned and
eloquent Speech." The Queen went to Trinity, where
the great Newton was knighted, to St. John's, and to
service at King's.
" After Prayers Her Majesty went to Queens' College,
where she was received by Dr. James in the same manner
aud with the same expressions of Duty and Loyalty as she
had been in the other Houses, which she had been pleased
to honour with her presence : From thence Her Majesty
took Coach, and returned the same evening to Newmarket,
very well satisfied with all the marks of Obedience and
ELECTION BY ROYAL MANDATE
Loyalty which she had met with " (" London Gazette,"
April 19, 1705).
A Fellow of Queens' was chosen as one of the five
Delegates sent to represent the University at the
bicentenary of the University of Frankfort on the Oder
in 1706, " when the deputation was received at Frankfort
with the utmost courtesy, the King of Prussia assisting
in person upon the occasion " (Cooper, " Ann., 1 ' iv. 75).
This was Henry Plumptre, M.D., who was elected
Fellow in 1702, but vacated his Fellowship by not
taking orders. He was afterwards an eminent Physician
in London and President of the College of Physicians.
Dr. James was one of the Trustees appointed by the
will of William Worts to administer his splendid
benefactions to the University. He was also one of the
Heads who, in 1710, deprived William Whiston the
Lucasian Professor, who " believed in everything except
the Trinity, 1 ' for publishing and avowing Arian tenets
(Cooper, "Ann.," iv. 86 and 103). He lived to see
the accession of the House of Hanover, and may have
been one of the Heads who presented George I. with an
address of welcome at St. James', September 22nd, 1714,
and again with an address on the failure of the Old
Pretender, August 16th, 1715. But his long tenure of
the Headship was drawing to a close. He had ruled
Queens' College under six Sovereigns (Charles II.,
James II., William and Mary, Anne, George L), and
had been President for upwards of forty-one years, when
he died, unmarried, at the age of seventy-five, March
15th, 1717. " He had proved himself an excellent
Master, very attentive to the business and interests of
p
QUEENS' COLLEGE
the College during his life, and was a considerable
Benefactor to it at his death." By his will he gave the
College an estate at Haddenham in Cambridgeshire,
and an Exchequer annuity of =£50 per annum to found
four " poor scholarships," a term equivalent to the more
modern sizarships, at 2.9. 6d. per week each, and for an
allowance of 2s. 6d. per week in meat to four poor
people, of whom the College scullion was always to be
one, and the others were to be named by the President.
On this bequest Dr. Plumptre notes that " during the
continuance of the Exchequer Annuity there is a sur-
plus in this account which is divided among the Master
and Fellows. When that ceases, March 25th, 1830, this
dividend will cease also. 1 ' In 1701 Dr. James had
given £2,0 to the College, on condition that £1 should
be paid on Christmas Eve in equal portions to the
eight almswomen "for the purchase of a Christmas
dinner in commemoration of Lady Joan Burgh, who
gave St. Nicholas Court to the College.'" Dr. James
also left to the Library his books and JP50 for pur-
chasing new books ; and bequeathed money with which
the Rectory of Grimston, Norfolk, was bought.
Other benefactions belonging to the period covered
by this Chapter are these. Bishop Sparrow gave i?100
for wainscoting and adorning the Parlour (Combina-
tion-room). Dr. William Roberts, Bishop of Bangor,
and formerly Fellow, gave =£100 to found a scholarship
in 1665, with a preference for a poor scholar of the
diocese of Bangor. In 1670 John Joscelyn gave an
augmentation out of lands in Sturmer to the Hebrew
Lectureship founded by his great uncle. But this
benefaction was lost by a flaw in the settlement.
ELECTION BY ROYAL MANDATE 227
Edward Kemp, elected Fellow 1632, ejected 1644 and
restored 1660, who died Rector of Eversden 1671, gave
to the Chapel £300, out of which was purchased an
annuity of ,£16 rising out of an estate at Willingham.
Thomas Clarke, M.A., Rector of Maningford Abbots,
Wiltshire, formerly Fellow, gave in 1674 an estate at
Eversleigh in Wiltshire (exchanged for an estate at
Kingston, . Cambridgeshire) to found four scholarships
of £10 per annum each. He desired that one of his
scholarships should go to the Librarian. £3 was to go
annually to the College Stock, and the surplus of the
annual rent to buy books for the Library. " By this
he is the principal Benefactor to the Library." Matthew
Andrews, Fellow, in the same year gave all his medical
books to the Library. Dr. Robert Mapletoft, Fellow,
afterwards Master of Pembroke and Dean of Ely, gave
£100 towards purchasing the fee-farm rent payable to
the Crown for the manor of Eversden, the interest to
found two poor scholarships and to augment the stipends
of the Censor Theologicus and the Catechist. Mrs.
Sarah Bardsey, widow of Dr. Edmund Bardsey, one of
the ejected Fellows, gave the Rectory of Hickling in
Nottinghamshire. Richard Bryan, B.D., Vice-President,
gave £50 in 1680. In 1691 Mr. Thomas Alston, of
Assington in Suffolk, gave a rent-charge of £3 per
annum, charged on a farm at Assington, to found a poor
scholarship, with a preference first for any one of the
name of Alston, then for a native of Suffolk. David
Edwards founded a Fellowship, Thomas Edwards,
LL.D., a scholarship. Griffith Lloyd in 1713 founded
two poor scholarships with a preference for natives of
Carmarthen, or failing such of Wales. Queens 1 was
9.9.S QUEENS' COLLEGE
one of the Colleges which benefited by the foundation
of Lady Sadleir in 1710. An Algebra Lectureship was
founded by her with a stipend of £%& paid out of an
estate in Hampshire. "The Master of Emmanuel
receives the rent of this estate and pays the stipends "
(Cooper, " Ann.," iv. 77).
A regulation passed in Dr. James'' time will show how
times have altered. On Oct. 26th, 1676, it was decided,
by the unanimous consent of the President and Fellows,
that nothing but Latin be spoken in the Hall at dinner
and supper, not only in term but out of term, by all
gownsmen constantly (excepting all Scarlet-days, the
twelve days at Christmas and Commemoration of Bene-
factors). Apparently this ordinance was found to be
somewhat severe, for Sept. 13th, 1680, there was a modi-
fication ; it was desired and consented to that English
may be spoken on Sundays and holidays and the decree
be in force at all other times (" Old Parch. Reg.," 157).
Nous avons change tout cela. Many of the present
Fellows can remember the time when they were fined a
bottle of wine for speaking three words of Latin in Hall,
and recall with mingled amusement and indignation the
gross injustice practised to render them amenable to the
penalty. The fine is still nominally in force, but the
custom, unhappily for the liveliness of the meal, is
" more honoured in the breach than the observance."
Francis Master, who was elected Fellow in 1676, is the
hero of some extraordinary episodes recorded in Dr.
James' Book. The extracts will tell their own story.
"'1 Fran : Master, Fellow of Queens Coll, do declare in ye
presence of God and upon ye faith of a Christian that I
ELECTION BY ROYAL MANDATE 229
was not one of those that broke into ye Master's Orchard
and destroyed ye Fruit-trees in August 1677.' This Mr.
Master would not subscribe but own'd his shame for it : ' I
am asham'd of the Act.' Upon Mr. Master's confession
that he was guilty of that ungratefull and inhuman act,
and upon his owning himself very sorry for it and upon his
earnest entreating of my pardon, I was willing to pass it
by, after he had subscribed w th his owne hand those words,
viz., ' I am asham'd of ye Act' Oct. 4, 1678 : in my bed-
chamber. H. J.
" ' I acknowledge that I said the last Congregation was a
pack'd Congregation, for which rash and indiscreet words
I acknowledge myself very sorry.' Francis Master. Oct. 4, ,
1678 : In my bedchamber H. J.
"Mr. Master, privately admonish'd for Pernoctation
(which appears to mean stopping all night out of College)
Mar. 3, 1678, again privately admonish'd for his loose
living Oct. 4, 1678 w th a promise by his owne hand, in Jan.
1679 came to officiate at Chappell on a Sunday in ye
Evening much disorder'd w th drink. In ye same yeare
from Shrove Monday until ye Friday in Whitsun-week
never at ye Chappell foure times, lieing for ye most part
out of ye Coll dureing all that time, and that at houses of
noe good note, particularly at ye 3 Tuns on Easter Eve
and Easter-night, and soe continually notwithstanding
many and frequent messages from myselfe and ye earnest
importunities of his Friends to repaire to ye Coll. Mr.
Master return'd to ye Coll about Shrove-tide in ye yeare
1679 and having lain in ye Town for ye most part at ye
3 Tuns for 5 weeks together and never been at Chappell
nor in ye Hall dureing all that time was on 14 Apr : 1680
punish'd according to ye Statutes for Pernoctation 20'-, and
then with ye consent of ye Fellows and at his owne request
sent into ye country and not to return without leave,
230 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
return'd again in Oct : since w ch time he has liv'd very-
disorderly lieing for ye most part out of ye Coll and
abstaining from ye Publick Prayers, notwithstanding
severall messages sent to him he would not repayre to ye
Coll, but now, viz Nov. 29, 1680, appearing before myselfe
and ye Society at a publick meeting he was then in my
owne name and ye names of ye whole Society Ad-
monish'd according to Statute for his scandalous manner of
Liveing & ye reproach he brought upon ye Coll. Hen.
James."
It is to be hoped that Mr. Master became a wiser
and a better man. The admonitions are not repeated,
either privately in Dr. James'' bed-chamber or at a
public meeting. He must at least have ceased his
scandalous life, for "he was preferred to two livings
in Canterbury, which vacated his fellowship, 1684."
Dr. James 1 Book contains abstracts of the College
Accounts during the greater part of his Mastership.
The income of the College varied a good deal. As a
specimen of a good year the Account rendered Lady-
Day and Michaelmas 1710 (Dr. James 1 Book 11) may
be taken. The total sum received at Lady-Day is
returned as i?385 4?. lid., at Michaelmas i?298 0s. lOd.
To this rent-receipt are added balances which make up
.£707 2s. Id., but payments amounting to <£104 9s.
have to be deducted, so that the sum available for
division is ,£602 13*. Id. Of this the President receives
two-twentieths, £60 5s. The President pays 15s. Id.
for Commons, the Fellows 1 Commons amount to
,£245 4s. 3d., leaving for division among the eighteen
Fellows ,£297 19*. 5d., or £16 lis. apiece, the odd 1.?. 5d.
being given Divisori. The Accounts for some parts of
ELECTION BY ROYAL MANDATE 231
the property are kept separately, and fines on renewal
of leases and the like come in periodically. Dr. James 1
Book contains a full account of the different properties
then held by the College. From this book it would
probably be possible to exhibit fully the conditions of
the College Finances during the period. But space for-
bids that this should be attempted here.
In 1685, a year of repairs, a considerable sum was
spent on the first Court. Dr. James 1 account is this :
" This yeare all ye first Court was stripp'd, ye Sparrs
w ch in many places were very bad new lin'd, all ye upper
Windows made new & regular, the great Gate alter'd, ye
Gate-House & Regent- Walk (across the Court) new laid
with Freestone, ye bow-window in ye Hall repair d with
Freestone & new glass there, ye Dialls new painted, ye
Cripple betwixt ye library & ye Master's Bedchamber made
new ; that vast Summer in ye Master's Study, on w cl1 all ye
Sparrs of that building lean (being rotted at both ends)
supported by two great pieces of Timber, a Cupola new
made &c. all w ch make ye moneth (monthly) acct s swell to
soe great a sum " (" Magn. Journ.," vi. 221).
The monthly accounts for Sept. 1685, are swollen to
=£"490, and nearly all this amount was spent upon the
repairs and alterations named in Dr. James 1 note.
CHAPTER IX
UNDER THE GEORGES
" In God's name, stop there. Be Church of England men still.
Do not cast away the peculiar glory which God has put upon you."
Presidents : John Davies, 1717-1732 ; William Sedgwick, 1732-
1760; Robert Plumptre, 1760-1788; Isaac Milner, 1788-1820;
Henry Godfrey, 1820-1832.
For good or for evil there can be no question that the
fortunes of the Universities have always been closely
bound up with the fortunes of the Church of England.
The closeness of the connexion was remarked and
reprobated as early as the reign of Elizabeth, when it
was represented that the Universities were becoming
too exclusively seminaries for the Anglican clergy. But
the Bishops at the time were not inclined to loosen the
ties that bound the Universities to the Church, and it
was reserved for the nineteenth century to sweep away
all the restrictions which could prevent any man from
joining or enjoying the full privileges of the Universities.
In the eighteenth century the Church of England pro-
bably sank to the lowest level she has ever reached.
No more significant condemnation of her condition can
be found than the warning given to Prince Charles, the
Young Pretender, " not to judge of the English clergy
a
a
a
5
w
o
w
o
p
o
O
E-
K
O
>5
UNDER THE GEORGES
by the Bishops, who were not promoted for their piety
and learning, but for writing pamphlets, being active at
elections, and voting as the ministry directed them.'
The Church, it is true, at no period of her history
possessed abler scholars among her clergy. But the
prevailing policy of the State was fatal to the real
efficiency of the National Church, and general deadness
and inertia are unhappily the marked features of the
period. What happened in the Church happened also
in the Universities. And a College is a microcosm of
the University, and, as a general rule, exhibits the same
characteristics, bhe same virtues or the same vices, on a
smaller scale. And so it was here. Numbers are not
the only test, or the best test, of the efficiency of a
College. But to some extent they must be accepted as
a gauge pf prosperity. The members of Queens' Col-
lege, who had amounted in 1621 to two hundred and
thirty, and in 1672 to one hundred and twenty, in
1753 had sunk to about sixty. There were at that
date " a Master, twenty Fellows, forty-five scholars and
eight exhibitioners, total usually about sixty. 11 This
statement is taken from " Carter's History, 1 ' which the
late Mr. Cooper characterises as "a very worthless
book 1 ' ("Ann., 11 iv. 272). And though probably
Carter's use of the terms " scholars and exhibitioners "
is not more accurate than his " total, 1 ' it cannot be sup-
posed that he is greatly mistaken as to the number of
men then in residence, nor does it appear that the
number varied very much in the period now under
consideration. Or again, take as a test the distinguished
members of the College who lived during the same
years. The earliest of them should more properly be
234 QUEENS' COLLEGE
credited to the preceding period. But let these be
included ; though a long enough list can easily be made,
and many of the names are the names of men of real
mark, it will probably be felt that, as a whole, the list is
inferior to the shorter summaries given in previous
chapters. The names are taken from the somewhat
fuller list in Cooper's "Memorials'" (p. 313 ff.) Among
the better known Queens 1 men, then, are Dr. Lawrence
Fogg, Dean of Chester (d. 1718) ; Sir Philip Meadows,
Fellow, Ambassador to Portugal, Denmark and Sweden
(d. 1718) ; Simon Ockley, Professor of Arabic, a great
Orientalist, author of the "History of the Saracens,"
&c. (d. 1720) ; Poley Clopton, M.D., Fellow, a distin-
guished physician (d. 1730); Thomas Fuller, M.D.,
physician and medical writer (d. 1734) ; Dr. Nicholas
Penny, Fellow, Dean of Lichfield (d. 1745) ; William
Bramston, Fellow, Commissary of the University (d.
1734) ; Dr. William Bramston, Fellow, Canon of
Worcester (d. 1735); Dr. John Warren, Fellow, Pre-
bendary of Exeter (d. 1736) ; Dr. Thomas Brooke,
Dean of Chester (d. 1737) ; Joseph Wasse, Fellow, an
excellent classical scholar, editor of " Thucydides,"
"Sallust," &c. (d. 1738); Sir John Comyns, Chief
Baron of the Exchequer, author of a " Digest of the
Laws of England," &c. (d. 1740) ; Dr. Benjamin Lang-
with, Fellow, Prebendary of Chichester, antiquary
(d. 1744); Dr. Thomas Brett, nonjuror and contro-
versialist (d. 1744); Thomas Pellett, M.D., President
of the College of Physicians (d. 1744) ; Henry Plumptre
M.D., Fellow, President of the College of Physicians
(d. 1746) ; Dr. Charles Ashton, Fellow, Master of Jesus,
a learned critic (d. 1752) ; Dr. Peter Allix, Dean of Ely
UNDER THE GEORGES 235
(d. 1758) ; Dr. Isaac Maddox, Bishop of Worcester
(d. 1759); Dr. Thomas Rymer, Fellow, author of a
" General Representation of Revealed Religion " (d.
1761) ; John Hadley, M.D., Fellow, chemist and physi-
cian (d. 1764); Dr. William Geekie, Fellow, Arch-
deacon of Gloucester (d. 1767) ; Dr. John Ryder,
Fellow, Archbishop of Tuam (d. 1775) ; Dr. Benjamin
Newcome, Dean of Rochester (d. 1775) ; Dr. Richard
Newcome, Fellow, Bishop of St. Asaph (d. 1769) ; Dr.
Charles Plumptre, Fellow, Archdeacon of Ely (d. 1779);
Daniel Wray, Fellow, an admirable scholar and critic
(d. 1783); Sir George Saville, M.P. for Yorkshire
(d. 1784) ; Henry Taylor, Fellow, Vicar of Portsmouth,
one of the writers against Gibbon (d. 1785) ; Abel
Ward, Fellow, Archdeacon of Chester (d. 1785) ; John
Mitchell, Fellow, Woodwardian Professor (d. 1793);
Russell Plumptre, M.D., Fellow, Regius Professor of
Physic (d. 1793) ; Henry Venn, Fellow, author of " The
Complete Duty of Man," &c. (d. 1796) ; Peter Newcome,
Fellow, author of the " History of St. Alban's Abbey "
(d. 1797) ; William Brown, Fellow, Archdeacon of
Northampton (d. 1797) ; Owen Manning, Fellow, joint-
author of " Dictionarium Saxonico et Gothico-Latinum, 11
&c. (d. 1801); Thomas Fyshe Palmer, Fellow, an
advocate of Parliamentary reform (d. 1802); Stebbing
Shaw, Fellow, author of the " History of Staffordshire "
(d. 1802) ; Joseph Dacre Carlyle, Professor of Arabic,
Orientalist (d. 1803) ; Robert Acklam Ingram, Fellow,
a writer on social science (d. 1809); Dr. Claudius
Buchanan, author of "Christian Researches in Asia, 1 '
the famous advocate of missionary work in the East
(d. 1815) ; Christopher Wy will, an advocate of Parlia-
236 QUEENS' COLLEGE
mentary reform and religious freedom (d. 1820) ; John
Hatsell, Clerk of the House of Commons, an authority
on Parliamentary Proceedings (d. 1820); Thomas
Harrison, Fellow, Commissary of the University (d.
1824) ; Thomas Truebody Thomason, Fellow, Chaplain
at Calcutta, translator of the Old Testament into
Hindustani (d. 1829) ; James Plumptre, author of
"Sermons, Dramas, 1 '' &c. (d. 1832). This is a con-
siderable list, and perhaps the most striking feature in
it is the variety of the departments in which excellence
was gained. The names are "many for many virtues
excellent, None but for some, and yet all different."
Nevertheless there will probably be few who do not
think that, on the whole, these names are hardly equal
to the names of the preceding period.
If the foregoing reflections are justly conceived, the
triumphant paean with which Dr. Plumptre opens his
account of the Headship of John Davies, the twenty-
third President of Queens' College, will be thought to
be misplaced. " The Revolution," writes Dr. Plumptre,
"had now taken place near thirty years, and the
Hanover Succession near three. In this Golden Age of
this Island, the season of Mandates was over ; and may
it never return ! " It is permissible to echo Dr.
Plumptre's wish, that "the season of Mandates may
never return," with a private reservation that there may
be worse evils than mandates in the history of a College,
and with a refusal to endorse his verdict that the early
Georgian period was " the Golden Age of this Island."
But Dr. Plumptre, careful and industrious as he was,
could not be expected to foresee the thoughts and
judgments of our day, and it is only too possible that a
UNDER THE GEORGES 237
later age will find us of the present time much more
mistaken and much less meritorious than Dr. Plumptre
was. " O wad some pow'r the giftie gi'e us, to see our-
sels as others see us ! "
However this may be, Dr. John Davies became
President by the free election of the Fellows, March 23rd,
1717. John Davies was the son of a London merchant,
educated at the Charterhouse, entered the College 1695,
was elected Fellow in 1700 and vacated his fellowship
by preferment in 1712. He was Chaplain to Dr. John
Moore, Bishop of Ely, whose library was purchased by
King George I., and presented to the University.
"This collection valuable for its extent, being above
thirty thousand volumes, and for the rarity of its
treasures both printed and manuscript, is considered
the greatest benefaction Cambridge has yet received 1 '
(Cooper, " Ann.," iv. 140). The Bishop had preferred
his Chaplain to the Rectory of Fen Ditton and to a
stall in Ely Cathedral. Davies was a good classical
scholar and a fine critic, and his work as an editor of
the Classics (" Cicero's Philosophical Works," " Cagsar's
Commentaries," " Maximus Tyrius," &c.) was consider-
able. In the year of his election, George I. visited the
University, and the President, who was LL.D., was
admitted D.D. with two other Heads of Houses, Mr.
Grigg, Master of Clare, and Mr. Waterland, Master of
Magdalene, the famous theologian, by royal mandate in
the King's presence. His Majesty was enthusiastically
received and was most gracious to the University. His
favour was evidently a reward to Whig Cambridge for
being good, perhaps also a punishment to Tory Oxford
for being naughty. David Wilkins, who was one of
238 QUEENS' COLLEGE
the Doctors created on this occasion, ends his account
of the proceedings with the words, "What will the
Sister University say to this ? " (Cooper, " Ann.," iv. 148).
In 1718 Dr. Davies was nominated as Vice-Chancellor
against the outgoing Vice-Chancellor Dr. Gooch. The
election was a vote of confidence in Dr. Gooch after the
dreadful Bentley controversy, and he was re-elected by
122 votes to 60. Dr. Davies served the office of Vice-
Chancellor in 1725. He died March 7th, 1732, at the
early age of fifty-two. His plain tombstone, with its
short inscription, is not a greater contrast to the ful-
some panegyrics customary at the time than it is a
strong proof of his sober taste. His name, age, the
date of his death, &c, are stated, and then Plura dici
noluit vir optimus. Many of the Fellows elected during
his Presidentship attained eminence. Such were
William Bramston, LL.D., Commissary of the Uni-
versity, who "died in the Fleet," 1734: William
Geekie, Chaplain to the Duke of Somerset Chancellor
of the University, and afterwards Chaplain to Arch-
bishop Wake and Archdeacon of Gloucester; John
Ryder, Rector of Nuneaton, Bishop of several Dioceses
successively in Ireland, who died Archbishop of Tuam
in 1775, when he was upwards of ninety years of age.
Joseph Wasse, who was as fine a scholar as Dr. Davies,
was two years his senior as a Fellow. Wasse was
Chaplain to the Duke of Kent and subsequently Rector
of Aynhoe in Northamptonshire.
William Sedgwick was chosen to succeed Dr. Davies
in the Presidentship March 15th, 1732. He was the son
of Leonard Sedgwick, Rector of Thornton and Perpetual
Curate of Stony-Stratford in Buckinghamshire, was
UNDER THE GEORGES 239
educated at Eton, entered Queens' College in 1716, was
elected Fellow 1723, and was still Fellow at the time of
his election. " Not being of standing for the degree of
B.D., he obtained the signatures of a majority of the
Heads to a Petition to the King for a Mandate for that
degree, without which the Crown has not granted even
Mandates for degrees since the Revolution " (Plumptre
MS.) At the time of his election he held the College
living of Oakington together with his Fellowship. But
he vacated it shortly afterwards on being presented by
Lord Chancellor Hardwicke to the Rectory of St.
Clement East Cheap, London.
Structural alterations of some importance were made
in the College during the time of Mr. Sedgwick. The
most considerable were the panelling of the Hall and
covering it with a flat ceiling (happily removed in
1846), the erection of Essex's building, commonly
known as the Fellows' Building, and the throwing
across the river of the famous wooden Bridge. The
Bridge is no doubt one of the features of the College
and of Cambridge, and may be set in the balance against
the barbarism of ceiling the Hall and the incongruity
of the Essex building with the rest of the College. But
it should be said in defence of the latter that its
interior is superior to its exterior and the rooms inter-
nally are handsome and most comfortable. Here is
Dr. Plumptre's account of these changes, which shall be
given in extenso without comment.
" Early in his (Mr. Sedgwick's) time the Hall was new
wainscoted and fitted up in its present neat and elegant
manner, under the direction of Sir James Burrough, then
Fellow of Caius College and one of the Esquires Beadles,
240 QUEENS' COLLEGE
afterwards Master of the College (Caius). And in the
year 1756 the Clunch building extending from the Lodge
Stair-case by the Town Bridge to the College Kitchen on
the outside, and forming nearly two sides of the Court
called Erasmus's Court within, being very much decayed,
was taken down, and the present useful and ornamental
building begun in its place. It was planned and executed
by Mr. Essex,* an eminent Architect and man of good
understanding and character in Cambridge; and was
finished (except the fitting up of the rooms) before the
death of Mr. Sedgwick in 1760. Towards defraying the
expense of it he had advanced £1000, on condition of
receiving an Annuity for life from the College, about a
year and a half before his death. The present Bridge
from the Cloisters to the Stable-yard was built in the year
1749, and the wall along the river, as far as the College
boundaries extend, was carried on and the Grove altered
from its then nearly natural state to its present one
(excepting some few additional improvements since made)
in the three following years. This, and some considerable
improvements in the Gardens of the College, and in the
Cloister Court, were principally contrived by and the work
carried on under the direction of John Fortin the then
Gardiner (died 1783 after having been Gardiner upwards
of forty years), a man of excellent skill in the ordinary
parts of his business, and of some taste and knowledge in
these superior parts, qualities which were more useful and
pleasing ; to which he added the more important ones to
his Masters and himself of being an honest and faithful
Servant."
The building, begun September 1756, was finished
* An account of James Essex will be found, Cooper, ■■ Ann.," iv.
412-413.
UNDER THE GEORGES 241
September 1760, when Mr. Essex was paid twenty
guineas " for surveying the new Building."
" It was at that time intended to rebuild the whole of
the river-front, including the Lodge ; and the part erected
is only one wing of a more extensive design. The opposite
wing would have been exactly similar ; the central block
would have been set in advance of the rest. It was sur-
mounted by a pediment, and access to the bridge was
provided through a lofty classical doorway, over which was
a smaller pediment. The design, which was much admired
at the time, will be found in the Cambridge Guide for
1796 " (" Willis and Clark," ii. 18).
The work, in the Hall was earlier in date. It may be
premised that the panelling, which was removed, and
which, after many years of seclusion in the Servants 1 Hall
of the Lodge, has now been restored to a worthier posi-
tion in the President's Study, had been put up in 1531-
1532? It was about eight feet high and consisted of
" linen " panels surmounted by a frieze which contained
alternately the arms of benefactors in relief and gro-
tesque heads finely carved. The full accounts for this
panelling are printed from the "Magnum Joufnale'"
by Willis and Clark, ii. 61-68. The total cost was
£50 5s. 3%d. The Screen was made 1548, but doors
were not added until 1628 ("Magn. Journ., 11 quoted
Willis and Clark, ii. 46). Under Sir James Bur-
rough's direction a flat ceiling with an Italian cornice
was introduced under the old open-timbered roof.
Over the high table was erected a composition of wain-
scot "consisting of coupled Corinthian columns sup-
porting an entablature and pediment with side-panels
Q
242 QUEENS' COLLEGE
in the same style ; so that had not the pointed windows
been retained the whole would have appeared uniform.
The Oriel remained intact, but the tracery heads of the
lateral windows were removed " (Willis and Clark, ii.
46). The work was begun in 1732 and finished in
1734. The work was entirely to the taste of the
eighteenth century as Cole's description, written
February 22, 1742, shows,
" [The Hall] very lately was elegantly fitted up according
to the present taste and is now by much y e neatest Hall of
any in y e University being compleatly wainscoted and
painted with handsom fluted Pillars behind ye Fellows
Table at ye upper end of it over w ch are neatly carved ye
Armes of ye Foundress : at ye lower end of it over ye two
neat Iron Doors of ye Screens w ch front ye Butteries and
Kitchin is a small Gallery for Musick occasionally" (MSS. ii.
12, quoted "Willis and Clark," ii. 46).
The famous Dial also belongs to this time. Cole
describes it thus :
" Over ye W. end [of the Chapel] is a small Tower * and
against ye side of it w ch fronts ye Court is lately placed a
very handsome Clock, 1733, and directly under it on ye
wall of ye Chapel and over ye Door w ch leads to it is also
lately painted a very elegant Sun Dial with all ye signs.
This is no small ornam' to ye Court to enliven it."
The Dial replaced an older one made in 1642. The
present Dial and the Bridge are commonly connected
* Taken down in 1804, replaced by a classical clock-turret, which
in 1848 was removed in favour of the present wooden turret erected
under the direction of Mr. Brandon, Architect (see " Willis and
Clark," ii. 51).
'UNDER THE GEORGES 243
with the name of Sir Isaac Newton. But Newton died
1728, and Cole dates the Clock and Dial very precisely
1733 and Dr. Plumptre as precisely dates the Bridge
1749. However the Bridge replaced another wooden
one built in 1700, about which it is possible that New-
ton may have been consulted.
Mr. Sedgwick did not proceed to the D.D. degree,
and in consequence the Vice-Chancellorship did not
come to him until 1741, when he was elected and
served the office. He is described by his successor as
" a man of weak nerves and an infirm constitution, which
he probably render'd still more so by too much indulgence,
instead of using proper methods and exertions to strengthen
it. For the last fifteen years of his life he very rarely went
out of the Lodge. He died Nov. 4th, 1760, in the sixtieth
year of his age, unmarried, and was buried in the Chapel,
where there is a monument to his memory."
Mr. Sedgwick was a considerable Benefactor to the
College. He gave two freehold estates and a leasehold
in Northamptonshire, the latter of which (according to
the direction of his Will) was sold and half of the farm
at Wrestlingworth in Bedfordshire bought with the
purchase money. The uses to which his benefaction
was to be applied iwere left (with some hints of the
testator's wishes and intention) to his executor, Dr.
Walker. The benefaction was applied to augment the
Mastership, to found two scholarships, one of them
with a preference first for a native of Buckinghamshire
then of Northamptonshire, the scholars to be named by
the President. The surplus after the stipends are paid is
to be divided among such Fellows as are resident in the
244 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
College on November 3, and the six following days.
Mr. Sedgwick also left his books, amounting to some
thirteen hundred volumes, as an heirloom to the Lodge.
The College received other considerable benefactions
about this time. Ferdinando Smythies, B.D., Vice-
President, gave in his life-time (about 1725) ,£1500
Bank Stock, the interest of which was to be employed
to found three scholarships for B.A.s of £2,0 each, to
be held in addition to any scholarships they may have,
to give each of the Almswomen 1*. a week in addition
to their former allowance and £2 each annually to buy
coals and cloaks : the residue (if any) to be applied to
pay for the degrees of poor scholars or to buy them
books, or assist them in sickness, or in such other
charitable uses as shall be thought proper by the Pre-
sident. But, writes Dr. Plumptre,
"by reason of the fall of interest of Bank Stock these
scholarships do not hold out now above £l6 per annum,
and from the rise in the price of coals the Almswomen's
quantity would have been considerably lessened, if it had
not been agreed by the Master and Fellows to give them
a chaldron of coals annually instead of a fixed sum of
money."
David Hughes, B.D., who died in 1777, and had been
for many years Senior Fellow, made the College his
residuary legatee. By this disposition the College got
his books, whereby the Library was enriched by more
than 2000 volumes, and £2400 in the Funds. The
application of the money was left by the will to the
President, and has been applied to provide Prizes.
Mrs. Mary Buck, whose first husband was Ralph
UNDER THE GEORGES 245
Davenant, gave the Rectory of Sandon in 1736. The
Rectory of South Walsham and the Vicarage of Rock-
land St. Peter's in Norfolk were purchased in 1734
with money left for the purpose by several persons, e.g.,
Dr. Ralph Perkins, Fellow, Canon of Ely, Dr. Hayes,
Fellow, &c.
The writer of the MS. history was elected to succeed
Mr. Sedgwick, Nov. 12th, 1760. Robert Plumptre
" was the youngest of ten children of John Plumptre, Esq.,
a gentleman of moderate estate in Nottinghamshire, and a
Member of Parliament above forty years, most of which
time he was representative of the town of Nottingham.
He received his school education under Dr. Henry
Newcome at Hackney, from whence he was removed to
Queens' College in April 1741. . . . He was chosen
Fellow March 21st 1745, and his Fellowship had been
vacated in 1755 by his being preferred, in succession to
his elder brother Charles (Fellow of Queens' and Arch-
deacon of Ely), to the Rectory of Wimpole, and Vicarage
of Whaddon, both in Cambridgeshire, by the favour of the
then Lord Chancellor Hardwicke (High Steward of the
University). In Sept. 1756 he married the second daughter
of Dr. Newcome, his former schoolmaster (by whom he has
had ten children, nine of whom are living in 1784), and in
about a fortnight after, and about two months only before
resigning the Seals, his kind and most excellent patron
gave him a Prebend in the Church of Norwich. He took
the degree of D.D. Oct. 18th, preceding his election, per
saltum, not having till then taken that of B.D."
Dr. Plumptre was Vice-Chancellor in 1761-1762,
when an address was presented to George III. at
St. James', Sept. 3rd, 1762, on the occasion of the birth
246 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
of George IV. (Cooper, " Ann.," iv. 308). Dr. Plumptre
contributed to the Verses written in the honour of the
marriage of George III., of the Prince's birth, and again
in celebration of the Peace of Fontainebleau. Another
contributor to these compositions was the Hon. John
Grey,ione of the three brothers, sons of the Marquess of
Stamford, who presented, in 1766, the three pictures of
Queen Elizabeth Widville, Erasmus, and Sir Thomas
Smith (painted by Thomas Hudson, whose pupil Sir
Joshua Reynolds was), which adorn the upper end of the
Hall. Soon after the Duke of Grafton had succeeded
his Grace of Newcastle as Chancellor, a change was
made in the academic dress of the Undergraduates
which deserves to be chronicled in passing. The head-
gear of the undergraduates had been a round cap or
bonnet of black cloth, lined with black silk or canvas,
with a • brim of black velvet for pensioners, and of
prunella or silk for sizars. The undergraduates now
petitioned the Chancellor to obtain consent for them to
wear square caps, that they might attend his installation
" in a dress more decent and becoming,'" stating that the
Heads of Houses had no objection to the proposed
change. The Duke intimated to the University that
the square cap might be adopted by the undergraduates,
and this was done. " In this quiet way was a change
made in a trifling matter, which if it had happened in
the days of Whitgift and Cartwright would have set the
whole University in an uproar " (Cooper, " Ann.," iv.
356). This was in 1769, and in that year, Dr. Law
having resigned the Professorship of Casuistry on his
appointment to the See of Carlisle, Dr. Plumptre
succeeded to the Professorship.
UNDER THE GEOKGES 247
There was at this time an agitation that B.A.s, who
were required to sign the Thirty-nine Articles, should
be released from this requirement, which resulted in
1772 in the substitution of a declaration, " I, A. B., do
declare that I am a bond fide member of the Church of
England as by law established." In the agitation a
member of Queens' College took a leading part. This
young gentleman was Charles Crawford, a Fellow-
commoner of Queens', who presented to the Vice-
Chancellor a petition signed by a numerous body of
undergraduates, praying to be released from subscription
to the Articles on the ground that their academical
studies did not leave them time " to inquire into the
abstruser points of theology.'" As the Vice-Chancellor
took no notice of the document, Mr. Crawford went to
him and addressed him in these terms :
"Mr. Vice-Chancellor, I wait upon you again concerning
the petition of the undergraduates, and would beg to be
indulged with a few moments hearing. We have received
as yet no direct answer to our petition, which with great
submission we think deserves one. It has been intimated
to us, however, that it is' thought improper to grant us our
request at this time, lest those in authority in the Uni-
versity should be said to favour the petition of the clergy.
We have been told that after that is presented to Parlia-
ment we may expect relief. Our petition we think to be
quite independent of the petition of the clergy. We beg
that our subscription to the Articles may be dispensed with,
not because we object to any of them, but because we have
not had an opportunity to study them. You must consider,
Sir, that there are some who have subscribed their names
who are to take their degrees in a- few days : they there-
248 QUEENS' COLLEGE
fore claim an immediate relief. The most zealous advo-
cates of the Church will not impute to you a desertion of
its cause by granting our request ; for all mankind with
one voice cry out against the imposition we speak of as
absurd and illegal, which an arbitrary Stuart, in the wan-
tonness of his power, had pleased to establish in the
University. What answer, Sir, shall I carry back to the
rest of the subscribers ? "
The Vice-Chancellor then said that there were many
names erased in the petition, that other persons were
also willing to erase their names, and that he had not
power to grant the petition. In this episode Mr.
Crawford appears in the light of the plausible petitioner.
We see him next as an injured innocent. He indicts
the Porter of Queens 1 College and others for an assault.
The case was finally decided in the King's Bench, when
it appeared that Mr. Crawford was expelled the College
by an order of Sept. 27th, 1773, made by the Master and
two Fellows, but confirmed by a College order Jan. 13th,
1774, under the hand of the Master and ten Fellows.
Mr. Crawford afterwards came into the College garden
with intent to take possession of his rooms, whereupon
the defendants took hold of him and conducted him out'
of the College. Mr. Crawford contended that his
expulsion was illegal and unstatutable, and consequently
that the assault was not justifiable. But the Court
gave judgment for the defendants, intimating that Mr.
Crawford as a Fellow-commoner was a mere boarder and
had no corporate rights, but, if he had, his only mode of
redress was by an appeal to the Visitor ; consequently
that the order of expulsion must be taken to be a right
sentence till voided or set aside by the Visitor, and the
UNDER THE GEORGES 249
defendants acting under it were thereby justified in the
assault (Cooper, " Ann.," iv. 363 and 378). Is it to be
supposed that the Vice-Chancellor was very sorry to have
seen the last of Mr. Crawford ?
Dr. Plumptre narrates two events in his history at a
length for which he apologises, on the ground that " he
has done little more than state facts which scarce any
one was so well enabled to state as himself, which he
hopes may amuse the curious, or even perhaps afford a
degree of use to posterity. 1 ' One of the events led to
his second tenure of the Vice-Chancellorship, the other
arose out of his occupation of that office. They
must be described more succinctly here. In 1777 Dr.
Thomas, Master of Christs', and Dr. Plumptre, President
of Queens', were the two heads nominated for the office
of Vice-Chancellor, and it being Dr. Thomas's turn to
serve he was duly elected (November 4th). Dr. Thomas
pleaded that his health would not allow him to take
office ("he had the gout slightly in one hand"). A
grace to excuse him on payment of a fine was proposed
but rejected. However, Dr. Thomas refused to be
sworn in, and the University was left for a month with-
out a Vice-Chancellor. Business was at a standstill,
so the Master of Trinity, Dr. Hinchliffe, Bishop of
Peterborough, and the Provost of King's, Dr. Cooke,
approached Dr. Plumptre. He told them that "he
would be as much ashamed to pass the office over to a
junior as he was unwilling to take it before a senior,"
and that if Dr. Thomas was formally relieved of the
Vice-Chancellorship, he would, if elected, serve. On
consideration of the situation the Heads determined that
the proper course would be, as Dr. Thomas had been
250 QUEENS' COLLEGE
chosen by the Senate at large, for the Senate at large to
have his excuse laid before it dc novo, and approve or
disapprove of it. There remained the difficulty that
there was no one to call the Heads together. They
agreed to sign a request to the Heads to meet : they
met, the proposed course of action was approved by
the meeting, and communicated to the Proctors. A
congregation was called, Dr. Thomas' excuse was
received, and allowed by a large majority. The heads
then pricked Dr. Plumptre and Dr. Goddard, Master of
Emmanuel, for the office of Vice-Chancellor, and on the
following day (December 3) Dr. Plumptre was elected
and immediately sworn into office. (See also Cooper,
" Ann.," iv. 386-387).
The second event was this. William Howell Ewin,
LL.D., of St. John's, had been accused before the pre-
ceding Vice-Chancellor, Dr. Chevalier, Master of St.
John's, of lending sums of money at exorbitant interest
to Mr. Bird, Fellow-commoner of Trinity, who was a
minor, without his tutor's consent. There was no definite
statute against the practice, and a doubt arose whether
the Vice-Chancellor could take cognisance of the offence.
Eminent counsel were consulted, and unanimously gave
it as their opinion that the offence was cognisable in
the Vice-Chancellor's Court, and punishable, if proved,
by suspension, expulsion, or other academical penalty.
Dr. Ewin had written to Dr. Hinchliffe, Master of
Trinity, acknowledging his fault and promising not
to offend again. But the charge was brought afresh
before Dr. Plumptre as Vice-Chancellor, and tried
before him and the Heads (October 14th, 1778). Dr.
Ewin protested against the citation and pleaded " not
UNDER THE GEORGES 251
guilty " under protest. The charge was fully proved and
there was no real defence. The Court adjourned till
October SI, when the defendant raised further objec-
tions and then left the court. The Vice-Chancellor and
Heads gave sentence that the defendant should be sus-
pended from his degrees, and expelled the University.
Dr. Ewin thereupon appealed to Delegates — the Dele-
gates chosen were Dr. Watson, Regius Professor of
Divinity, afterwards Bishop of Llandaff, Dr. Halifax,
Regius Professor of Civil Law, afterwards Bishop of St.
Asaph's, and Mr. Yates, Fellow of St. Catharine's.
These delegates reheard the case, withdrew the sentence
of expulsion but confirmed the sentence that the accused
should be suspended from his degrees. This revision of
the sentence was, no doubt, a compromise. Dr. Plumptre
is unable to understand it, but compromises are not
always logical. However, possibly encouraged by this,
Dr. Ewin took the case to the King's Bench, where the
sentence was reversed, and it was ordered that the accused
person should be restored to his degrees. The ground
for this decision given by Lord Mansfield, Lord Chief
Justice, was, that there being no University Statute
against the offence, the punishment of it was not
within the jurisdiction of the Vice- Chancellor's Court.
The practice indicted being dangerous to the existence
of the University, proofs of the charge should, said the
Chief Justice, have been laid before the Senate, which
might have passed sentence of expulsion upon him, or
such other sentence as it should have judged proper to
his crime. On which Dr. Plumptre comments :
"This mode of proceeding the Vice-Chancellor had
carefully avoided, because he saw that in Dr. Bentley's
252 QUEENS' COLLEGE
case it had been reprobated by the Court of King's Bench
as contrary to natural justice, because, the Senate not
being a Court of Judicature, the accused person could not
make his defence before it. As he very sincerely submits
his opinion (as he ought to do) to that of the Court, he
presumes that he did not sufficiently distinguish between
the two cases, and can only lament his error in an instance
in which he most earnestly wished to do right, and which
called for such exemplary punishment."
" Who shall decide, when doctors disagree ? " Every-
one will sympathize with Dr. Plumptre in his legal
dilemma. There is an account of the case in Cooper,
" Ann.," 388-389, and the sequel is given 392. Dr.
Ewin was restored to his degrees, but his name was
struck out of the Commission for the county and
a Grace was passed to stop " this most pernicious
evil."
Dr. Plumptre may be quoted for the last time to
describe the internal events of his Presidentship.
" In regard to Collegiate affairs worth recording in this
time they are only as follows. That in the summer after
his election, the offices on the North side of the Lodge
Gallery were built for him at the College expense, in lieu
of some that had stood on part of the ground of the new
building erected in Mr. Sedgwick's time. The inside of
the Chapel was likewise entirely refitted, as it now (1784)
appears, in the years 1774 and 1775, and the Library
enlarged at the same time by taking into it the principal
part of a set of rooms that were between that and the
Chapel, making the remaining part into a Gallery to the
Chapel for the use of the Master's family."
UNDER THE GEORGES 253
These alterations require some explanation. The
College Order for building the offices, a low range on
the garden side of the Lodge, is dated March 11th, 1761.
Fortunately the buildings are not visible except from
the President's garden. The alterations in the Chapel
are the natural sequel to the alterations in the Hall
made during the preceding Presidentship. The Chapel
had been refitted in 1661 after the ravages of William
Dowsing (see p. 170). The organ was repaired by the
celebrated Thamar in 1679, (" Magn. Journ.," vi. 189),
and a new organ bought in 1710 at a cost of £164 6s. 10^d.
(" Magn. Journ.," September 1710). The chapel, as it
then appeared, is described by Cole (MS. II. 13 to 18,
quoted by Willis and Clarke, ii. 40-41), February 22nd,
1742, and he paid fresh visits and noted the altera-
tions in progress July 2nd, 1768 and March 30th, 1773.
Parts of his description are worth quoting.
" Come we now to ye Chapel, w ch as I said before takes
up ye better half of ye S. side of ye 1 st Quadrangle, and
has a Tower at ye W. end of it : y e Altar is railed round
and stands on an Eminence of 3 Steps, and is intirely
covered with Crimson Velvet w th a gold Fringe at all ye
joynings of it : in ye Front of it in a Glory is a I. H. S. finely
wrought with gold : on an Eminence on ye Altar ag" ye
Wall is placed an handsom silver gilt Bason, w* two large
Candlesticks of ye same sort, and on y se is wrote at ye
bottom : Deo et Sacris Reginalibus Cardabr : Edw : Martin
Prcesid : on ye Bason ye same except ye Presidents name.
.... The upper end of ye Chapel is entirely Wainscoted
with Cedar from ye Pulpit, w ch is a small one of old
workmanship and stands in an Arch of ye S. wall, on one
side, and from ye Vestry Door w ch exactly fronts ye Pulpit,
254 QUEENS' COLLEGE
on ye other side. Over this Door stands ye Organ Loft
supported by two Iron Pillars in ye Chapel : and ye Organ,
w ch is a very handsome one, stands sideways in ye N. wall
of ye Chapel and has a way up to it by ye Vestry. The
Chapel is furnished on both sides with 2 Ranges of Stalls
and wainscoted in ye old manner, but very neatly : ye
Roof is arch'd and wainscoted, and finely gilt and painted.
There are more Monuments in this "Chapel than one would
have expected to have met with considering ye Bigness of
it, some of which are very curious ones and of good
Antiquity. ..."
"The Chapel in the Spring of 1773 was entirely taken
to Peices and new modelled, tho' it seemed to want it very
little ; every old and modern Tomb Stone being taken up
from the Floor, the Altar Peice taken away, with the stalls
and the blew coved Ceiling taking down in order to refit it
entirely, . . . The Ceiling being altered from a cove to a
flat one, the East Window was forced to be lowered. All
the Monuments and Stones were taken away and those on
the Walls put in different positions to answer one another.
The West End was enlarged (by putting back the Screen
some 3 feet) and a curious painted Room above the Entrance
into it converted into a Gallery for the Master's Family."
The College Orders explain the progress of these
alterations. On December 23rd, 1772, it was agreed to
refit the inside of the Chapel according to Mr. Essex's
plans, to make a Gallery for the Master's family " out
of part of the rooms late Mr. Thwaites's " and to take
the remaining part into the Library: to appoint Mr.
Essex Surveyor of the work with 5 per cent, on the
outlay and to shut up the Chapel on Lady-Day in order
to begin the work. February 22nd, 1773, it was agreed
to fit the room over the Butteries for use as a
UNDER THE GEORGES 255
temporary chapel. March 16th, 1773, it was agreed in
refitting the Chapel to make a vault under it, " tp fit
up the Ante-Chapel with the Cedar wainscot now
about the Communion Table, to set up the Pew now
used by the Master's family in the Chancel of St.
Botolph's Church, and that the room which was
formerly the Vestry be again used as such." April 12th,
177ovS«reed that the new Pavement of the Chapel be
C f Ketton stont with black dots. July 5th, 1774, agreed
to pave the Chftpel passage with Yorkshire stone, and
to wash the plain part of the Ceiling and Walls in the
Chapel a Naples yellow. January 16th, 1775, agreed
that the area of the Communion Table in the Chapel
be enclosed with wooden palisades in imitation of iron
with a Mahogany rail upon them ; to change away the
Candlesticks belonging to the Communion Table and
the flagons ; to have new patens for the bread and a
new bason for collecting the Alms, all of Silver Gilt,
and the present two Cups new gilt ; that the furniture
of the Communion Table be entirely new, and that the
old furniture be given to St. Botolph's parish. The
last order on the subject arranges for the opening of
the Chapel on May 8th, 1775, so that it was closed for
two full years for these alterations, which remained
undisturbed until 1845. The Library, which still was
confined to the upper floor, was increased by the
addition of the greater part of the set of rooms, which
had up to this time intervened between the Library and
the Chapel.
To Dr. Plumptre's time also belongs the alteration of
the windows in the older part of the College. The
process began in 1774 and continued during the next
256 QUEENS' COLLEGE
eight years at intervals. It was ordered that the stone
window-frames should be scraped and painted a stone
colour. The eaves in the interior of the Court had
been changed into parapets at some date subsequent to
1688. The date of the change is not recorded. But
happily the Court has escaped the fate with which it
was threatened at the end of the last century, when it
was proposed to stucco the building and cut the
windows down to square heads (see Willis and Clark, ii.
51-52). The Walnut Tree Court was partially rebuilt
after a fire, 1778-1782. ,£1490 of Hughes' benefac-
tion was employed for this purpose.
The Plumptres were a clever family. Henry
Plumptre, the Fellow of Queens' who was afterwards
President of the College of Physicians, was Robert
Plumptre's uncle. Henry's son, Russell Plumptre, was
also a Fellow and was Regius Professor of Physic,
1741-1793. Charles Plumptre, the President's elder
brother, was Fellow and Archdeacon of Ely. The
President's second son, James Plumptre, Fellow of
Clare, was the dramatist, and his second and third
daughters, Anna and Annabella, were literary ladies of
considerable note.
One of the College orders passed in Dr. Plumptre's
later years introduces the name of his famous successor.
On February 28th, 1782, leave was granted to Mr. Milner
" to build a Chemical Laboratory in the Stable Yard
adjoining to the Coal-house," an order interesting as
showing that Milner had turned his attention to
scientific studies. Isaac Milner was bom at Leeds,
January 11, 1750. He was sent to the Grammar School
of that town, but, owing to his father's death, when he
UNDER THE GEORGES 257
was only ten the boy was taken from school and set to
earn his living as a weaver. His elder brother, Joseph
Milner, was appointed to the school at Hull, in 1768,
and took Isaac with him, and, whether the story that
the lad was found reading Tacitus at his loom is true or
not, he had already made considerable progress in
Classics as well as in Mathematics. In 1770, he entered
Queens 1 College as a sizar, having, according to the
story, tramped on foot with his brother all the way from
Hull. The sizars still performed such menial duties as
ringing the Chapel bell and bringing up the first dish to
the Fellows' table, and there is little doubt about the
substantial truth of the story that Milner, when waiting
on the Fellows in Hall, being reproved for his clumsiness
with a tureen of soup, said, " I will abolish this nuisance
when I am in power," a prediction which his position
afterwards enabled him to fulfil. In the Tripos of 1774,
Milner was Senior Wrangler. It is said that he was
utterly dissatisfied with his own work in the examination
and despondent about the result. But his performance
was in reality so brilliant that in issuing the list the
Moderators wrote Incomparabitts after his name. Milner
was also first Smith's Prizeman. His election to a
Fellowship (January 10th, 1776), followed as a matter of
course, and as early as 1780 he was elected a Fellow of
the Royal Society. He became Rector of St. Botolph's
in 1778, retaining the living until 1792. He had
already acted as Deputy to the Professor of Chemistry,
when in 1783, the year after his erection of his Chemical
Laboratory, he was appointed to the newly founded
Jacksonian Professorship of Natural Philosophy, a chair
which he held till 1792, when he was Vice- Chancellor.
258 QUEENS' COLLEGE
Gunning (" Reminiscences," i. 236) describes his lectures
as being amusing rather than profound. In 1798, Dr.
Milner became Lucasian Professor of Mathematics and
held the chair until his death in 1820.
Isaac Milnei-'s intimate friendship with William
Wilberforce commenced in 1784, when they met at
Scarborough. The two friends travelled in company
for the greater part of a year. They read and discussed
the Greek Testament together, and Wilberforce describes
his friend, as he was at this time, in terms which show
that Milner altered little in character during later years.
In 1786, Milner's Divinity Act for B.D., excited great
attention on account of his high reputation for ability,
which he more than maintained by his performance
("Gunning, 11 ii. 48). Milner, who was Moderator in
1780, 1783, 1785, enjoyed an unrivalled reputation for
his skill as an examiner, and it was common for the
Moderators to call him in to settle the position of
candidates whom they had been unable to separate.
Thus Gunning (" Reminiscences, 11 i. 83) relates how in
his own year, 1788, Milner was called in to decide the
Senior Wranglership between Brinkley of Caius and
Outram of St. John's.
" The examination was conducted with great seriousness
and decorum on this occasion; but it not unftequently
happened that, when examining the brackets, Milner was
in the habit of indulging in jokes at the expense of those
unfortunate men who, when dissatisfied with their situation,
had caused him to be called in. Milner had a very loud
voice, combined with a peculiar shrillness, by which he
could make himself heard a considerable distance. He
was in the habit of calling dull and stupid men sooty
UNDER THE GEORGES 259
fellows ; and when he had a class of that description to
examine, he would call out to the Moderators, who were
at the other end of the Senate House, * In rebus fuliginosis
versatus sum.' Among the Moderators and Examiners of
that day Milner had, and continued to have, during many
years, a prodigious influence, and was frequently called
upon to settle the places of men in the higher brackets."
Isaac Milner was elected President in succession to
Dr. Plumptre in November 1788. His preferment to
the Deanery of Carlisle took place in 1791, so that
Milner was President at 38 and Dean at 41 years of
age. His promotion to the Deanery was due to the
influence of William Pitt's tutor, Bishop Tomline,
rather than to William Wilberforce. As Dean Dr.
Milner was regular in presiding at the great Chapter
Meetings, but he did not reside at Carlisle for very
lengthy periods. However, the undergraduates of
Queens' seem to have thought otherwise, if the story is
true that they tore the brass knocker off the President's
Lodge, and forwarded it to Carlisle with a message, that
perhaps it might be of some use to the Dean at Carlisle,
for it was of no use in Cambridge. At Carlisle Milner
enj oyed great popularity, and when he preached attracted
such vast congregations that in Paley's phrase "you
could walk over the heads of the people." A story is
told of the Dean that on one of his journeys north
he called on his friend Richardson, the well-known
Evangelical, at York, and found a maid washing the
doorsteps. On his next journey he repeated the visit,
and finding the same maid engaged on the same work
called out to her, " What, lass, hast not thou finished
that step yet ? "
260 QUEENS' COLLEGE
" The University," says Mr. Gunning, " never perhaps
produced a man of more eminent abilities than Dr.
Milner." But despite this high praise Mr. Gunning is
always glad to rake up anything he can that tells against
Dr. Milner. Thus Mr. Gunning relates at full length
how Milner, from the time when his election as President
became imminent, pleaded ill-health, his alleged object
being to escape the office of Vice-Chancellor. Whatever
truth there may be in this story, Dr. Milner was elected
Vice-Chancellor in 1792 and his year is memorable for
the prosecution of Mr. Frend. The Rev. William
Frend, M.A., Fellow of Jesus College, published in the
spring of 1793 a pamphlet entitled " Peace and Union
recommended to the Associated bodies of Republicans
and Anti-Republicans. 1 '' The pamphlet created some
excitement, and members of the University waited upon
the Vice-Chancellor to express a wish that the work should
be censured by the University. On March 4, a meeting
was held in Queens' Lodge, at which it was resolved to
prosecute the writer in the Vice-Chancellor's Court, and
a Committee was appointed to manage the prosecution.
Mr. Frend was summoned to appear on May 3, to answer
a charge of having violated the statutes of the University
by attacking the Church of England. Mr. Frend
declined to own the jurisdiction of the Court, but, this
objection being overruled, the case against him was set
forth, and the Court was adjourned until May 10, to
give Mr. Frend time for his defence. On that day Mr.
Frend denied the articles against him, asserting them
to be false, wicked and malicious. Then evidence for the
prosecution was given, which occcupied the Court
May 10, 11, and 13. On May 17, Dr. Kipling the pro-
UNDER THE GEORGES 261
moter summed up the evidence. On May 24 Mr. Frend
made his defence, to which Dr. Kipling replied. On
May 27, the Vice-Chancellor and Heads met to consider
their decision, which was delivered on May 28, to the
effect that Mr. Frend was proved to be the author of
the pamphlet, that he had offended against the statute
" De Conchmibus" and must publicly retract his error.
Mr. Frend on May 30 declined to do this ; he said he
would sooner cut off his hand than sign the paper.
Upon this the Vice-Chancellor addressed the University
and pronounced a decree, signed by himself and nine
other Heads of Houses, banishing Mr. Frend from the
University. From this sentence Mr. Frend appealed,
but the Delegates, Sir William Wynne, LL.D., of
Trinity Hall, John Hey, D.D., of Sidney Sussex, John
Barlow Seale, D.D., of Christ's, John Lane, M.A., of
Queens', and Edward Christian, M.A., of St. John's,
unanimously affirmed the Vice-Chancellor's sentence.
And Mr. Frend's application to the King's Bench for a
mandamus also failed. Mr. Frend was also removed
from the precincts of Jesus College by resolution of the
Master and Fellows, and his appeal to the Visitor, the
Bishop of Ely, against this sentence was dismissed
(Cooper, " Ann.," iv. 447 ff., Gunning, " Reminiscences,"
i. 255 ff.). Mr. Gunning criticises Dr. Milner's conduct
in the following terms :
" to an attentive observer of the proceedings in the Vice-
Chancellor's Court, it was apparent from the first that the
Vice-Chancellor was determined to convict, otherwise the
blunders of the Promoter were so gross and so palpable,
that he must have been defeated. In the examination of
witnesses, the forms established in courts of justice were
262 QUEENS' COLLEGE
constantly violated, and every objection brought forward
by Frend, whether founded on the Statutes of the Univer-
sity or on the maxims of civil law, were (sic.) overruled by
Dr. Milner."
It is probably true that Milner showed his feelings
very plainly, and also true that his manner was always
characterized by a tinge of despotism. But Milner was
a strong and convinced Tory, and no one of any fairness
will suppose that he did not act in accordance with what
he believed to be the interests of the University and the
requirements of the case.
On Dr. Milner's government of his College Mr.
Gunning is equally severe. Commenting on the state-
ment of Milner's biographer, that previously " Queens'
College had greatly decreased in reputation ; from this
time, however, this College, once distinguished by the
residence of Erasmus, steadily and rapidly advanced in
character and importance," Gunning says :
" It is very true that the College entirely changed its
character, and that the Society, which, under the Presi-
dentship of Dr. Plumptre, had been distinguished for its
attachment to Civil and Religious Liberty, became after-
wards as remarkable for its opposition to liberal opinions.
By the assistance of his brother (who was a learned and
devout man, and discharged most conscientiously the
duties of a schoolmaster and clergyman at Hull) the
number of students increased ; but the majority of them
were men who in those days were termed Methodists, after-
wards Calvinists, and then Serious Christians. Previously to
his being President these Low-Church doctrines had been
entirely confined to Magdalene College. . . . Dr. Milner
soon acquired that entire ascendency over the Fellows,
UNDER THE GEORGES
that after a few years no one thought of offering the
slightest opposition to his will. Hammond married and
left the College ; Fyshe Palmer was transported for sedition
in Scotland; Jordan took a living; also Marris (formerly
called Beau Marris) ; Plumptre went to the Bar and
vacated his Fellowship ; and George Hewitt, who had
lived on a curacy at Eversden, was ordered into residence
as a lenient punishment for his irregularities in the country,
of which the President said ' he was in possession of the
strongest proofs.' John Lodge Hubbersty was also a
Fellow : he was described in the Gazette as ' Fellow of
Queens', Master of Arts, Doctor of Medicine, Barrister-at-
Law, Recorder of Lancaster, a Cotton Spinner and a
Bankrupt.' I understood that at the last College Meeting
at which Milner was present, he recommended Hubbersty
(who had shown some disposition to oppose him) to be
prepared to prove at the next Meeting that he was
statutable a Fellow of that Society."
The animus of this passage is more evident than its
argument. Was it a proof of Milner's tyranny, that
Fellows took livings, or went to the Bar or even were
transported for sedition ? * That there were proofs of
Mr. Hewitt's irregularities will unhappily appear only
too probable to those who have heard the stories still
current of the conduct of that eccentric gentleman.
And the question might fairly be raised whether Mr.
Hubbersty did hold one of the Dispensation fellowships :
if he did not, his fellowship should have been resigned,
whether or not he ' showed some disposition to oppose
the President.' The words "Civil and Religious
* "Thomas Fyshe Palmer, M.A., was expelled the College on
account of his seditious conduct " Jan. 16th, 1794 (Order-book).
264 QUEENS' COLLEGE
Liberty," all with capitals, disclose the reason of
Gunning's dislike. Gunning was a Whig, Milner was a
Tory, who appeared to Gunning, in those days when
party spirit ran so high and Whigs were accused of
being Jacobins, Revolutionists and what not, to be a
strong-handed oppressor of the party to which he
belonged. That Milner was a strong Evangelical and
did all in his power to make the College Evangelical there
is no doubt. But the fact that a man of Milner's
known views was President was in itself a sufficient
reason why men of Evangelical views should join the
College. To the period belong the names of men so
deservedly esteemed as John and Henry Venn, both
Fellows. And it cannot be seriously disputed that the
prosperity of the College revived considerably under
Milner's rule. Its members were elected to fellowships
in other societies. The numbers were maintained, when
the numbers at most colleges diminished seriously, during
the French War. In 1813 the College stood fourth on
the list in point of numbers. And during what may be
called the forty years' supremacy of Milner (1780-1820)
there were four Senior Wranglers, Ingram in 1784,
Harrison in 1793, Thomas Penny White in 1802, and
Joshua King in 1819 ; G. H. Law, the future Bishop of
Bath and Wells, was second Wrangler and first Chan-
cellor's Medallist in 1781, while men high in the list are
quite common, a sufficient proof that the College
attracted able men and that it was most efficient as a
place of education. It is easy to prove that Dr. Milner's
rule, if despotic, was able and conducive to the prosperity
of the College, and that being granted, the reader may
choose for himself between the eulogies of Miss Milner,
UNDER THE GEORGES 265
the Dean's niece and biographer, and the disparagement
of Mr. Gunning.
In the great flood of February 10th, 1795', the water
invaded Queens' College: The river rose suddenly in
the evening, and it is said that a member of the College
returning home from a ball, quite unconscious of what
had taken place, sprang from the top of the steps in
the Cloisters, and was not a little surprised to find him-
self up to his waist in water.
The name "Kidman's Staircase," applied to the
staircase which leads from the east end of the Gallery in
the Lodge to the President's garden, arose from an
occurrence of this time. Burglaries had been frequent in
Cambridge for some time, and several colleges had lost
considerable quantities of plate. The offenders were at
last discovered to be William Kidman, a whitesmith,
William Grimshaw, a chimney-sweep, and Henry Cohen,
a Jew who disposed of the plunder, and these three
rascals were brought to justice in 1801. Kidman, the
story goes, had determined to rob Queens' College and
had entered the Lodge from the garden by this stair-
case. But Dr. Milner was sitting up late in the Gallery
reading, Kidman saw the light from his lamp under the
door and ventured no farther (Cooper, " Ann.," iv. 470,
Willis and Clark, ii. 22).
Dr. Milner was Vice-Chancellor again in 1809.
During his year of office a curious action for slander
was brought in the King's Bench by Dr. Browne, Master
of Christ's, against Mr. Renouard, Fellow of Sidney,
when Dr. Milner as Vice-Chancellor claimed cognisance
of the case, and ultimately i his claim was allowed. The
Vice-Chancellor appointed a day for proceeding with
266 QUEENS' COLLEGE
the case, but the plaintiff not appearing the case was
dismissed (" Life of Milner," 383-421). In 1811 Dr.
Milner was one of the principal speakers at a crowded
meeting in the Town Hall, at which the Cambridge
Auxiliary Bible Society was established. This meeting
gave rise to a controversy between Dr. Milner and Dr.
Herbert Marsh, who opposed the project on the ground
that it was not right to circulate the Bible without the
Prayer-book.
It is happily unnecessary to go into the misunder-
standings which arose between the President and the
Fellows of Queens' College. Dr. Milner's view, and his
consequent conduct, were characteristic of the man, and
exhibit clearly his resolution to govern the Society to
the best advantage and at the same time an iron-
handedness which earned him the character of being
despotic. Dr. Milner's position is sufficiently illustrated
by the following extract from a letter recommending
Mr. Thomason, Fellow and Tutor of Queens' College,
written in 1807 :
" Some time ago Queens' College, of which I have the
honour to be Master, was in want of a Tutor ; and there
not being a person of my own College whom I judged
proper for this truly important situation, I fixed upon Mr.
Thomason (who took his degree from Magdalene as 5th
Wrangler in 1796), after looking very diligently through
the whole University; and I was certainly induced to
appoint him Tutor of Queens' College, entirely on account
of his high reputation for learning, good principles and
exemplary conduct" ("Life," 344).
Needless to say Mr. Thomason's career amply justified
the President's estimate of him. Dr. Milner's letter of
UNDER THE GEORGES 267
advice about lectures to another Tutor, the Rev. W.
Mandell (3rd Wrangler 1803, Fellow 1805), is inter-
esting as throwing some light upon the educational
system of the time z
"The Greek books in which I used to lecture were
these : Prose. — Xenophon's Memorab, as an easy book for
pupils who know any Greek at all ; then Demosthen.
Orations, as a harder ; Longinus, as still harder and afford-
ing to the lecturer a deal to say. Verse. — I used Euripides
and Sophocles : In Latin, select parts of Livy, particularly
in Second Punic War. In Morals, Locke's Essay is indis-
pensable" ("Life," 364.).
It is probably due to the fact that this is a hasty
note that only one Latin author is mentioned. It
would be curious to learn how long it is since Longinus
has been selected for the lecture-room, though there is
no ground for cavilling at Dr. Milner's estimate of that
author or of what a lecture upon him will entail upon
the lecturer.
The story of Kidman narrated above will suggest
that Dr. Milner was in the habit of sitting up late to
read. This was the case, and dissatisfied with the
lamps of the period he determined to invent a lamp for
himself. After some attempts he succeeded and
obtained a lamp
"as perfect as such an implement could well be. The
light was shaded from the reader's eyes ; it was thrown
strongly upon the paper before him ; there was neither
shadow nor smoke ; and finally the trimming and adjusting
gave no trouble worth mentioning. In fact this lamp was
a decided ' hobby horse ' " (" Life," 365).
268 QUEENS' COLLEGE
The lamp, it appears, was really so good that many
men were glad to procure it, and the Dean's servant
carried on a profitable trade in lamps for many years.
Dean Milner, always a big man, attained huge pro-
portions in his later years. This is clear not only from
his portraits but from the piece of furniture known as
" Milner's chair " in the Gallery of the Lodge, in which
two men of ordinary girth can sit, and in which three
ladies of slender proportions have contrived to bestow
themselves. An investigation of Milner's life soon
removes most of the prejudices, which are not unlikely
to be felt against him by those who have never troubled
themselves to ascertain whether their prejudices were
well founded or not. He was big, boisterous and over-
powering. His manner perhaps more than his conduct
brought upon him the charge of being despotic. On
the other hand he was a sincerely religious man; his
private papers show a depth of religious feeling and a
scrupulous conscientiousness not easily overstated. As
to his abilities Mr. Gunning may be quoted again :
" The abilities of the Dean were of the very highest order ;
his acquirements most extraordinary ; and the versatility of
his talents quite wonderful. It was an observation of
Professor Carlyle that ' if the Dean had undertaken to
work a lace veil, he would have done it better than any
female brought up to the business ' " (" Life," 419).
Isaac Milner was a deeply affectionate man, witness
his friendship with Wilberforce and his love for his
brother Joseph, to whom he declared that he owed
everything. This love led him to complete his brother's
Church History, to edit his Sermons and to write his
UNDER THE GEORGES 269
Life, a task involving enormous labour and engrossing
Milner's time for years, but with him a labour of love.
He was a very generous man, as was proved repeatedly.
And he was very fond of the young, as for instance his
kindness to Henry Martyn, when he came to be
examined for the Smith's Prizes, and to T. B. Macaulay
(Lord Macaulay), when as a school-boy of twelve he
came to stay at the Lodge and found the formidable
Dean " a delightful companion for a boy.' 1 The young
Macaulay repeated his visit on two subsequent
occasions.
Dean Milner writes during an enforced absence from
Cambridge, " Be assured that my heart is in College."
One of his last services to the College and the University
was to secure the brilliant Orientalist, Samuel Lee,
Professor of Arabic, afterwards Regius Professor of
Hebrew. His last days were soothed by the presence
of Mr. Wilberforce, who was by his side when he passed
away April 1st, 1820. Dr. Milner was a great benefactor
to the Library, to which he left by will more than 3000
volumes. " This collection is particularly rich in works
on the Reformation and in modern Mathematical
Treatises." He likewise left i?500 to augment the
pensions of the alms women.
The election of Dr. Milner's successor gave rise to
legal proceedings. The person chosen was Henry
Godfrey, B.D., who stood 5th on the list of Fellows and
was 13th Wrangler in 1802, the year in which Thomas
Penny White was Senior Wrangler. But the validity
of the election was disputed by William Mandell, B.D.,
Tutor of the College, 3rd Wrangler in 1803. Two
petitions were laid before the Court of Chancery, one
270 QUEENS' COLLEGE
from Joshua King, Fellow of the College, who prayed
that the Court, on behalf of the Visitor, would inquire
whether the office of Master was vacant, and, if it should
be found to be so, whether the Fellows ought to proceed
to a new election, or whether the right of appointment
had devolved to the Crown. The grounds on which
this application rested were, that on the 12th day after
the death of Dr. Milner, the Fellows in compliance
with the Statutes proceeded to elect a new Master,
when Mr. Godfrey was chosen by a majority of votes.
Immediately after the election Mr. Godfrey required
the Senior Fellow to admit him to the office, when
he was informed that it was first necessary for him
to sign the declaration of faith required by the Act
of Uniformity. Mr. Godfrey, however, neglected this
intimation, and, as Mr. King contended, went through
the usual form of admission by receiving the keys and a
copy of the Statutes. The other petition was from
Mr. Mandell, who had been the opposing candidate to
Mr. Godfrey at the time of the election. Mr. Mandell
stated that Mr. Godfrey obtained a majority of votes
by voting for himself as Fellow for Middlesex, although
there was at the time another Fellow for that county,
and it was provided by the Statutes that there never
should be more than one Fellow for Middlesex in the
College at one and the same time. Upon this ground
Mr. Mandell claimed to be Master of the College. For
answer Mr. Godfrey contended that the form of
admission was not completed by the delivery of the keys
&c, until some subsequent ceremony was performed in
the Chapel of the College. This ceremony he had gone
through several days after he had signed the declaration
UNDER THE GEORGES 271
of faith before the Vice-Chancellor. He therefore
maintained that he had not violated the provisions of
the Act of Uniformity. With respect to the allegations
that he was not entitled to vote as Fellow for Middlesex,
Mr. Godfrey asserted that it had been the immemorial
usage of the College to maintain two Fellows for that
county.
The proceedings were protracted, and it was not
until March 27th, 1821, that the Lord Chancellor
delivered judgment. Lord Eldon decided (1) that Mr.
Godfrey must be considered at the time of the election
de hire Fellow for Middlesex, and therefore that Mr.
Mandell's claim to the Mastership fell to the ground ;
(2) that according to the intention of the Statutes and
the constant usage of the College, the admission of the
Master was not completed by the delivery of the
keys, &c. Hence it was evident that Mr. Godfrey had
signed the declaration of faith required by the Act of
Uniformity previously to his admission (" St. James's
Chronicle," March 29th, 1821 ; Cooper, " Ann.," iy. 532).
The election therefore was declared to be valid. The
reason why a majority of the Fellows voted against
Mr. Mandell is to be found in the unhappy mental
aberration of which he was afterwards the victim. It
should be said that Mr. Godfrey gave the College no
reason to repent the choice made of him as President
during his twelve years' tenure of the office. He was
Vice-Chancellor in 1822.
Queens' College ^appeared in the Courts again a few
years later. The question was about the interpretation
of a Statute, on which some of the Fellows presented a
petition to the King as Visitor, and the point at issue
272 QUEENS' COLLEGE
was whether the concurrent voice of the President was
necessary in all College elections. The case for the
petitioners was argued by Mr. King, Fellow and sub-
sequently President of the College. The judgment of
the Lord Chancellor, Lord Lyndhurst, was that by the
Statutes of the College the concurrence of the President
was required (Cooper, " Ann.," iv. 558).
Half-way up the list of Fellows at the time of Mr.
Godfrey's election as President was the name of George
Cornelius Gorham. He was the son of a banker at
St. Neots, was born 1787, educated by a Quaker,
entered Queens 1 College in 1805, gained the Norrisian
Prize, with an essay on Public Worship, and graduated
as 3rd Wrangler and 2nd Smith's Prizeman in 1808.
" Coming events cast their shadows before." For when
he presented himself for ordination, the Bishop of Ely
(Dr. Dampier) was so displeased with his views on
Baptism that there was a question whether the Bishop
would ordain him. But Mr. Gorham stood firm by his
views, and the Bishop gave way. Mr. Gorham was
elected Fellow in 1810 and held his fellowship until
1827, but, with the exception of the three years 1811-
1814, when he came up and took pupils, he resided
little in Cambridge, which perhaps is the reason why he
was not thought of, when the Mastership became vacant
by the death of Dr. Milner. Mr. Gorham devoted
himself enthusiastically to the study of geology, and it
is no disrespect to the memory of the great Professor
Sedgwick to say that, when they were rivals for the
Woodwardian Chair in 1818, Mr. Gorham knew more
of the subject than his successful competitor.
But the publication of his book on " the History and
UNDER THE GEORGES 273
Antiquities of Eynesbury and St. Neots in Huntingdon-
shire and St. Neots in Cornwall," marked Mr. Gorham's
zeal for the study in which he really won his fame, viz., as
an antiquary. His subsequent publications on the history
of Maidenhead and of his own family " the De Gorrams,"
bore upon the same subject. The works connected with
the unhappy controversy were alone an exception. Into
the history of that controversy it is unnecessary to enter
here. Suffice it to say that, when he was presented to
the living of Brampton Speke by Lord Chancellor
Cottenham in 1847, the Bishop of Exeter, Dr. Henry
Philpotts, insisted on his right to examine before
instituting, and after examination refused to institute
Mr. Gorham on account of his views on Baptism ; that a •
long litigation with varying results followed ; and that
the final triumph of Mr. Gorham was at least one cause
of important secessions from the Church of England, for
instance, Cardinal (then Archdeacon) Manning's. In
the end Mr. Gorham was instituted to Brampton Speke
in 1851, a public subscription was raised to defray the
heavy expenses of the litigation and a testimonial
presented to him. Mr. Gorham died at Brampton
Speke in 1857. Mr. Gorham spent much care on an
edition of the Statutes of Queens' College in 1822.
Soon after Mr. Godfrey's election considerable altera-
tions were made in the Library. The building was re-
roofed and repaired throughout at a cost of i?300
(Order-book, November 9th, 1820). The Library was
still confined to the upper storey. The resolution to
incorporate the rooms underneath into the Library was
not passed until January 10th, 1837. There were repairs
in the Lodge and the Walnut Tree Court and the
274 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
Lodge was "furnished at the Master's discretion 1 ''
(May 29th, 1822). An order of January 17th, 1823,
shows that the change in the value of money was being
felt. This order runs :
" Agreed that in consequence of the depreciation of the
value of money it is equitable that the foundation and
other scholarships of small amount should be increased,
but that several being inconsiderable rent-charges incapable
of augmentation it would be for the advantage of the
College to diminish their number by consolidating them
and augmenting their value ... to render them worthy
of competition.''
As the Library was repaired, so it was catalogued at
this time. It was agreed January 13th, 1826, " to print
250 copies of the classed catalogue of the Library now
preparing by the Rev. T. H. Home, 11 i.e., Thomas
Hartwell Home, who was a "ten-year man 11 and
member of the College.
In these days of late dinners it is quite a shock to be
reminded how early dinner in Hall was in the first part
of the present century. Only in January 1831 was the
dinner-hour changed from 3 to 4 p.m., and even then it
was ordered that the meal should take place "at 4
o'clock precisely, and that during one month before and
after the shortest day it be fixed at 3£ o'clock." And
concurrently the hour of Evening Service was altered
to 5.30 p.m. Then came supper in Hall at 8 p.m.
Riding and walking were practically the only relaxa-
tions available for the undergraduate of the period.
Boating and cricket were coming into popularity,
athletics, football, &c, were still in the future. The
UNDER' THE GEORGES 275
institution of the Boat races and the Cricket-match in
1827 and the Inter-University Boat-race in 1829
speedily popularised and systematized these forms of
exercise, and the gradual postponement of the hour of
dinner in Hall is to be attributed quite as much to the
change "of habits consequent upon them as to the dictates
of fashionable taste.
CHAPTER X
"WITHIN LIVING MEMORY"
" Merses prof undo, pulchrior evenit."
Presidents: Joshua King, 1832-1857; George Phillips, 1857-1892;
William Magan Campion, 1892-1896 ; Herbert Edward Ryle, 1896.
The Senior Fellow of the College, who is a storehouse
of information about Cambridge during the reign of
Queen Victoria, and who could, if he but would, continue
Gunning's "Reminiscences'''' with the verve and with
the knowledge which such a book demands, dates his
connexion with Queens' College from the year 1832.
Hence the period to be sketched very briefly in this
chapter is "within living memory." In 1832, when
Mr. John Clark, as a freshman, travelled by coach from
York to Cambridge, he carried letters of introduction
to the President of the College. But he arrived only
to find that Dr. Godfrey was dead and that he was
expected, as a member of the College, to attend Dr.
Godfrey's funeral.
The succeeding President was Joshua King, who was
Senior Wrangler in 1819, was elected Fellow January
14th, 1820, and was Junior Fellow at the time of Dean
Milner's death. Mr. King was " allowed to divert to
the study of civil law," in other words was dispensed
From a photograph by] {J. Palmer Clarke, Cambridge
INTERIOR OF XEW CHAPEL
"WITHIN LIVING MEMORY" 277
from taking orders, January 13th, 1824. In 1829 he was
elected Lucasian Professor of Mathematics and held the
Chair until 1849, when on his resignation the present
distinguished occupant of the Chair, Sir G. G. Stokes,
was appointed. At the time of Dr. Godfrey's death
Mr. King was Senior Tutor of the College. It was
generally desired by the Society that Mr. King should
be their President, but by the Statutes the President
was required to be in orders, and Mr. King was a
layman. A dispensation from the Crown was therefore
required for his election, but as Mr. King was a Tory
and the Whigs were in power it was feared there might
be difficulty in obtaining the dispensation. However,
the dispensation was duly granted and Mr. King was
elected. He was Vice-Chancellor in the following year,
1833.
In Dean Milner's time there were frequent orders
that old plate should be melted down to provide articles
of silver for use in the Lodge. Perhaps all the anti-
quated silver had been treated in this way, or else the
funds at the disposal of the Society were larger, for in
1833 i?200 was spent on new plate for the College,
But three Fellowships were still sequestered and the
College was still borrowing money periodically. There
is one transaction of this period which can be viewed
only with unmixed regret. During the preceding
mastership negotiations had been carried on between
the University and the College about the site of the
old printing press in Silver Street, part of which had
been rented by the University from the College but was
no longer needed by the University, since the Press had
been moved to its present position. The University
278 QUEENS' COLLEGE
and the College had failed to come to terras about this
property, and the College now offered the ground to
St. Catharine's. The offer was accepted and the pro-
perty was sold to St. Catharine's in 1836. There were
certain restrictions which were intended to preserve
Queens' College from danger of any nuisance arising
from this site in the hands of its new owners. But the
policy of selling was a terrible blunder. At all costs
the College should have retained the property, and
should have purchased along the north side of Silver
Street, until the whole block belonged to Queens'. The
alienation of this property entailed the transference of
the Almshouses from Silver Street to their present site,
which was no doubt convenient then, but is not very
suitable now that the College has been extended in this
direction.
The system of beneficial leases had proved very
detrimental to the permanent interests of the College.
The fines paid for the renewal of the leases were divided
among the President and Fellows at the time ; nothing
was laid by, no provision made for the future welfare of
the College. That the plan was prejudicial was now
seen. On January 16th, 1845, a most important resolu-
tion was passed. It is entered in the books in the
handwriting of Dr. Phillips, then Senior Tutor. Dr.
King had had a paralytic stroke, and after 1840 only
signed his name in the Conclusion-book. The resolu-
tion runs as follows :
" The Society being impressed with the conviction that
the present system of letting the College property by
beneficial leases is highly injurious to the permanent
interests of the College, and being desirous of introducing
"WITHIN LIVING MEMORY " 279
in the place of the said system the mode of letting upon
rack rent, do resolve not to offer . . . [certain leases] for
renewal."
The resolution was repeated on subsequent occasions
and the number of beneficial leases steadily reduced.
In 1849 the money borrowed at different times by the
Society amounted to £1 0,200. It is not too much to
say that this state of things was entirely due to the
pernicious system of fines, which were divided as soon
as they were received. But the body now set to work
in earnest to extinguish the debt. In January 1851, a
committee was appointed to frame a new scheme for this
purpose. On the report of this committee ,£2000 was
at once paid off and a method of payment was adopted
which would clear off the debt in twenty-one years. In
1851 ,£244 was appropriated for the purpose, in 1852
,£269, in 1853 £279 10*., and so on.
In Dr. King's time work of great importance was
undertaken in the Chapel and in the Hall.
In 1845 the plaster ceiling of the Chapel was
removed. The beams of the old oak_ roof were found to
be in a bad condition, so a new oak roof was made in
exact imitation of the original roof. Shortly after-
wards the east window was restored and filled with
stained glass by Mr. Barnett of York, the cost being
covered by subscriptions raised from members of the
College. But these were only preliminary steps toward
the complete restoration, which followed after Dr.
King's death. The renovation of the whole interior
was undertaken in 1858. The work was entrusted to
Mr. G. F. Bodley, and was finished in 1861. Two sets
280 QUEENS' COLLEGE
of rooms at the south-east corner were taken into the
Chapel, to form an organ-chamber, and connected with
the chancel by a lofty arch. The altar platform was
raised on three steps, and space was made for a reredos
by blocking the lower portion (some four feet) of the
east window. The reredos was of polished alabaster,
inlaid with encaustic tiles, and the east end was paved
with encaustic tiles. The wood-work of the stalls was
removed and replaced by work on the same plan, but
more ornate in character. The general style of the
work may be described as Romanesque. A full de-
scription of it is given in Willis and Clark, ii. 42-43.
The windows on the north side were given, one by
Thomas Beevor, Fellow, in 1849, the other by various
members of the College in 1850. The central window
on the south side was a memorial to Joshua King,
the others were given by James N. Goren, Fellow,
in 1860 and 1879 respectively. These three windows,
which are by Hardman, have now been removed to the
south side of the new Chapel. The east and north
windows and the reredos remain in situ, although the
old Chapel is now part of the Library, and oak book-
cases run along the north and south sides. The
wooden belfry was erected at a cost of £380 in 1848.
The bell which it contains is much more venerable. It
is inscribed MILES GRAIE FECIT 1637. It is 15
inches across at the top, 30 inches at the bottom, with
a depth of 22 inches, and the metal is 2| inches thick
at the top, 2% inches at the bottom. The bell deserves
this much description, not only because of its venerable
age but in honour of its clear tones, which have often
been distinguished as far as the railway bridge over
"WITHIN LIVING MEMORY" 281
the river. The present clock-face was put up in
1853. «
In the Hall, between 1819-1822, the oriel window
had been ornamented with the arms of the Foundresses,
Masters, and other distinguished members of the College,
beautifully blazoned and stained in glass by Charles
Muss, " enamel painter to the King." This piece of
work cost in all i?454 10*. In 1846 the flat ceiling was
removed and the old roof uncovered. The ceiling had
been attached to the tiebeams of the roof, which were
uninjured, but the braces had been cut away and had
now to be replaced. The architect of this work, Mr.
Dawkes, at the same time constructed the louvre, which,
according to the best authorities, is neither correct nor
necessary. The windows, which were then divided into
three lights by plain mullions, were fitted with new
stonework and tracery. In 1854 the oriel was restored
and filled with stained glass by Hardman, the glass
inserted in 1822 being removed to the Lodge. The
cost of these improvements was defrayed by the
generosity of Robert Moon, Fellow and afterwards
Honorary Fellow. Mr. Moon was not satisfied with
the tracery of the other windows. So he again came
forward, and had the present tracery, designed by Mr.
Johnson, inserted, the windows raised to their present
height, and filled with glass by Hardman. The two
windows on the west side contain the arms of bene-
factors, the three on the east side the arms of members
of the College who have been bishops. The last avail-
able space was filled with the arms of Dr. Bickersteth,
who was raised to the See of Ripon in 1857. The
uncovering of the old fireplace and the handsome
282 QUEENS' COLLEGE
decoration of alabaster and encaustic tiles, from Mr.
Bodley's design, which surmounts it, were also due to the
generosity of Mr. Moon. Mr. Bodley completed the
woodwork and designed the decoration of the whole
Hall in 1875. This work was done at the charges of
W. M. Campion, D.D., and George Pirie, M.A., then
Tutors of the College.
During the last years of Dr. King's life the University
Commission was at work. In November 1851, a com-
mittee was nominated by the College to answer the
questions put by the Commissioners, and again in
January 1853, a fresh committee was constituted to
examine the Report of the Commissioners and suggest
such alterations as they might deem necessary in the
interests of the College. The chief changes made in
the Statutes given by these Commissioners were that
the obligation to take orders was relaxed and that the
Fellows were allowed to marry, a concession not made
in most colleges until the Statutes of 1882. A Fellow,
who was a layman and married, could retain his fellow-
ship for twelve years from M.A. At the same time an
advantage was still given to an ordained Fellow. A
Fellow who was in orders, if he remained unmarried,
retained his fellowship for life. The Statutes must
have been thought to be beneficial, as many, who were
already Fellows and therefore had their rights preserved,
elected to place themselves under the new code. Joshua
King's last signature in the Conclusion-book was written
August 17th, 1857.
In succession to Dr. King, George Phillips, B.D., was
elected President September 9th, 1857. Born in 1804,
Mr. Phillips had engaged in teaching and had published
"WITHIN LIVING MEMORY" 283
several mathematical books before he entered Queens'
College in 1825. He graduated as 8th Wrangler in
1829, became a Fellow and was almost immediately
invited to join the tutorial staff. Mr. Phillips early
avowed the conviction that the studies of the University
were too restricted in their range, and he more than
any man, by his influence and by his example, promoted
the study of Hebrew and of the Semitic languages. It
was he who discerned the rare abilities of Dr. William
Wright, brought him from his post at the British
Museum to Cambridge, procured his election to an
Honorary and then to a full fellowship at Queens'
College, and was instrumental in getting the great
Orientalist appointed first Lord Almoner's Reader and
then Sir Thomas Adams Professor of Arabic. Never
was a wise discernment happier in its results, and never
was a College more richly rewarded for the recognition
of merit than was Queens' College, when it adopted Dr.
William Wright. But this is anticipating later events.
George Phillips resided as Fellow and Tutor 1829-1846.
It is not a little singular that he accepted the College
living of Sandon on the same day, October 12th, 1846, on
which his successor in the Presidentship, Dr. Campion,
was elected a scholar. It is an open secret that Dr.
Campion was not only Dr. Phillip's successor but was
his competitor for the Presidentship in 1857. William
Magan Campion was 4th Wrangler in 1849, was elected
Fellow January 12th, 1850, and became almost at once
joint Tutor and soon sole Tutor of the College. He
was a vigorous and stimulating teacher. His pupils
were highly successful, C. B. Clarke was 3rd Wrangler
in 1856, G. B. Finch Senior Wrangler in 1857, G. M.
284 QUEENS' COLLEGE
Slesser Senior Wrangler in 1858, E. J. Stone 5th
Wrangler in 1859. The implication made in Sir G. O.
Trevelyan's " Cambridge Dionysia," that Queens 1 Senior
Wranglers were considerably above the average age,
rests on no basis of fact, so far as the gentlemen are
concerned to whom presumably reference is made. The
successes of the College at this time were such, that, in
allusion to their number and their distinctions, the
Queens' men were spoken of as "the Forty Thieves."
The energy and the ability displayed by the Tutor of
Queens' speedily marked him out as a leader among the
rising young men of the University. This was shown
by his election to the first Council of the Senate and
his appointment to be the first Secretary of that body.
It is not surprising that, although only eight years had
elapsed since he had taken his degree, Mr. Campion
should have been thought of by his contemporaries for
the vacant Presidentship. But neither is it surprising
that the older members of the body should have deemed
Mr. Campion too young for such a post and thought
that he might bide his time. The counsel of the seniors
prevailed, and George Phillips was recalled from his
rectory to assume the Headship of the College. And
as Dr. Campion lived to fill the Presidential chair, those
who remember with affection Dr. and Mrs. Phillips as
well as Dr. Campion may rejoice that the election of
1857 resulted as it did.
The first order written by Dr. Phillips as President,
on the very day of his election, is an odd one. " Agreed
to give Policeman No. 4 of the Cambridge Police Force
two pounds for his exertions in extinguishing the fire in
the College on August 25th, 1857." The fire was caused
"WITHIN LIVING MEMORY" 285
by the carelessness of an old member of the College,
who was allowed to occupy rooms for a few days at a
time when the building was almost untenanted. Happily
the fire was a very trifling affair, which afforded the
two or three people who were sleeping in College,
equally with the Policeman, an opportunity of distin-
guishing themselves. It is a little hard that the active
officer's name was not preserved. "Policeman No. 4"
makes the officer as impersonal as the " 20 K " of the
" Cambridge Dionysia " and with less reason.
Dr. Phillips was Vice-Chancellor 1861-1862. His
year of office was memorable, because the Prince of
Wales was then in residence and because the Duke of
Devonshire was elected Chancellor on the death of the
Prince Consort. It was peculiarly suitable that Dr.
Phillips should install the Duke in his high office, as
they had graduated together in 1829, when the Duke,
then Mr. Cavendish, was 2nd Wrangler and 1st Smith's
Prizeman, and took a First Class in the Classical Tripos.
On the occasion of the installation a number of distin-
guished persons, including the present Chancellor, then
Marquis of Hartington, and the Duke of Argyll, then
Marquis of Lome, were admitted to Honorary Degrees.
The Gallery of the Lodge was turned into a banqueting-
room for the dinner given by the Vice-Chancellor.
There is an amusing but apocryphal story that during
the banquet "the architect," or perhaps it should be
the ghost of the architect, paced the Cloisters wringing
his hands in fear that the unwonted strain would bring
down his beautiful building. What a pity that he was
not accosted and asked his name ! Will there ever be
such an opportunity of finding out who the architect of
286 QUEENS' COLLEGE
the Gallery was, and when he built it, and whether he
put in flat windows on both sides? For the recent
laying bare of the Gallery for the purpose of replaster-
ing has shown that on the north — but not apparently
on the south — the present window in the centre is not
original.
In 1867 the wooden bridge over the river was rebuilt
at a cost of £367.
As has been already stated, the Hall was completed
and redecorated in 1875. In the same year the east
front of the College was restored under the superintend-
ence of Mr. W. M. Fawcett. The object of the archi-
tect was to reproduce, as nearly as possible, the front as
shown in Loggan's print. This restoration ultimately
led to Mr. Fawcett's being entrusted with a very impor-
tant piece of work. The first intimation that the
College contemplated building occurs in a resolution of
December 28th, 1875, which was passed when agriculture
was highly prosperous. And just at the time of the
highest agricultural prosperity the last University
Commission commenced its labours (1878-1882). There
was no reason to suppose that agriculture would be
depressed or the incomes of the Colleges diminished. But,
before the Commissioners had finished their work, there
was a serious shrinkage in the receipts of the Colleges,
and the contribution for University purposes, which
was intended only to divert the surplus revenue of the
Colleges, has in many cases proved to be a serious
crippling of the resources necessary for their proper
efficiency. But in 1875 such things were undreamt of,
the revenue of the College was abundant, and the
Society was able in 1876 to invest £5000 in the pur-
"WITHIN LIVING MEMORY " 287
chase of an estate at Fulbourne. In 1880, for the first
time, the Bursars were authorised to confer with the
agent on the question of a reduction of rents. How-
ever, the number of men in residence was steadily
increasing, and fresh accommodation was needed. The
increase in numbers was due, at least in part, to what
the present members of the College know as " the new
system." In October 1882 a committee, consisting of
Dr. Campion, Mr. Wright and Mr. Temperley (the two
Tutors and the Bursar), was appointed to consider
" whether students might be allowed the option of
paying a fixed sum in advance in lieu of the present
College bill."" A scheme for this purpose was devised
and adopted. All the fixed charges for University and
College expenses were combined into one sum, which
students might pay in advance, in place of the system
of caution-money and a College bill at the end of the
term. In the end the College also furnished the rooms
and provided all " College requisites," and the charge for
the use of these was included in the rent of the rooms.
This step was certainly a saving of expense to the
undergraduate, and at the same time ensured that the
rooms should be kept up to a fair standard of neatness
and comfort. The plan has proved popular, and has
been commonly chosen by the men. It leaves them
freedom. Their meals, except dinner, are taken in
their own rooms : the cook's bill, the grocer's bill and
the like are items, the amount of which depends upon
the means and taste of the individual. And those who
prefer the full freedom of "the old system" are at
liberty to choose that plan. The freshman is offered
a choice between "the old system" and "the new
288 QUEENS' COLLEGE
system,'" and takes whichever of the two he thinks best
suited for himself.
However, new buildings being required, it was found
possible to provide them by investing certain special
funds in the building, paying interest at 3 per cent, to the
funds out of the rent of the rooms. It is right to pay a
passing tribute to the skill with which the finances
were managed for this purpose by Mr. Temperley, the
Bursar. The site chosen was the north part of the
ground acquired from the Carmelites, which had hitherto
been used as a kitchen-garden by the President. Upon
this site the " Friars 1 Building 11 was erected. Mr. Faw-
cettfs plans were accepted by the College, October 3rd,
1885. Messrs. Rattee and Kett were invited to tender
for the work, and the contract with them was signed
December 15th, 1885. A red-brick building of four
storeys, with stone dressings and red-tiled roof, and
containing thirty-two sets of rooms, was erected in 1886.
The building is of a style taken from the earlier part of
the College. The criticism is sometimes made that
the great height and the narrow ends to some extent
detract from the undoubted merits of this excellent
building. Yet the block is so far from the older build-
ings that the difference in height is not much noticed.
The cost was ^8200.
This building was hardly completed and tenanted
before the Chapel was found to be too small. It was
impossible to enlarge it without encroaching on the
Library, and the Library itself was overcrowded, and
stood in need of additional space. The only alternative
was to build a new Chapel upon another site. This
was a serious undertaking for a college of no great size,
•'WITHIN LIVING MEMORY" 289
suffering severely from agricultural depression. The
Chapel would yield no revenue, no existing funds could
be applied to its erection, and clearly it could be built
only by the free gifts of the members of the College.
Mainly through Mr. Wright's untiring zeal, subscrip-
tions of sufficient amount were promised to enable the
building of a new Chapel to be authorised, June 16th,
1888.
The New Chapel stands on what was the north side
of the old Walnut Tree Court and parallel to the Old
Chapel. It forms the division between the Walnut Tree
Court and the Friars' Buildings, erected in 1886. The
Chapel was designed by Mr. G. F. Bodley, A.R.A., and
the work was executed by Messrs. Rattee and Kett. The
Chapel is in the late English Gothic style to harmonize
with the older College buildings, and is built of the
thin bricks used in ancient work, Ancaster stone being
largely used in the buttresses and facings. The external
length is 107 feet, the width 34 feet. The proportions
are lofty, and the eastern gable with its fine seven-light
window shows well in Queens' Lane. The sides show
windows of three lights, one in each bay. These
windows are tall, and the tracery, graceful and charac-
teristic of the style, is certainly very effective. There are
two entrances to the Chapel ; over the south doorway
is finely carved stonework bearing two shields with the
crest and badge of the College.
In the Ante-chapel is what appears to be a surplice-
press of carved oak: in fact, it is a case to contain
and conceal the hydraulic engines for the organ. An
oak screen forms a continuous archway across the Ante-
chapel from doorway to doorway, and constitutes the
290 QUEENS 1 COLLEGE
entrance to the Chapel proper. This screen was the
gift of Mrs. M. and Messrs. T. and J. G. Weller-Poley
in memory of the members of their family who have
belonged to the College. On the screen stands the
organ in a case of a style corresponding to the screen.
The inner side of the screen forms the back of the west
stalls. The upper panels on the inner side contain
alternately the letters "M" and "B," the initials of
St. Margaret and St. Bernard, the patron saints of the
College. On the two extreme panels, N. and S., are
the letters "A. D." and " G. P., 1 ' the initials of
Andrew Dokett, the first President, and George Phillips,
the President in whose Mastership the Chapel was
built. The stalls, with their handsome oak panelling,
are dignified, and are surmounted by an overhanging
cove, which forms a continuous canopy. The panelling
was in 1897 continued from the termination of the
stalls to the east end of the Chapel, in memory of the
late President, Dr. Campion. The roof is panelled and
painted in colours which gain in brilliancy as the east
end is approached. The general effect aimed at is
dignity of proportion rather than profusion of orna-
mentation.
The east wall has been coloured, and over the hand-
some doors, which lead from the Chapel to the room
beyond, are pairs of angels holding shields suspended
between them. The reredos is painted in rich red and
gold, and in it is framed a triple picture of the Old
Cologne School representing the Betrayal, the Resurrec-
tion and the Appearance to the Eleven. This picture
(painted by Schoene ?) was in the original Chapel, but
had been for many years in the President's Lodge.
"WITHIN LIVING MEMORY" , 291
In its present position it is most effective and with the
beautiful reredos, of which it is a part, forms perhaps
the greatest ornament of the Chapel. The altar-cross,
candlesticks and vases were given by the Dean, the
massive candelabra by Dr. Campion, and the eagle-
lectern by the Rev. A. Wright, in memory of Mr.
Temperley. Mr.. Wright at the same time gave a
silver-gilt flagon to complete the Communion plate.
On the south side are the three windows transferred
from the Old Chapel, see p. 280. The great east window is
a memorial erected by friends to Dr. Wm. Wright. This
window and those on the north side are by Mr. C. E.
Kempe. The east window has, as the subject of its
centre light, the Crucifixion with an Entombment
below. The remaining lights contain single figures.
The central pair represent our Lord in glory, and the
Virgin bearing the Child in her arms; the inner pair
St. Botolph (the saint of the parish in which the College
is situate, of whose church the first President, Andrew
Dokett, was Rector) and St. Etheldreda (the patron
saint of the diocese); the outer pair St. Margaret and
St. Bernard (the patron saints of the College). Below
these figures are a series of New Testament scenes from
the life of our Lord : they are the Annunciation, the
Salutation, the Adoration of the Magi, the Women at
the Sepulchre, the Appearance of our Lord to Mary,
the Supper at Emmaus. It is difficult to imagine a
richer effect than this east window gives when it is
lighted up by the morning sun. Those who have seen
it at such a time will feel that it is not unworthy of its
position in the Chapel, or of the great scholar whom it
commemorates.
292 QUEENS' COLLEGE
The windows on the north side by Mr. C. E. Kempe are
intended to form a series illustrative of English Church
History. Of the four at present filled with stained
glass the first is the gift of Dr. Campion and the Rev.
W. T. Fowke, the second is a memorial to Dr. Phillips,
the third the gift of Mr. W. Gibson, Fellow, 1869-
1882, the fourth a memorial to Dr. Campion. The
figures in the first window are St. Alban, St. Patrick
and St. Augustine of Canterbury: under them is a
representation of the Fall. In the second window are
the Venerable Bede, King Alfred the Great and Arch-
bishop Theodore: below is Abraham's Sacrifice. The
third window contains Archbishop Lanfranc with a
model of his Cathedral, St. Anselm, holding his Cur
Deus Homo in his hands, and Archbishop Stephen
Langton with the Magna Charta: Abraham and
Melchizedek are depicted below. The fourth window
exhibits Bishop Grosseteste, King Edward I. and
Wycliffe with his Bible : below is the Brazen Serpent.
The last window, when filled with stained glass, will
represent three distinguished members of the College,
viz., Erasmus, Bishop Fisher and Thomas Fuller, the
Church historian. The Organ was built by Mr. J. J.
Binns of Bramley, Leeds. The Prayer-books, bound in
dark morocco and stamped with the arms of the College,
are the gift of Mr. E. C. Haynes, Fellow, 1868-1881.
The whole cost of the Chapel — up to the present time
some ,£14,000 exclusive of personal gifts — has been
defrayed by contributions from past and present
members of the College.
Dr. Phillips lived to see the Chapel completed. He
was present at the Dedication by the Bishop of Ely,
"WITHIN LIVING MEMORY " 293
October 13th, 1891, and presided at the dinner given on
the occasion in the Hall. He was hale and vigorous
almost to the last. Many people will remember the
Lent Term 1892, as the Term in which the Dead
March was played at Great St. Mark's on five successive
Sundays. The members of the University to whom
this last tribute was paid were the Duke of Clarence,
the Duke of Devonshire, Sir George Paget, Professor
Adams and Dr. Phillips.
Dr. Phillips' death was followed by the election of
Dr. Campion, February 23rd, 1892. The event was
hailed with delight by the past members of the College,
most of whom had been his pupils, and by many friends
in the University and elsewhere. Dr. Campion's
Presidentship, if short, was not uneventful. The
Chapel was brought several stages nearer completion.
The Organ was inaugurated September 27th, 1892, and a
number of old members of the College came up to take
part in the proceedings. Most of them will remember
the sermon preached by the President on the occasion.
During Dr. Campion's Mastership the highest academic
distinctions were won by Queens' undergraduates. The
highest honours in Mathematics, Law and Natural
Science were carried off 1894-1896. The highest
honours in Classics followed in 1897. But Dr. Campion
was not spared to rejoice in this last success of the
College, in which he had resided as Scholar, Fellow,
President, for fifty-one years. He passed away after a
very short illness, October 20th, 1896.
The Fellows then took a step, for which no precedent
could be found in the annals of the College for three
hundred years. But whereas the last Heads who had
294 QUEENS' COLLEGE
been elected from outside, Dr. Chaderton and Dr.
Tindall, had been appointed by the influence of the
Crown, the President installed in 1896, Dr. Herbert
Edward Ryle, Hulsean Professor of Divinity and
Fellow of King's College, was elected by the free and
unanimous choice of the Society. The choice won
universal approbation, and the members of the College
will desire nothing more earnestly than that their
present Master may be spared to preside over the royal
and religious foundation of which he now is Head.
Before Dr. Ryle's tenancy of the Lodge commenced it
was restored under the superintendence of Mr. T. D.
Atkinson. The old fire-places in the Audit-room and
the Gallery were uncovered ; the panelling, taken out of
the Hall in Mr. Sedgwick's time, was removed from the
Servants' hall and put up in the old President's
Chamber, which was fitted as the President's Study;
the staircase leading from this room to the Cloister
Court was reopened; and considerable alterations and
improvements were made in the internal arrangements
of the Lodge. Another piece of work, done at the
same time, and not less important because it obtrudes
itself neither upon eye nor nose, was the laying down of
a new system of drainage throughout the College.
The new gate between the Chapel and the Alms-
houses, the Friars' Gate as it is to be called, is the most
recent addition to the College buildings. This was
completed in April last. Mr. Wright's appointment
to the office of Vice-President in October was some
recognition of his splendid services to the College.
The present year, 1898, is the ninth Jubilee of the
foundation of the College. In celebration of this event
"WITHIN LIVING MEMORY" 295
the President and Fellows entertained a number of old
members of the College and representatives of the
University in the Hall on Thursday, December 8th, 1898.
The gathering was a great success. All who were
present will feel stimulated by the past and strength-
ened for the future.
The principal benefactions received at a date sub-
sequent to those given on p. 244 are these. Dr.
Plumptre, President and Canon of Norwich, in 1789 left
his MS. Collections for the history of the College and
pictures as an heirloom to the Lodge. Dr. Milner?
President and Dean of Carlisle, in 1820 left to the
Library more than three thousand volumes (see p. 269).
John Sandys, Fellow, founded a scholarship in 1840.
Thomas Penny White, Senior Wrangler in 1802,
Fellow, left a trust-fund to found prizes, one a prize of
,£30 for the best degree each year, provided the
recipient be within the first four in the Mathematical
or Classical Tripos. The accumulations up to £300
are by the present regulations given to a Senior
Wrangler, who is also placed in the first division of the
First Class in the Mathematical Tripos Part II., or a
scholar who is placed in the first division of the First
Class in the Classical Tripos, and also gains the first
Chancellor's Medal. Mrs. Mary King gave in 1880
£1000 to found prizes in memory of her husband,
Joshua King, late President. Dr. George Phillips,
President, gave in 1887 i?1000 to found a scholarship.
Dr. Phillips also presented a fine picture of himself
painted by Professor Herkomer. The donors to the new
Chapel are happily for the most part still alive. Among
the contributors who have passed away are Dr. Phillips,
296 QUEENS' COLLEGE
President, Dr. Wm. Wright, Fellow and Professor of
Arabic, Ernest Temperley, Fellow and Bursar, Thomas
York, Fellow and Bursar, E. J. Stone, F.R.S., Fellow
and Radcliffe Observer, J. N. Goren, Senior Fellow
for many years, Mrs. Margaret Finch, daughter of
Joshua King and wife of G. B. Finch, late Fellow and
Honorary Fellow, who with her husband gave £3000,
and Dr. W. M. Campion, the late President, who gave
£1000 as a first subscription, and considerable sums in
gifts and subsequent subscriptions.
To continue the roll of distinguished members of the
College since Dr. Godfrey's time, the list includes Philip
Yorke, K.G., Earl of Hardwicke, Lord Lieutenaut of
Ireland and Lord High Steward of the University
(d. 1834) ; Sir Henry Russel, Fellow, Chief Justice of
Bengal (d. 1836) ; Sir Samuel Egerton Brydges, a great
authority on English Bibliography (d. 1837); Thomas
Creevey, a distinguished M.P., Secretary of the Board
of Control, Treasurer of the Ordnance &c. (d. 1838) ;
John George Breay, Prebendary of Lichfield (d. 1839) ;
Dr. William Strong, Archdeacon of Northampton
(d. 1842) ; Dr. Martin Joseph Naylor, Fellow, author
of " Discourses on the Evidences of Christianity,'" &c.
(d. 1843); Charles Callis Western, M.P. for Essex,
created Lord Western of Bivenhall (d. 1844) ; George
Henry Law, Fellow, Bishop of Bath and Wells
(d. 1845) ; John Brown, an eloquent evangelical
preacher (d. 1845) ; John George Children, scientist
and chemist (d. 1852) ; Theyre Townsend Smith,
Hulsean Lecturer, &c. (d. 1852); Dr. Samuel Lee,
Professor of Arabic, Regius Professor of Hebrew, &c.
(d. 1852) ; Dr. William Scoresby, the Arctic explorer
"WITHIN LIVING MEMORY" 297
and writer (d. 1857) ; George Cornelius Gorham,
Fellow, antiquary and ecclesiologist (d. 1857) ; Richard
Newcome, Archdeacon of Merioneth (d. 1857); John
Toplis, Fellow, mathematician (d. 1857); Philip Kel-
Jand, Senior Wrangler in 1834, Fellow, Professor of
Mathematics at Edinburgh ; Robert Bickersteth, Bishop
of Ripon (d. 1884); Dr. William Wright, Fellow,
Professor of Arabic, Old Testament Reviser, the great
Orientalist (d. 1889); Edward John Stone, F.R.S.,
Fellow, Astronomer Royal at the Cape, Radcliffe
Observer at Oxford (d. 1897).
Imperfectly as it has been told, our story draws to an
end. In a sense it is true to s$y that the history of the
College may be read in its buildings. There is no
important epoch that is not written in bricks and
mortar. There is the first Court to recall the Wars of
the Roses. Perhaps no more perfect fifteenth-century
buildings are extant. The massive Gate-Tower, the
style and arrangement of the blocks to which it leads,
the Hall and all its appurtenances are eloquent of
the days of Lancaster and York. It is impossible to
enter the President's Chamber without thinking of
Andrew Dokett and John Fisher. The first addition to
the Lodge, the original Gallery, i.e., the old study, was
actually built while Erasmus lived and worked in his
rooms just the breadth of the Cloister Court away. The
present Gallery passed through its various stages to
completion, while the Church of England was passing
through the different phases of Reformation to the
Elizabethan settlement. The Walnut Tree Buildings
tell not more plainly of the days of the First James than
they testify to the prosperity of the College under the rule
298 QUEENS' COLLEGE
of Bishop Davenant. The taste of the eighteenth
century still stands embodied in Essex's Building,
though its marks have been obliterated from the Chapel
and the Hall. And the nineteenth century may be
content to take the new Chapel as the test by which it
shall stand or fall.
Is there also a character stamped upon the successive
generations which have been housed within these walls ?
Will it be true to say of the best and most typical men
that they have any features in common ? They seem
to exhibit in common a strong determination that
change and progress shall always be in continuity with
the past. They were supporters and advocates of
reform, but it was a careful and moderate reform, that
should not break violently with the past. Such was
Erasmus, such was Bishop Fisher, such were Dr. Wil-
liam Mey, Sir Thomas Smith, Bishop Davenant,
Dr. Martin, such even the Parliamentarian Herbert
Palmer, such, if it be allowed to cite a modern instance,
Dr. William Wright. There is scarcely a marked
exception to this rule. There is hardly a prominent
member of the College who wished to pull down the
existing fabric of things in the confidence that he could
build a better, or to see whether perchance he could
improve upon it. If progressive, they have been dis-
tinctly moderate ; if conservative, they have been un-
doubtedly willing to progress. They have been men
able and willing to look at both sides of a question, to
appreciate the position and the motives of those who did
not see face to face with them on all points. If this is
true, the type is one which the College may well wish to
preserve and may well strive to produce. Progress but
"WITHIN LIVING MEMORY 1 ' 299
not precipitancy, reform but not revolution will not be
the least valuable lesson that the College can teach to
men, who are to be called " to serve God in Church and
State." " And thus," to adopt Fuller's words of fare-
well to Queens' College, "I take my farewell of this
foundation, in which I had my education ... in that
University. Desiring God's blessing to be plentifully
poured on all the members thereof."
Floeeat Domus.
APPENDIX
A.— THE LIBRARY.
The principal benefactors to the Library have been named in the
narrative: such are Bishop Davenant (chap, vi.), John Smith
(chap, vii), Henry James and Thomas Clarke (chap, viii.), David
Hughes and Isaac Milner (chap. ix.).
An excellent catalogue of the Library in two volumes was compiled
for the College in 1826-1827 by the well-known Thomas Hartwell
Home (see chap. ix. ad fin). To this the reader may be referred
for full Information about the Library.
The Library at the time when the catalogue was made contained
30,000 volumes, Mr. Cooper in his " Memorials of Cambridge " gives
the number of books as 35,000, at the present time the number is
quite 40,000.
There are no MSS. comparable in value to the treasures of the
Corpus Christi College Library. The Turkish and Persian MSS.
are, according to Dr. Wright, of no great value. There is a MS. of
Wycliffe and also a MS. of " Occleve's Poems," valuable for their
rarity.
In the MSS. case are placed some black-letter Missals and
Breviaries, Spongia Erasmi, with the autograph of Erasmus, and
Loggan's " Cantabrigia Illustrata."
The catalogue shows the books that are of special value from their
early date by printing their dates in black letter. In addition to
the books so distinguished the following may be mentioned :
Shakespeare (William), Comedies, &c. ; 4th edition folio, London
[P. 2, 3] . This is in good condition and very valuable. The MS.
notes in it appear to be of little value.
There are also some early editions of single plays, see Catalogue,
p. 964.
There are early editions of Ben Jonson, Massinger, Beaumont and
APPENDIX 301
Fletcher, and some early quarto Collections of Miscellaneous Plays
and Poems.
The Library contains a considerable collection of Bibles. Perhaps
the most important are Walton's "Polyglott," viz., "Biblia Sacra
Polyglotta," ed. Brianus Walton, 6 vols, fol., London 1657 [C. II,
8-13] , and a fine copy of the Antwerp Polyglott, Montanus' Bible,
presented by Bishop Chaderton [K. 10, 10-16] . There aretwo early
printed Vulgates, one Naples, folio, 1476 [C. 4, 11], the other
Venice, quarto, 1484 [H. 6, 10]. Several of the Hebrew Bibles
are early, e.g., the edition in 4 vols., folio, Dan. Bomberg, Venice
1518 [K. 10, 1-4].
There are three very interesting volumes of maps and plans of
cities, with figures in costume of the period [D. 4, 1-3] .
The Select Discourses of John Smith [H. 7, 35] are of special
interest to members of the College. Also Sir Thomas Smith's
"chap book," containing a list of his Greek books.
There is a very rare edition of " Catullus, Tibullus and Propertius,"
Venice, folio, 1487-1488 [C. 2, 13] and some very old editions of other
Latin poets, for which see Catalogue, pp. 939, 942, 943, 944. The
Library is rich in tracts, of which there are seven hundred volumes,
" upon every subject, theological, moral or political, which has been
agitated for nearly four centuries."
B.— PICTURES.
In the Hall there are portraits (by Hudson) of Queen Elizabeth
Widville, Erasmus and Sir Thomas Smith. In the Combination-
Room there is an old panel-portrait on wood of Elizabeth Widville,
portraits of Dean Milner (by Harlow), Dr. Campion (by C. E. Brock),
Dr. Wm. Wright, Edw. Willes, L.L.B. 1745, Simon Patrick, Fellow,
Bishop of Ely, d. 1707, and Thomas Penny White (by Pickersgill),
Fellow and Benefactor 1778-1845.
In the President's Lodge, (1) on' the Staircase are Commander
John Honing, M.P. for Eye 1597, the Duchess of Rutland and the
Duchess of Kingston (by Sir Peter Lely), John Ryder, 1697-1775,
Fellow, Archbishop of Tuam, Joshua King, President 1832-1857 (by
Sir William Beechey), J. L. Hubbersty, Fellow; (2) in the Gallery,
George Monck, Duke of Albemarle, Charles II., Oliver Cromwell,
Hugh Peters, Mr. Fitzwilliam (by Sir Joshua Reynolds), William
Attwood, admitted 1668, two men unidentified. Sir Thomas Smith,
Elizabeth Widville, Erasmus (by Holbein), Admiral Caleb Barnes,
admitted 1675, Sir Henry Bridgeman 1763, George Phillips, President
302 QUEENS' COLLEGE
1857-1892 (by Prof. H. Herkoraer), Sir George Saville, Bart., M.P.
1750, Anne of Denmark, Queen of James I., Elizabeth, daughter of
James I., Henry, son of Jamesl., Elizabeth Widville, Prince Charles,
afterwards Charles I. ; (3) in the Audit-room, John Davies, D.D.,
President 1717-1731, Thomas Walker, LL.D., Fellow, d. 1764,
William Sedgwick, President 1731-1760, J. T. Hewit, LL.D., 1753,
Robert Plumptre, D.D., President 1760-1788, Daniel Wray (by
George Dance), Benj. Langwith, D.D., Fellow, d. 1743, J. L. Petit,
M.D., d. 1780, John Hayes, D.D., Fellow, d. 1750, Isaac Milner,
D.D., President 1788-1820, Dean of Carlisle (by Opie), Henry, Earl
of Huntingdon, d. 1643, Henry Plumptre, M.D., Fellow, d. 1746,
Erasmus, John Fisher, D.D., President 1505-1508, Bishop of
Rochester, Anthony Sparrow, D.D., President 1662-1667, Bishop of
Exeter and of Norwich, the two Foundresses, Margaret of Anjou and
Elizabeth Widville, John Davenant, D.D., President 1614-1622,
Bishop of Salisbury, Henry James, D.D., President 1675-1717, Ralph
Perkins, D.D., Fellow, d. 1751.
C— PLATE.
There is little plate of early date remaining, as the College sent
almost all the Plate it then possessed to Charles I. in 1642. (See
p. 162.) The College has, however, at the present time a consider-
able quantity of Plate. I believe the boast is still true that
" Queens' is the only College where the Hall is provided with
silver at all the tables." The collection of silver candlesticks is con-
siderable and some of them are very handsome and valuable.
The most interesting piece of Plate is perhaps " The Compton
Cup" 1637. This is a plain cup, the bowl covered with frosting; it
has a baluster stem with flame ornamentation on the top member.
The weight is 46^ oz., the height 12 inches, the depth and dia-
meter 6 inches. The inscription is "ex dono pranobilis Jacobi
Domini Compton, honoratissimi Comitis Northamptoniae filii natu
maximi."
A good many articles of Plate belonging to Queens' College are
described in " Old Cambridge Plate," J. E. Foster and T. D. Atkinson
1896. Such are the Silver Tankard 1683, weight 404 oz., " ex dono
Mattei Ducie Moreton F. C. 1681" (Foster and Atkinson, 55); the
silver Tankard 1685, weight 38.15 oz., "ex dono Jacobi Fortrey
Armigeri" (F. and A. 102); the curious silver Toasting-Fork, 1707
(F. and A. 103); Cream-jug, 1761 (F. and A. 110); silver Teapot,
APPENDIX 303
Urn and Stand, 1794 (F. and A. 115) ; silver Spoons (F. and A. 128
and 129).
Deserving of mention is the Silver Cup and Cover 1775 with two
handles ; the finial of the cover is in the form of an acorn. Weight
36 oz. "Dono dedit Hon. Charles Hervey, 5th son of the Earl of
Bristol," (F. and A. 133). Also the Ewer and Salver, 1699, given by
the Hon. W. Villiers, eldest son of the Earl of Jersey, circular, with
gadrooned edge, floral patterns and scallop shells at inte-rvals.
Weight of Salver 87 oz., the helmet-shaped Ewer weighs 48 oz.
(F. and A. 221). The Rose-water Salver and Ewer used by the
Fellows are handsome but of modern work.
Interesting Candlesticks are described and illustrated by Messrs.
Foster and Atkinson, 136, 137, 145, 151, 152.
D.— THE ARMS OF QUEENS' COLLEGE.
"No College in England (says Fuller, "Univ. of Camb." v. 36)
hath such exchange of coats of arms as this hath." Four of the five
shields used at different times by the College will be found in
Atkinson and Clark's " Cambridge, Described and Illustrated." The
first shield (Atkinson and Clark, p. 374) bears six quarterings ;
(1) Barry of eight argent and gules = Hungary ; (2) France, a label
of three points throughout gules = Naples ; (3) Argent, a cross potent
cantannee with four others plain, or = Jerusalem ; (4) France, abordure
gules=Anjou; (5) Azure, semee of cross crosslets two barbels hauriant
endorsed, or=De Barre; (6) Or, on a bend gules three alerions
displayed argent = Lorraine. These are the quarterings of Queen
Margaret, without any bordure or difference. The fifth shield
(Atkinson and Clark, p. 373) was granted in 1575 and consists of the
arms of Queen Margaret, with the addition of a bordure vert. The
crest — out of a coronet or an eagle rousant, sable wings of the first-
was granted at the same time.
On the whole subject see " The Armorial Ensigns of the University
and Colleges of Cambridge," by W. St. J. Hope, M.A. ("Camb.
Antiq. Soc." vol. viii.).
E.— QUEENS' MEN IN THE INTER-
UNIVERSITY CONTESTS.
It is not an easy matter to procure a full list of the members of a
College who have figured in the Inter-University contests. The
304 QUEENS' COLLEGE
lists of crews, elevens, &c, are complete, but in many cases the name
of the College is not given. Perhaps the older members of Queens'
College can supply names that belong to earlier years 1827-1875.
The writer will only attempt to give the names of those who have
competed since his own connexion with the College began.
In the University Boat of 1880, R. D. Prior rowed seven and
W. M. Warlow four. G. H. Baker was cox. in 1886 and 1887, T. W.
Northmore in 1889 and 1890.
For the Rugby University Football Club (of which the writer has
been President for the last three years) H. F. S. Adams played full-
back in 1884 and 1885, and the famous Welsh International C. B.
Nicholl played forward in 1890, 1891, 1892, 1893. He was Secretary
in 1891 and captain in 1892. N. C. Fletcher, who is still in residence,
gained his blue as a forward in 1897 and 1898.
A. S. Farnfield played in the Association eleven in 1897.
In the University Athletic Club (of which the writer has the honour
to be Treasurer) B. L. Parkin was second string in the Three Miles
1878 ; A. G. Paterson was first string in the Weight 1884, and
second string 1885 ; S. O. Purves was full blue for the High Jump,
1885, and divided the event with the Oxford Jumpers ; C. B. Nicholl,
the footballer, was second string for the Weight, 1892, and full blue
in 1893.
In what are known as " the minor contests," F. O. Houseman has
played in the Hockey Team, H. M. Siddall and E. E. Apthorp in
the Golf Team ; H. B. Lester, W. C. Sandford, F. G. Scovell and
J. D. Israel in the Chess Team. ,
INDEX
Alane, Alexander, 85
Alienation of College lands, 130,
131
Allix, Peter, 222
Ammonius, Andreas, of Lucca, SI
Arms of Queens' College, 303
Associated counties, 158-160
Ayliner, John, Bp. of London, 126
Barhet, William, 124-126
Basset, Joshua, 219
Bedell, Sir Capel, 141
Bekensaw, Robert, President, 56-99
Bridge, the, 239, 242, 286
Bryan, Richard, 171, 192, 201, 227
Buckingham, Duke of, 148-149
Bullock, Henry, 47, 64
Butts, Dr. Henry, 150, 155
Byron, Mr., 117
Campion, W. M., President, 283, 284,
298, 296
Carmelite Friars, 13, 14, 15, 87
Cartwright, Thomas, 112-113
Cecil, Sir William, Lord Burghley,
101, 105, 107, 109, 111, 114, 115,
116, 121
Chaderton, Bp. William, President,
108, 110-120, 123
Chandler, Daniel, 161, 172
Chapel, 21, 170, 194, 252-255, 279-
281 ; New Chapel, 289-293
Charters of King Henry VI., 5, 7, 10
Cheke, Sir John, 74, 90, 93
Church of England and the Univer
sities, 232, 233
Clark, John, 276
Clarke, Thomas, 227
Cloisters, 22-23
Clunch Building, 109
Coke, Henry, 167, 194
Coldham, John, 171-172
Cole's MSS. quoted, 242, 253, 254
Collegiate system, 2
Commissioners of Henry VIII., 90;
of Edward VI., 92-94 ; of Ma ry
98; of Elizabeth, 102-103
Conformity, Certificates of, 132
Contracts for building first Court,
18-20
Corn rent reserved, 119
Covenant, the, 171-172
Crawford, Charles, 247-249
Cromwell, Oliver, 162, 163
Cromwell, Sir Henry, 128
Cromwell, Thomas, 83
Dale, John, Vice-President, 98-99
Davenant, John, President, Bp. of
Salisbury, 134-147
DavieB, Humphrey, 133, 165
Davies, John, President, 236-238
Devereux, Robert, Earl of Essex,
129-130
Dial, 242
Dinner in Hall, hour of, 274
Directory of Public Worship, 174.
179
U
306
INDEX
Distinguished members of tbe Col-
lege, 126,150,185, 313, 334-236
296
Dokett, Andrew, first President, 4-5,
9, 24, 27, 28, 30, 35-37
Dowsing, William, 170
Dudley, Robert, Earl of Leicester,
10 9, 111, 121
Edwards, Thomas, 149
Engagement, the, 183
Erasmus, Desiderius, 42, 46-56, 74
Erasmus' Edition of St. Jerome, 52
Erasmus' Novum Instrument urn, 52-
54
Erasmus' Tower, 48
Erasmus' Walk, 222
Essex's Building, 239-241
Essex Chamber, 129
Ewin, Dr., case of, 250-261
Expenditure of College in 1546, 91
Fellows appointed by Parliamenta-
rians, 175-176
Fellows ejected by Parliamentarians,
171-172
Ffarman, Thomas, President, 66-68
Fisher, John, Bp. of Kochester, Pre-
sident, 42-46, 56-57
Fletcher, Giles, quoted, 1
Foundation stone, 17
Francis. Alban, 219
Frankelyn, William, President, 68
Freer, Michael, 172, 191
Frend, William, case of, 260-262
Friars" Building, 288
Fuller, Thomas, Ch. Hist, and Hist,
of Univ. quoted, 9, 11, 17, 34, 44,
46, 97, 122, 135, 150, 177, 299
GALLERY of Lodge, 60-62, 285
Glynn, Bp., President, 94, 96-97, 99-
100
Godfrey, Henry, President, 269-275
Gorham, G. C, 129, 272-273
Grey, Hon. John, 246
Gunning's "Reminiscences," 258,260,
261, 262, 268
Hall, the College, 19, 239-242,281-
282
Harington, Sir John, quoted, 110, 120
Hastings, Henry, Earl of Hunting-
don, 133
Hausted, Peter, 160, 155, 156
Heynes, Simon, President, 70, 79-85
Home, Thomas Hartwell, 274
Horton, Thomas, 181-189
Hubbersty, J. L., 263
Hughes, David, 244
Hughes, William, 109
" Ignoramus," by George Ruggle,
139
Inter-University contests, 274, 303
James, Henry, President, 216-226
"James', Dr., Book," 230-231
Jegon, John, 130
Jenyn, John, President, 64-66
Jesuits, 218
Jones, Ralph, 114
"Kidman's " Staircase, 265
King Charles I., 137, 148, 149, 161
King Charles II., 161, 212, 215, 218
King Edward IV., 25, 28
King George I., 237
King Henry VI., 5-8, 19
King Henry VII., 38-39, 45
King Henry VIII., 65
King James I., 137-139, 145, 148
King James II., 212, 216, 218
King Richard III., 28, 32, 33-35
King William III., 212, 221, 224
King, Joshua, President, 276-282
Lady Joan Burgh, 30
Lady Margery Roos, 29
Lady Margaret's Readership in
Divinity, 43
Lady Margaret, the, 42-44, 45
INDEX
307
Lambert, John, 64
Lambeth Articles, 126
Latin spoken in Hall, 228
Laud, Abp., 154, 156, 164, 166, 173
Lee, Samuel, 269
Library, 252, 255, 269, 273, 300
Lodge, the President's, 21, 59-63,
252-253, 294
Lumley, Harmaduke, Bp. of Lincoln,
21
Macadlav, Lord, 269
Magnum Journale, 24, 25, 147, 210-
211
Manchester, Earl of, 166, 169, 171.
174, 184, 188-192
Mandell, William, 269-271
Manners, Roger, Earl of Rutland,
133'
Mansell, John, President, 148-152
Martin, Edward, President, 153-198
Master, Francis, 228-230
Mere, John, 98
Mey, Dr. John, 100
Mey, Dr. William, President, 13-15,
86-96, 101-103
Middleton, William, 115
Milner, Isaac, President, 2 5 6-2 G 9
Milner's chair, 268
Milner, Josepb, 257, 268
Monmouth, Duke of, 215
Moon, Robert, 281
Monntaigne, George, Abp. of York,
134-137, 148
Mullinger, Mr. J. B., quoted, 12, 31,
46, 49, 73, 111, 112, 152
New Chapel, 289-292
Non-Collegiate system, 1
Number of members of the College,
106, 159, 213, 233
Organ, 253, 292
Palmer, Herbert, 160, 172-180
Parker, Abp., 90-92, 101, 105, 109
Parliamentarian outrages, 166, 168-
169, 170
Pascall, Andrew, 48
Patrick, Bp. Simon, 177, 179-180,
185-186, 200-206, 212, 222
Peachell, Dr., 219-220
Pearson, Bp. John, 156
Pecocke, Thomas, President, 100-102
Perne, Andrew, 72, 107
Phillips, George, President, 282-293,
295
Pictures, 301
Plate, sent to the King, 162, 302
Plays in Colleges, 123, 132-133, 139
150, 155
Plumptre, Henry, 225, 256
Plumptre, Robert, President, 245-
256 ; MS. History quoted, 131,
176, 186, 190, 197, 207, 216, 236,
239, 245, 251, 252
Pole, Cardinal, Chancellor, 97
Pontage lands and rates, 223
Poor scholars, 63-64, 66, 152
Preston, John, 136-143
Puritans in Cambridge, 105, 112,
123
Queen Anne, wife of Richard IIL>
28, 33
Queen Anne, 224
Queen Catharine of Aragon, 64
Queen Elizabeth WidviUe, 12, 25-29
Queen Elizabeth of York, wife of
Henry VII., 39
Queen Elizabeth, 105, 107-108
Queen Margaret of Anjou, 7-11, 25
Querela Cantabrigiensis, 168, 178
Richard, Duke of Gloucester, after-
wards Richard III., 32
Ridley, Bp., 93, 96
Robinson, Bp., 100, 107, 114
Rockrey, Edmund, 115-116
Rotherham, Abp., 33
Royal mandates, 199-200, 211, 216
Ryle, Dr. H. E., President, 293-295
308
INDEX
Saint Bernard's College, 5-7
St. John, Oliver, 184-185
Bancroft, Abp., 184, 301, 221
Searle, Mr. W. G., History of Queens'
College, 7, 9, 11, 24, 61, 66, 68,
87, 99, 165., 168, 170, 172,178,
186, 197
Sedgwick, William, President, 238-
245
Site of Queens' College, 6, 13-16
Smith, John, 175-177
Smith, Sir Thomas, 71-79, 85, 88,90,
92, 101, 102, 118, 119-120
Smythies, Ferdinando, 244
Somerset, Duke of, 221
Some, Kobert, 107, 114, 125
Sparrow, Bp. Anthony, 187, 161, 171,
200-210, 226
Stapleton, Sir Philip, 164, 167
Statutes of Elizabeth WIdville, 81 ;
of Henry VIII., 81; of Ed-
ward VI., 93 ; of Elizabeth, 108,
113; of Queen Victoria, 282, 286
Stoddart, John, 133
Stokes, John, President, 106-110
Stourbridge Pair, 94, 209
Synod of Dort, 145
Temfekley, Ernest, 288, 291
Tennison, Abp., 209
Thomason, T. T., 266
Tindali, Humphrey, President, 114,
120-134
Townson, Bp. Kobert, 146
Trotter, Hugh, 39
Visitation of 1557, 98
Wallis, John, 158, 175-177, 189
Walnut-Tree Court, 143-144, 256
Wasse, Joseph, 234, 238
Wells, William, President, 211-216
White Horse Inn, 67
Whitgift, Abp., 109, 112, 123, 124-
126, 132
Wenlock, Sir John, 17
Whitford, Richard, 46
Wilberforce, William, 258, 268, 269
Wilkynson, Thomas, President, 37-40
Williams, Bp. John, 146
Willis and Clark, Architectural His-
tory, quoted, 20, 22, 62, 144, 241,
242
Windows in New Chapel, 291-292
Witchcraft, 128-129
Women in Colleges, 111-112, 151
Wren, Matthew, Bp. of Ely, 137-138,
163
Wright, Arthur, 289, 291, 294
Wright, Dr. William, 283, 291, 296
Printed by Ballantvke, Hanson &• Co.
London &* Edinburgh
January 1899
SOME BOOKS PUBLISHED BY
F. E. ROBINSON
FULL CATALOGUE ON APPLICATION
20 Great Russell Street
Bloomsbury, London
TIMES.— "We are glad to welcome the first two volumes of
what promises to be an excellent series of College Histories. . . .
Well printed, handy and convenient in form, and bound in the dark
or light blue of either University, these small volumes have every-
thing external in their favour. As to their matter, all are to be
entrusted to competent men, who, if they follow in the steps of the
first two writers, will produce records full of interest to everybody
who cares for our old Universities."
Universities of Oxford and Cambridge
Two Series of Popular Histories of the Colleges
To be completed in Twenty-one and Eighteen
Volumes respectively
EACH volume will be written by some one officially connected
with the College of which it treats, or at least by some
member of that College who is specially qualified for the
task. It will contain : (i) A History of the College from its
Foundation ; (2) An Account and History of its Buildings ; (3)
Notices of the Connection of the College with any Important Social
or Religious Events ; (4) A List of the Chief Benefactions made to
the College ; (5) Some Particulars of the Contents of the College
Library ; (6) An Account of the College Plate, Windows, and other
Accessories ; (7) A Chapter upon the best known, and other notable
but less well-known Members of the College.
Each volume will be produced in crown octavo, in a good clear
type, and will contain from 200 to 250 pages (except two or three
volumes, which will be thicker). The illustrations will consist of
full-page plates, containing reproductions of old views of the
Colleges and modern views of the buildings, grounds, &c.
The two Series will extend over a period of about two years, and
no particular order will be observed in the publication of the
volumes. The writers' names are given on the opposite page.
Price Ss. net. per Volume
These volumes can be ordered through any bookseller or they
will be sent by the Publisher on receipt of published price together
with postage.
COLLEGES
University
Balliol
Merton
Exeter
Oriel .
Queen's
New .
* Lincoln
All Souls
Magdalen
*Brasenose
*Corpus Christi
Christ Church
*Trinity .
*St. John's
Jesus . .
* Wadham .
Pembroke
Worcester
Hertford
Keble . .
Peterhouse .
Clare . . .
Pembroke
Caius . . .
Trinity Hall
*Corpus Christi
King's . .
*Queens' .
St. Catharine's
Jesus . . .
Christ's . .
St. John's .
Magdalene .
Trinity . .
Emmanuel .
Sidney . .
*Downing . .
Selwyn . .
©xforti Sbtxits
A. C. Hamilton, M.A.
H. W. Carless Davis, M.A.
B. W. Henderson, M.A.
W. K. Stride, MA.
D. W. Rannie, M.A.
Rev. J. R. Magrath, D.D.
Rev. Hastings Rashdall, M.A.
Rev. Andrew Clark, M.A.
C. Grant Robertson, M.A.
Rev. H. A. Wilson, M.A.
J. Buchan.
Rev. T. Fowler, D.D.
Rev. H. L. Thompson, M.A.
Rev. H. E. D. Blakiston, M.A.
Rev. W. H. Hutton, B.D.
E. G. Hardy, M.A.
J. Wells, M.A.
Rev. Douglas Macleane, M.A.
Rev. C. H. O. Daniel, M.A.
S. G. Hamilton, M.A.
D. J. Medley, M.A.
©ambtfogj &txit%
Rev. T. A. Walker, LL.D.
J. R. Wardale, M.A.
W. S. Hadley, M.A.
J. Venn, Sc.D., F.R.S.
H. T. Trevor Jones, M.A.
Rev. H. P. Stokes, LL.D.
Rev. A. Austen Leigh, M.A.
Rev. J. H. Gray, M.A.
The Lord Bishop of Bristol.
A. Gray, M.A.
J. Peile, Litt.D.
J. Bass Mullinger, M.A.
W. A. Gill, M.A.
Rev. A. H. F. Bocghey, M.A., and J. Willis
Clark, M.A.
E. S. Shcckburgh, M.A.
G. M. Edwards, M.A.
. Rev. H. W. Pettit Stevens, M.A., LL.M.
. Rev. A. L. Brown, M.A,
• Ready.
The Oxford and Cambridge volumes will be
succeeded by the following :
University of St. Andrews.
J. Maitland Anderson, Librarian, Registrar, and
Secretary of the University.
University of Glasgow.
Professor W. Stewart, D.D., Clerk of Senatus.
University of Aberdeen.
Robert S. Rait, M.A. Aberdon., Exhibitioner of
New College, Oxford.
University of Edinburgh.
Sir Ludovic J. Grant, Bart., Clerk of Senatus, and
Professor of Public Law.
University of Dublin.
W. Macneile Dixon, Litt.D., Professor of English
Language and Literature, Mason University
College, Birmingham.
University of Wales and its Constituent
Colleges.
, W. Cadwaladr Davies, Standing Counsel of the
University of Wales.
TVNews
OpenLibrary