Victoria Ifoiston? of tbe Counties of Englanb EDITED BY WILLIAM PAGE, F.S.A, A HISTORY OF DURHAM VOLUME II THE VICTORIA HISTORY OF THE COUNTIES OF ENGLAND DURHAM LONDON ARCHIBALD CONSTABLE AND COMPANY LIMITED This History is issued to Subscribers only By Archibald Constable & Company Limited and printed by Eyre & Spottiswoode H.M. Printers of London INSCRIBED TO THE MEMORY OF HER LATE MAJESTY QUEEN VICTORIA WHO GRACIOUSLY GAVE THE TITLE TO AND ACCEPTED THE DEDICATION OF THIS HISTORY THE VICTORIA HISTORY OF THE COUNTY OF DURHAM * EDITED BY WILLIAM PAGE, F.S.A. VOLUME TWO LONDON ARCHIBALD CONSTABLE AND COMPANY LIMITED 1907 DA v.2 CONTENTS OF VOLUME TWO PACE Dedication v Contents . ix List of Illustrations and Maps ............ xi Ecclesiastical History . . . . By the Rev. HENRY GEE, D.D., F.S.A. . . I Religious Houses : — By Miss MARGARET E. CORNFORD Introduction .............. 78 Monastery of Hartlepool 79 St. Hilda's First Monastery 80 Gateshead House ............. 80 Nunnery of Ebchester ............ 8l Monasteries of Wcarmouth and Jarrow . . . . . . . . .81 Priory of St. Cuthbcrt, Durham ........... 86 Priory of St. John the Baptist and St. Godric, Finchale ....... 103 Priory of St. Mary, Neasham . . . . . . . . . . 1 06 Priory of Baxtcrwood . . . . . . . . . . . .109 Franciscan Friars of Hartlepool ... . . . 1 09 Franciscan Friars of Durham . . . . . . • . • . .lie Friars Preachers of Hartlepool ........ . . 1 1 o Friars Preachers of Jarrow . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 o Austin Friars of Barnard Castle ....... ..Ill Hospital of St. Giles, Kepier ....... . . 1 1 1 Hospital of St. Mary Magdalen, Witton Gilbert 114 Hospital of Bathel . . . . . . . . • . . . .114 Hospital of SS. Lazarus, Martha and Mary, Sherburn . . . . 115 Hospital of the Holy Trinity, Gateshead . ... .... 117 Hospital of St. John the Baptist, Barnard Castle 117 Hospital of St. Edmund, Bishop and Confessor, Gateshead . .118 Hospital of St. Mary Magdalen, Durham . . . .119 Hospital of St. Stephen, Pelaw .120 Hospital of SS. Mary and Cuthbert, Greatham 121 Hospital of St. Leonard, Durham • I23 Hospital of Friarside . ......... -I23 Hospital of St Edmund, King and Martyr, Gateshead . .124 Hospital of Gainford .... . . 125 Hospital of Wcrhale 125 College of Darlington • • • 125 College of Auckland St. Andrew .126 College of Norton ............. 127 College of Lanchester • • . -1*7 College of Chcster-le-Street 128 College of Staindrop . . . . . . . . • • • • .129 College of Barnard Castle 129 Hermitages ... . 130 CONTENTS OF VOLUME TWO Political History Social and Economic History Table of Population, 1801-1901 Industries : — Introduction Iron and Steel .... The Chemical Works Shipbuilding .... Glass Works .... Potteries .... Textile Industries Mining .... Coal .... Lead ..... Iron ..... Barytes .... Fluorspar .... Agriculture ..... Forestry Sport Ancient and Modern : — Introduction .... Fox-hunting .... The Raby, Mr. Cradock'sand Lord Zetland's Foxhounds The Lambton, the Durham County, and the South Durham Foxhounds The Durham County Hounds The North Durham Fox- hounds The Hurworth Hunt . The Braes of Derwent The Grove Hare-Hunting .... Otter-Hunting .... Coursing . Shooting . Angling Horse-Racing .... Rowing . Golf Football . By KENNETT C. BAYI.EY, F.S.A. By FREDERICK BRAUSHAW, M.A. (Oxon.), D.Sc. (Lond.) By GEORGE S. MINCHIN . By Miss MAUD SELLERS, Hist. Tripos. Cantab. . By Prof. HENRY Louis, M.A. (Dur.), Assoc. R.S.M., M. Inst. C.E., &c., and C. H. VELLACOTT, B.A. » n By DOUGLAS A. GILCHRIST, M.Sc. (Dur.), B.Sc. (Edin.), F.R.S.E By the Rev. J. C. Cox, LL.D., F.S.A., and ARTHUR CHAS. FORBES, F.H.A.S By PERCY S. T. STEPHENS By J. B. RADCLIFFE By PERCY S. T. STEPHENS By R. H. J. POOLE By the Rev. E. E. DORLING, M.A. By C. J. BRUCE MARRIOTT, M.A. FACE '33 175 261 275 278 293 302 3°9 312 3'4 319 230 348 353 356 356 357 373 385 388 388 393 395 397 39s 399 400 401 4°3 404 409 414 417 420 426 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS AND MAPS Durham Cathedral . By G. E. NATHAN Durham Episcopal Seals : — Plate I Plate II Plate III Ecclesiastical Map of Durham ..... Durham Monastic Seals ...... Details of Shotley Bridge Sword (Plate I) ... Plan of Mill Dam Salt Works Sunderland Pottery (Plate II) . . Swalwell Time-Gun \ Coatham Mundevillc Mill j PACE . Fran tit fleet full-page plate, fating 1 2 i» >» i» l!> » »> » facing 76 Jull-f>age plait, facing \ o 2 • *99 full-page plate, facing 312 X! A HISTORY OF DURHAM ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY I "^HERE is no proof of the existence of Christianity during the Romano-British period within the district now called the county of Durham. When in later days the first English historian came to tell the story of the beginnings of the Church in these islands, he found himself without any definite information concerning the origin of the faith in a district which was to him more interesting than any other region of the English settlement. The Venerable Bede, in his slight sketch of the earliest Christian centuries, was chiefly dependent on Orosius, who completed the Historia in 417, writing it in Africa, where he was far removed from Britain, and possessed no special knowledge of British affairs.1 We cannot extort from Orosius, or from Bede, one single historical fact connected with Roman Durham. Nor have any Christian relics of the Roman period descended to us. Coins have been dug up at various times in Jarrow, Hartle- pool, Chester-le-Street, and other places, and inscriptions have come to light at Lanchester, but nothing that can be interpreted as Christian has hitherto made its appearance.* All we can say is that a Roman road passed directly through the region, and that at Lanchester and Binchester there were military stations. It is as difficult to suppose that Christianity was entirely absent as it is to prove its actual presence. Bede is the first of a series of church historians connected with Durham.8 He wrote his Church History of the English People in 731, when exact details of the planting of Christianity in Northumbria were accessible to him through the tradition of those who had witnessed the events in their boy- hood, or had received their record from the previous generation. The first definite contact of Christianity with English Durham must have taken place when the Kentish Princess Ethelburga, otherwise Tata, came to the north as bride of Edwin, who had lately drawn within his influence the various English principalities. Bede tells in full the story of Edwin's wide sway ; of the arrival of his bride ; of the king's acceptance of the faith ; of the subsequent wide mission of Paulinus, the queen's chaplain. Paulinus must have traversed 1 For the authorities used by Bede, see C. Plummer's edition of the Works of Bede, (i) pp. xxiv and xliv. ' An important resume of what can be recovered concerning Durham in the pagan period will be found in Arch. Ael. vii, 89. Nothing is there traced of early Christianity. Raine's note on Haddan and Stubbs's Appendix Monumental Remains of the British Church during the Roman Period sums up the admitted absence of all information so far at Durham is concerned ; Hist, of the Church effort, i, p. xx. 1 The other Durham chroniclers are Simeon of Durham, Geoffrey of Coldingham, Robert of Graystanes, and William de Chambre. See Surtees Society edition of Trei Serif tores, p. vii. A HISTORY OF DURHAM the present county of Durham from end to end in the tour which he made through Northumbria to Edwin's northern capital at Yeavering.4 The nobles of that kingdom had embraced Christianity in the early stages of the mission of Paulinus,' and in the thirty-six days of constant baptizing in Glendale the rest of the people presented themselves in vast numbers. This successful evangelization was much helped by the proverbial peace of the reign of Edwin.6 But no church or baptistery was built as yet, Bede tells us ; and he is careful to hint that no permanent organization of the Church was made in the northern parts of Northumbria during the mission of Paulinus.7 The results of that mission were soon severely shaken by the death of Edwin and the pagan excesses of Penda, yet it was not overthrown.8 After a stormy interval of tyranny and disorder Oswald restored peace and unity to the distracted kingdom of Northumbria, following on his victory near the Roman wall. It is with Oswald that we get the historical beginning of the Church in Durham, as Simeon points out.' The sympathies of Oswald were10 more particularly with the Bernicians, and Bamburgh became his capital rather than York. He placed Aidan at Lindisfarne, and from this island a wide mission was directed. Fresh missionaries from Scottish regions joined him in his work, and churches were built and lands given, the whole life and disci- pline being constructed on the basis of Celtic monasticism.11 One of the monasteries so built we are able to identify by name at Hartlepool, and its erection is the first really definite event of Durham history to which we can point.12 Here Aidan placed Heiu, the first Northumbrian nun to take the veil.18 The establishment of this convent is assigned to about the year 640. About that time Aidan summoned Hild, a great-niece of Edwin, to a similar but unnamed institution, which has been identified with St. Hilda's, South Shields.11 In 649 Hild was transferred to Hartlepool, where she succeeded Heiu.15 Under her gentle rule of eight years the house at Hartlepool now became a centre of great fame and activity, to which Aidan and the other Celtic religious constantly resorted. This peaceful beginning of the church in Durham was disturbed in 651 by the death of its apostle St. Aidan, and also by the defeat and death of Oswin, the successor of Oswald. The new king Oswy, after the final over- throw of the Mercian Penda at Wingfield in 655, proved a good patron of the Church, and placed his baby daughter Aelflede under Hild's care at Hartlepool. This action was taken in devout recognition of his success. Various members of his family were eventually buried at Hartlepool. So far, the missionary influence throughout Northumbria since the departure of Paulinus was entirely Celtic. Wilfrid is usually credited with being the first to introduce the Roman type into Northumbria. So far as 4 Bede, Hilt. Eccl. ii, 14. 'Ibid. * Ibid. ' Ibid. ; cf. iii, 2, nee immerito — statueret, 8 Ibid. ; cf. ii, 20, Turbatis itaque rebus NorJanhymbrorum. 9 Sim. Dur. Opera (Rolls Ser.), ad init. 10 The family connexion of the two Northumbrian royal lines is explained, Arch. Ael. xix, 50. 11 This important passage runs as follows : — ' Construebantur ergo ecclesiae per loca, confluebant ad audi- endum populi gaudentes, donabantur munere regio possessiones et territoria ad instituenda monasteria ' ; Bede, Hist. Eccl. iii, 3. 12 Ibid, iv, 23; Ebchester is, on insufficient authority, said to have been another; cf. Hodgson Hinde, Hist. of Northumbria, 130. 13 Bede, loc. cit. " See an instructive paper in Arch. Ael. xix, 47, by Canon Savage. 14 A further transference of Hild to Whitby in 657 was probably due to the emergence of the paschal controversy, afterwards decided at Whitby in 664. ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY Durham is concerned he was actually anticipated by Benedict Biscop, otherwise Biscop Baducing.18 Biscop was a thegn of Oswy. He is the first Durham personage after Hild and Heiu to emerge partially from the obscurity of the time. His is a truly great name, but our knowledge of the details of his life is disappointingly meagre. Passing to the Continent with Wilfrid in 653 he pushed on to Rome, and returned to Northumbria before his companion came back. No doubt he spread those ritual scruples which Wilfrid imbibed at Rome, and disseminated after his return, scruples which were only set at rest, if they were set at rest, in the synod of Whitby, 664. The Whitby decision marked the triumph of the Roman as against the Celtic model, and is a matter of considerable importance.17 After a second journey to Rome in 665, and a residence of some years abroad, Biscop came back, in company with Theodore, in 669. From a third journey he returned to Northumbria about 672 to find Oswy dead and his son Egfrid occupying the throne. A friendship now sprang up with Egfrid which had great effects on religion and learning. The king bestowed on Biscop a large gift of land, probably in the actual neighbourhood of Heiu's first convent, but certainly on the northern bank of the Wear. Here he founded in 674 a monastery which was signifi- cantly dedicated to St. Peter.18 Of this famous house Stubbs says : ' The learning and civilization of the eighth century rested on the monastery which he founded, which produced Bede, and through him the school of York, Alcuin, and the Carolingian school on which the culture of the Middle Ages was based.' Commencing his foundation at Wearmouth in 674, Biscop journeyed next year to Gaul, and brought back masons who built the house in the Roman fashion dear to him, as Bede tells us ; and then he sent for glaziers, who not only did their own work, but taught their craft to the Northumbrians. The church, at all events, was ready for use within a year, and part of the ancient porch, it is probable, survives as an evidence of the builder's skill. In this counterpart to the work of Wilfrid recently erected in York, Hexham, and Ripon, we see the amazing progress of architecture and civilization which the span of a very few years witnessed. It is probable that the father of Bede was born and brought up as a heathen. His son, who was born on Wear- mouth land, perhaps a year before the monastery was founded, lived to see an enormous advance of civilization and religion, and to prove the depositary of all known learning. But Bede, to whom we are thus introduced, was still more closely con- nected with a second great Durham monastery which was erected by the same Biscop at Jarrow.1' A fourth visit of Biscop to Rome was concluded in " Bede has worked the facts of Biscop's life into Hist. Eccl. v, 19, so far at they are connected with Wilfrid, and has left a memoir of Biscop. See Bishop Stubbs's article, ' Bene Jictus Biscop ' in Diet. Christ. Biog. i, 308. " For the Whitby decision the original authority is Bede, Hist. Eccl. iii, 25 ; cf. Early Engl. Ch. Hist. 223-31 i Diet. Christ. Biog. i, 309. " The early history of the Wearmouth Monastery, until its devastation by the Danes, is given in Surtces' Hilt, of Dur. ii, 2. 11 Bede is again our original authority, Hilt. Eccl. v, 21, 24, with Hilt. Abbat. passim. W. Bright, Early Engl. Ch. Hist. 365, sqq. gives a full summary and appreciation of all known facts about Jarrow. See, too, Surtees, Dur. ii, 67. For Bcde's literary influence, J. R. Green, Making of England, 399-404 ; Hodgkin, Italy and her Invaders, vi, 422. The important paper of J. R. Boyle in Arch. Ael. x, 195, on the 'Monas- tery and Church of St. Paul, Jarrow,' gives a full rtsumt of the foundation of the house, with a discussion of its archaeological remains. These are particularly a series of inscribed stones, the most important of which records the dedication of the church. A HISTORY OF DURHAM 680. He brought back a still greater quantity of church furniture, and his former patron Egfrid gave him another but rather smaller grant of land in the neighbourhood of what is now Jarrow Slake, then termed' gyrwy' or 'marsh.' This little bay formed a safe harbour for ships, and its being known as Egfrid's Harbour suggests that the king had some family or personal connexion with the spot, as he had perhaps with Wearmouth. However this may be, the site was given in recognition of the success at Wearmouth, and building was pushed on with the same dispatch as before. The new monastery, dedicated to St. Paul, though seven miles distant from Wearmouth, was regarded as part and parcel of the same institution. The chief glory of Jarrow lies in the fact that it was for nearly fifty years the home, the school, the library, and the oratory of Bede. Here English learning, born at Wearmouth, was cradled and nursed, and here a generation of scholars was brought up under the fostering care of the first English teacher. Both Jarrow and Wearmouth were richly endowed with books by Benedict, and also by Ceolfrid, who in 690 became the single ruler of the double monastery. We thus get the beginning of monastic libraries in the North of England.30 The two houses were severely treated by the famous plague, which had first made its appearance in 664, and ravaged Northum- bria with frightful desolation in and about 685-31 But apart from the havoc caused by this early ' Black Death,' Northumbria began to decline from that same fatal year, 685, when Egfrid, under the temptation of securing external conquest, was lured into a Pictish ambuscade and perished.22 Thus the last legitimate descendant of the old Northumbrian royal house passed away. His successor, Aldfrid, reigned for 20 years more over an attenuated kingdom. After him a period of usurpation, conspiracy, and murder set in, which only partially gave way to greater stability in the reign of Eadbert, Bede wrote on quietly at Jarrow during this troublous period, beginning with his grammatical works between 691 and 703, proceeding to his Com- mentaries in or about 709, and taking up history, in addition, with the Lives of the Abbots in 716. No historian came after him, and a considerable gap follows his death in 735, during which interval we have merely a very general knowledge of Northumbrian history. In 788 there occurs an obscure reference to a synod held in Pincanheal, which place has been identified with Finchale, near Durham, but the fancied likeness of the word is the only ground of such identification, and is altogether too precarious. But be that as it may, an event took place in the preceding year which is a considerable landmark. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle places the first coming of the Danes in 787. Soon after this a piratical foray devastated the Lindisfarne monastery in 793, and next year a descent was made upon Jarrow, but it was repelled with some success, the defeated Danes suffering shipwreck in their flight. Apparently the Northumbrian churches were now left without molestation for seventy years. One event of considerable magnitude took place during this long respite, when Ecgred, bishop of Lindisfarne, increased the possessions w For what is known of these early libraries see Plummer's Bede, i, p. xviii. 81 See Dr. Charles Creighton, Hist, of Epidemics in Britain, i, 7. Further evidence of the general desolation occurs in Arch. Ael. xix, i 52. "J.Hodgson Hi.ide, Hist, of Northumberland, i, 93. 13 Particulars in Plummer's edition of Bede, \, p. xxxiii. ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY of the see by large grants of land. The nucleus of the patrimony of St. Cuthbert had been formed in 685, when Egfrid of Northumbria bestowed on St. Cuthbert, then living, territories in those parts of the kingdom which were to become in later days Northumberland and Yorkshire." Ecgred about 830 gave, in addition to certain places outside, a large slice of the modern county of Durham. The centre of this new donation was the royal vill of Gainford, and with its appendages included some of the district between Wear and Tees to a spot some three miles south of the latter river." Billingham was also added at the same time. Meanwhile, more formidable incursions of the Danes had been taking place in other parts of England. A period of regular settlement began about 853. In 866 a large body of the invaders remained for the winter in East Anglia, and came to terms there with the East Anglians. What followed is obscure, but it would seem that in revenge for some treacherous act committed by the Northumbrian king these Danes came north." With horse and foot to the number of 20,000, they laid Northumbria waste, destroyed Lindisfarne, and finally burnt the two houses of Jarrow and Wearmouth. After this the pro- vinces of Bernicia and Deira were placed under Danish governors." A coin discovered and described some years ago makes it probable that Beorn was appointed ruler over that part of Northumbria which lay to the south of the Tyne." This disastrous occupation seems to have practically annihilated the Church of Northumbria. So far the Church had been planted in monasteries, and with the exception of Gainford there is no proof of the existence of church buildings in other specific centres before 8 67. The destruction of Jarrow and Wearmouth meant, therefore, the practical extinction of the Church." This brings us to the great name of St. Cuthbert, whose dead body was destined to be the means of reviving Christianity in Durham. With this district he had no connexion in life, save nominally as bishop of Lindisfarne during the last two years of his episcopate (685—7). In ^75 l^e famous wanderings of his body began. It was borne from Lindisfarne through Northumbria and Galloway for seven years. Then came a respite in the ferocity of the Danes. Their leader was dead, and an opportune dream to Eadred, the abbot in charge of the wandering community, suggested the name of Guthred as the next king.80 There was sufficient romance and awe connected with St. Cuthbert to induce the Danes to regard the vision as a divine admonition, and Guthred, evidently predisposed to favour the monks, was elected. He forthwith established them at an ancient " Lapsley, County Palatine of Durham, 157. K Simeon does not say that the whole country from Wear to Tees was given, but ' quicquid ad cam [villam] pertinet .1 flumine Teisa usque Wer sancto confcssori Cuthbert contulit.' Simeon of Dur. Ofera (Rol s Ser.), i, 53. Billingham also lies between Wear and Tees, and would not have needed separate specification if the entire district had been intended. " The sources of our knowledge of the events, so far as Northumbria it concerned, are examined by Mr. D. H. Haigh, Arch. Ail. vii, 23. " To speak of the provinces of Bernicia and Deira is to use language loosely. Mr. Bates has a paper on this in Arch. Atl. xix, 147-54, in which he shows that we must think rather of peoples than of provinces. The limits of the Bernicii and the Deiri fluctuated constantly. " See Mr. Haigh's paper, Arch. Ael. vii, 24. " South Shields and Hartlcpool (above, p. 2), founded as religious settlement* about 640, may have lingered on. Bede has no further mention of them after their foundation, or of the churches indicated above, p. 2, note 1 1. " For the motives of Eadred and his relation to the bishop, see J. Rainc, St. Cuthbert, 47-9. The chronology is examined in Arch. Ael. vii, 29. A HISTORY OF DURHAM Roman station, now known as Chester-le-Street.sl Here we get the restoration of the Church in Durham and the commencement of its bishopric. We have traced above the donation of Durham land to the original see of Lindisfarne. All that had gone ; but Guthred began at once the series of gifts which was to form the mediaeval patrimony of St. Cuthbert. Another vision of Eadred directed the king to bestow all the land between Tyne and Wear and to the east of the Roman road. A glance at the map shows that this is a large square district from Gateshead to Chester-le-Street on the west, and from South Shields to Sunderland on the east. The new church was to have right of sanctuary.33 The donation was approved by the army and by the people. Guthred again confirmed it at his death, and Alfred, who now exercised a sovereignty over Northumbria, was eager to ensure all these privileges to St. Cuthbert, who had appeared to him on the eve of Ethandun in 878. Alfred also commended the patrimony of Cuthbert to the protection of ( Edward. In the reign of Edward, the bishop at Chester-le-Street, Cutheard, added to the endowment certain lands which have not been specified. Under Bishop Cutheard, Sedgefield was purchased and added to the ' possessions of the see. But these recent gains were soon lost in the confusion that followed Guthred's death. According to Simeon, a Danish leader called Reginald appeared in the Humber about the beginning of the tenth century * and took York. He then made a foray into the land of St. Cuthbert, and divided it between two of his followers, Scula and Onalafbald, but the latter, seized by sudden illness, confessed the sanctity of the saint in the agony of his last moments. This circumstance added greatly to the awe which already surrounded the remains of St. Cuthbert and prepares us for the next step. The reign of Athelstan constitutes a landmark in the history of the Northumbrian church, as well as in English history generally. Three churches at least, Ripon, Beverley, and Chester-le-Street, looked back to it as an era of stability.83 Athelstan deposed Reginald and other petty sub-kings, and annexed Northumbria to his own overlordship. This tightening of his control led to a coalition of various chieftains which he crushed, and made the rebels swear obedience. One of them was Constantine, king beyond the Tweed, who broke his pact in or about 934. On this the king gathered his forces and marched to avenge himself. It was apparently on this occasion that he visited the three places just mentioned, and confirmed all existing privileges. At Chester-le-Street he not only established anew all the rights of St. Cuthbert, but bestowed various gifts, which were all duly entered upon the Liber Vitae and survived in Simeon's time two centuries later. Most important of these gifts were certain villages which constitute a strip of land on the coast from Sunderland to Hesleden inclusive. The compactness of this grant may suggest that the land comprised an estate of one of the sub-kings, which was now forfeited to the conqueror.3* 11 Guthred's new kingdom was entirely south of the Tyne ; Raine, loc. cit. ; Simeon, op. cit. ii, 13-16. 3> Sanctuary was recognized in England first by Ini of Wessex in 693 ; by Guthred here in 883 ; and by Alfred in 887. See introduction to Sanctuarium Dunelmense, pp. xi, xii, and below p. 26. M For Ripon see Memorials of Ripon (Surtees Soc.), i, 5 1 ; Beverley, Beverley Chapter Act Book (Surtees Soc. xx). Athelstan was duly honoured in the daily chapter mass at Beverley. 3< Simeon of Dur. Opera, i, 74-5 ; cf. Raine, St. Cuthbert, 50-2 ; Surtees, Hist. Dur. i, 224. The gr undloss theory that old Durham, close to Durham, is the scene of Athelstan's great battle of Brunanburh is not worthy of examination. 6 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY The devotion of Athelstan, imbibed from his predecessors, was transmitted to his brother, who followed him on the throne of Wessex. In the ebb and flow of Danish power in Northumbria after Athelstan the presence of Edmund became necessary in 944, and of Edred in 954. Both kings therefore visited Chester-le-Street and endorsed the privileges of the Church. ^Ethel- wold, bishop of Winchester, formerly a protege of Athelstan, made pilgrimage somewhat later to the same spot. These visits, duly recorded, afford evidence of the enormous prestige of St. Cuthbert's shrine through these turbulent days, and help to account for the magic power of his name in time to come." With the closing years of the roth century we reach the foundation of the city of Durham. There is no mention of its unique site before the familiar events of 995, though its nearness to a Roman road" must have given frequent opportunity to the wayfarer to inspect its wonderful natural position. About 980 the ferocity of the Danes was renewed in constant raids upon the south coast of England." In 991 the attack passed northward, and Danegeld was first paid. Aldhun had been consecrated bishop of Chester-le-Street in the previous year, so succeeding to the now ample estates of St. Cuthbert. The undiminished fury of the Danes broke upon his see in 993. Aware that he was powerless to protect the possessions of the Church, the bishop had entrusted some of the manors to Uchtred, earl of Northumberland, and to two other nobles, intending to resume them when happier days came.88 Other manors, either before or after this, he bestowed as a marriage portion upon his daughter, Egfrida, who was married to this same Uchtred." Having thus provided for the temporalities of the Church, Aldhun formed in 995 the famous resolution of taking the body of St. Cuthbert to Ripon, whither the whole congregation of St. Cuthbert betook itself. In the summer of the very same year peace was restored, if indeed the menace of the Danes had been made effective, of which there is no real proof. The congregation set out on the return journey to Chester-le-Street.40 The bier became immovable. It was considered to be a sign that the saint refused to be borne back to the old spot. They were then close to the place where in after days Simeon recorded the account which he had received from the descendants of the original porters. From his pen the phrase prope Dun- helmum is not likely to have meant anything more distant than the immediate " Rainc, St. Cuthbert, 53, with authorities there quoted. * The existence of this road was discovered by Mr. Cade, of Gainford, in the eighteenth century. See Arcbaeologta, vii, and Surtees' note on Mr. Cade in his account of Gainford. " Anglo-Sax. Chron. sub ana. " Simeon of Dur. Of era, i, 83 and 213. For the existence and history of the official earldom ice Hodgson Hinde, Hiitory of Northumbria, 158,8 book strangely overlooked by Dr. Lapsley in his County Palatine of Durham. " The date is uncertain. It may have been after the return from Ripon. Simeon the monk perhaps naturally omits the fact of Aldhun'i daughter and her dowry. It is vouched for by the interesting tract printed with his works in the Rolls Series, i, 215. For the general existence of clerical marriage in this period see Hunt, Hilt. Engl. Ch. 269, 321. As regards the congregation of St. Cuthbert in particular, the practice was probably curtailed when Edmund became bishop in 1021. It seems to me likely that the circumstances of this bishop's election (Simeon of Dur. Opera, i, 85-6) point to the introduction of monastic influence. When Simeon calls Aldhun (i, 78) frobabilii monachal, he is looking at him through twelfth-century spectacles. M It would appear (see note 36, above) that a Roman road led from Sockburn to Mainsforth, Old Durham, and Chester-le-Street. It traversed the very lands that had been given to the congregation of St. Cuthbert, and it would be natural, not to say much safer, to bring the body over territory associated with the saint, and probably at this time specially under the protection of Uchtred. Simeon of Dur. op. cit. i, 83 and 213. A HISTORY OF DURHAM neighbourhood of the city of Durham. There is no reason to disown the local tradition which makes the hill Mountjoy the scene of this incident. At all events Durham was considered to be indicated as the spot where the saint desired to rest, and thither the bier was borne. It lay for some time in a hastily improvised wattled shrine on the hill-top, whilst the site was prepared for habitation. Uchtred the earl and son-in-law of Aldhun lent his aid, and prevailed on all the people, from the Coquet to the Tees, to join in the work of clearing the place and building the necessary buildings. A more seemly church known as the White Church received the body of St. Cuthbert, and the first cathedral of Durham was at once commenced. It was ready for use within three years, and to it the remains of the saint were carried, and the dedication took place on 4 September, 999." So the long history of the city of Durham opens. The earls of North- umberland were its first patrons and benefactors. In 1006 the new city was able to withstand a severe assault directed by Malcolm of Scotland, and the heads of many of the defeated host were fastened upon the fortifications. This decisive victory, which kept the Scots at bay for some years, was reversed in I o 1 8 at the disastrous battle of Carham-on-Tweed/2 when a levy of the people between Tees and Tyne was routed with terrible slaughter. But in 1013 Northumbria had acknowledged the power of Sweyn. Appar- ently his son Canute marched north after the battle of Carham, and by his armed display kept the Scots in check. At all events Canute came through Northumbria, and at Trimdon, so tradition says, made fresh gifts to St. Cuthbert,*3 whence he walked with bare feet to Durham. Thanks, then, to the patronage of Uchtred, Durham was now a fortified city, and gifts abounded. Stories of miraculous cure turned the attention of distant churchmen towards it. Relics began to be stored in the church of St. Cuthbert. A sacrist named Elfred brought to it the remains of various north-country saints, and rifled the ruins of Jarrow for the bones of Bede — at least so he gave out. In 1040 the second siege of Durham took place, when Shakespeare's Duncan brought a vast host together to reduce it. A sally on the part of the defenders routed the cavalry of the Scots, whilst the foot were annihilated. The heads of the killed were stuck on poles in the market-place, which is presumably the present Palace Green. The size of the Scottish army and the fact that the beleaguered forces were able to follow it up and disperse it goes to prove that the entire space within the peninsula was by this date fortified. ./Ethelric, a Peterborough monk, who became bishop in 1042, received from the new Earl Siward the same protec- tion which Uchtred had given to Aldhun. The earl confirmed the bishop in his see against a clerical revolt. ^Ethelric desired to replace the old church at Chester by a more dignified stone building, and proceeded to carry out his wish. His pillage of the ornaments and treasure at Durham is proof of the " Simeon is our authority for all these facts, which he claims to have received by tradition from those present. Op. cit. i, 78-84. See his remarks on the closeness of the tradition, ibid. 80. a For its importance cf. Freeman, Norman Conquest, i, 444, and Pertz, Mon. Hist. Germ. Hodgson Hinde, Hist. Northumb. 162. 43 For the tradition cf. Surtees, Hist. Dur. i, 2, 104. The lands now bestowed were chiefly in the neighbourhood of Staindrop, and were part and parcel of that manor, viz. Staindrop, Shotton, Raby, Wacker- field, and Ingleton, all close to one another, and Auckland, Eldon, Thickley, Middleton, Lutterington, and Evenwood, rather farther off. Simeon of Dur. Opera, i, 90 and 213. Auckland and Thickley were restitu- tions. Simeon of Dur. Opera, i, 213. 8 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY wealth of the Church in these things over and above its considerable landed estates. ./Ethelric's brother succeeded him and robbed the Church in the same way. Tosti, the next earl, carried on the now traditional patronage of the earls of Northumberland to the Church and see of St. Cuthbert.44 Copsi, the lieutenant of Tosti in Northumberland (for Tosti was the earl of York), was an even more liberal benefactor, and increased the Church estates by the addition of various manors in the North Riding of Yorkshire." It is probable that during the troubles of Tosti, who was driven from his earldom in 1065, the congregation of St. Cuthbert were perplexed as to their allegiance. Next year, after the battle of Hastings, they openly sided with Edgar Atheling, and doubtless helped to inspire general Northumbrian resistance to the Conqueror. William appointed the Englishman Gospatric to be earl of Northumbria in hope of reducing the widespread opposition of the north. Then followed the northern rebellion of 1068, which was stimulated by Gospatric himself, who found it politic to join the insurgents. Accordingly William made a reconnaissance in force as far as Warwick, whereon the northern army dispersed.48 A detachment, however, fled to Durham determined to make a stand on this impregnable spot. What follows is intricate, but a probable order of events is as follows: — According to a Norman authority Durham was now still further fortified.*7 William, determined to crush Northumbria, appointed Robert Cumin to be earl, and dispatched him to his work. Now the bishop had, some little time before, made his submission ** to William at York, and when the earl arrived before the gates of Durham he and his troops were admitted. But so imperious was their conduct that the Northumbrians rose next day and massacred the Normans.49 News of this event encouraged the Northumbrians without. Gospatric and Edgar, who had fled on the approach of William the year before, returned to rally the rebels. The Conqueror now seized York, and pushed on an army to seize Durham, but it got no farther than Northallerton.10 A little later in the same year a Danish invasion took place in Northumbria, and completed the downfall of William's cause by taking York. The disaster was only for a moment. William retook York and wreaked a terrible vengeance by depopulating the whole country round the city. Whilst these miseries were being enacted, the bishop of Durham, uncertain of his own fortune, was persuaded by Gospatric to flee with the body of St. Cuthbert to Lindisfarne. Accordingly the whole congregation left Durham. The motives of Gospatric are not clear." Perhaps he intended to seize the property of the see. At all events he with Waltheof, earl of Northampton and son of Siward, made submission to William in January, 1070. But this did not save the bishopric, for William at once carried burning and slaughter north of the Tees. 44 For the facts of this paragraph Simeon is our chief authority, op. cit. i, 87—98. * That Durham was becoming a place of pilgrimage is seen from the story of Bishop Alfwold of Sher- borne in William of Maltnesbury, De GtttitPmtlf. (Rolls Scr. 52), 1 80 ; and of Gospatric in Hovedcn, Chron. (Rolls Ser. 51), i, 59. 44 Freeman, Norman Conquest, iv, 1 88. 47 William of Jumieges, quoted by Freeman, op. cit. iv, 194, but it may be doubted whether this author is correctly informed as to the fortification. Presumably that existed already. It would be interesting if the work referred to is the erection of the mound of the existing keep at Durham. " For this submission, of which the exact date is doubtful, see Freeman, op. cit. iv, 205. * The story is told most fully by Simeon, op. cit. i, 98. 50 A legendary story is given in Simeon, ibid. " Simeon, op. cit. 102-41, speaks of the efforts of Gospatric. A HISTORY OF DURHAM Jarrow was at all events partially destroyed. The cathedral church at Durham became a hospital for the sick and dying." About March the deadly work was over, and once more the congregation of St. Cuthbert came to Durham, and set in order their ravaged church. The bishop was not allowed to rest. As in the case of his brother and predecessor ./Ethelric, there were suspicions of peculation. These, joined to the doubtful character of his loyalty, marked him out as an object of punishment. William was a son of the Church, and desired to make proof of his intention to be no plunderer or destroyer, and the bishop was made his scapegoat, being outlawed and deprived." In 1071 William placed a foreigner, as elsewhere, over the see of Durham in the person of Walcher, who until now was a secular priest in Lower Lorraine.64 Next year, after some delay, the king set out for Scotland, where he received the submission of Malcolm at Abernethy. His return left its mark on Northumbria. At Monk Chester he ordered the erection of the castle which gave its name to Newcastle." At Durham, which he now entered for the first time, he confirmed, as Athelstan and Canute had done, all existing privileges." A strange tradition was handed down as to his scepticism concerning the presence of St. Cuthbert's body. His unbelief was dispelled, and the benefactions alluded to were bestowed as evidence of his veneration for the saint. Before the year 1072 closed, William appointed Waltheof, of the old Northumbrian house, to be earl in place of Gospatric. Between the earl and the bishop a strong friendship sprang up, of which one visible result is Durham Castle, which Waltheof built for the protection of his friend.67 There was as yet, apparently, no thought of palatinate power in connexion with this ecclesiastical fortress. The history of the last year had shown how necessary some stable residence would be for the bishop and the desirability of adequate protection for the congregation of St. Cuthbert. Walcher contemplated a great change at Durham. Hitherto the bishop had been, as it were, the dean of a body of canons whose prebendal estates were numerous and widely spread.68 Walcher introduced into Northumbria the revived Benedictine monasticism of the eleventh century. He began this course at dismantled Jarrow, and endowed the restored monastery with the lands adjacent, to which the bishop's title is not clear. From this house the majority of the monks were transferred to Wearmouth, where similar endow- ment was made, and the buildings were renewed which had lain waste since the Danish inroads. The design of transplanting this restored monasticism M For the facts with reference to original authorities cf. Freeman, iv, 304. That Durham offered no resistance at this time is due either to the fact that it was denuded of the bishopric men, who presumably did some kind of military service, or else to the submission of Gospatric. 63 The fate of the bishop is told confusedly by Simeon. William could not depend on any one of the northern magnates. He, doubtless, designed to extrude the Englishman and adopted the means described in the text. 64 Simeon, op. cit. i, 9-10 ; Freeman, op. cit. iv, 513 and paiiim, has worked all the authorities. " Some authorities put this later in the reign ; Freeman, op. cit. iv, 518. * The order of events in the Durham visit is confused. It is probable that the grants were made after leaving Durham, when he stopped at Darlington. For his scepticism cf. Freeman, op. cit. iv, 520. 57 This is the true reading of Simeon, op. cit. ii, 199-200, where the subject of the sentence must be Waltheof, and not William, to whom the building of the castle has been wrongly ascribed. 58 This seems clear from what is a priori likely in regard to men who were not monks, though Simeon threw over them the respectability conveyed by that word. See also note 39 above. Reginald of Durham certainly regarded them as secular canons. Libellus, 29. IO ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY to Durham was cut short by the bishop's death, though some preparation for the monks was made." Waltheof being implicated in rebellion is withdrawn fron Northumbrian history in 1075. Walcher succeeded to his position as earl of Northumbria. But Walcher was an old and mild ecclesiastic unable to curb his dependants, and met his death at what may have been a meeting of the palatine court held at Gateshead.60 This tumultuous episode had an interesting sequel in a four days' siege of Durham Castle by the murderers of the bishop which was quite ineffectual. In revenge for the murder, Odo of Bayeux was dispatched to the north, and for the third time in fourteen years the district round Durham was deluged in blood and fire. Carileph the next Norman bishop completed the monastic plan of Walcher, and began the present cathedral at Durham.61 It is possible that the complaisant Walcher shrank from extruding the Cuthbertine canons. Carileph had no such scruple. He was younger and more energetic, and having obtained from Hildebrand, who was absolutely like-minded on this point, the bulls thought necessary for the purpose, the bishop gave the congre- gation the choice of turning monk or of withdrawing. Monks from Jarrow and Wearmouth were drafted into Durham, and thus the great Benedictine Abbey began its history in 1083. The great church was commenced in 1093, after an interlude of exile on the bishop's part which does not concern us here." Several charters purporting to be of the end of the eleventh century have been preserved, but they are now proved to be of later fabrication, though they seem to state facts.'3 To Carileph, then, we may attribute the donation of Rainton, Pittington, Hesleden, Dalton-le-Dale, Merrington, ShinclifFe, and Elvet, with the churches in Elvet, Aycliffe, Hesleden, and Dalton. On the same showing several manors outside the county were given about the same time to the prior and convent. Tynemouth Priory which had been a possession was transferred to the monks of St. Albans, about 1093. The character and eccentricities of Flambard,who became bishop in 1099, do not much concern us here. He came to a greatly wasted see after three years of vacancy. In the main Flambard, who had taught Rufus the profitable trick of keeping sees vacant, proved to be a restorer.*4 The most interesting event of the early twelfth century was the trans- lation of the body of St. Cuthbert in 1 104 from its temporary resting-place after the destruction of Aldhun's church to the shrine now prepared for it behind the high altar. There can be no doubt on scientific grounds that the body of the saint, emaciated by fastings and rigour, had dried up, but ** Grcenwell, Durham Cathedral, 20 ». " For a discriminating summary of this affair see Arch. Ael. xx, 32. " Simeon, op. cit. i, 1 2 5 iff. is our main authority. No better summing up of what Carileph did is to be found than that of Dr. Grcenwell in his Dur. Cath. (6th ed.), 21-9. " The circumstances of Carileph's exile are important in the larger political history of the time. See Bp. Creighton's summary in Diet. Nat. Biog. who points out that Simeon of Durham takes his tide, whilst the southern chroniclers condemned him. Durham Castle was seized by the king during the bishop's exile. ** See Dr. Greenwell's preface to the FeoJarium. M After his imprisonment and subsequent exile, during which for five yean the see was deprived of its bishop save for a visit in 1 1 04 and perhaps again. Diet. Nat. Biog. ' Flambard.' II A HISTORY OF DURHAM had never perished. This fact was abundantly proved at the opening of the coffin, which has been fully described for us.65 Flambard did much for the city of Durham, completing the plans of Carileph at the cathedral, adding to the fortifications of the castle, and before his death giving a large sum of money to the citizens.66 One or two other points may also be noted, as, for instance, the foundation of Kepier Hospital in 1 1 12, and the grant of Finchale to the prior and convent in 1118. It was probably during his absence from England that the see of Carlisle became independent. A very 67 shadowy jurisdiction had been exercised over Cum- berland or part of it, from Lindisfarne, but the bishops of Durham do not seem to have succeeded to any authority over it. Hexhamshire, said to have been dependent on Durham until Flambard, can not be proved to have owned any real allegiance. Under Geoffrey Rufus (113 3—40) , who had been chancellor in Henry's reign, the see was brought into the turmoil of the two contending factions and suffered much in consequence. Geoffrey took the side of Stephen in 1135, and it was perhaps in token of gratitude that the new king permitted the bishop for the first time to erect a mint which survived until the Refor- mation.68 The action of Geoffrey gave David of Scotland a pretext for trying to push the southward influence of Scotland, which Malcolm had been the last to attempt. David accordingly advanced into England and took up position at Newcastle. Stephen to oppose him flung himself into Durham. For the moment terms were made, but two years later, in 1138, the invasion was resumed to vindicate the claims of David's son Henry in right of his mother to the earldom of Northumberland. There is no trace of any bishopric force. The diocese was ravaged, Norham Castle (erected by Flambard) was taken, and after great accessions from Scotland and Ireland, the tide of invasion flowed on into Yorkshire, to be hurled back at the Battle of the Standard. In all this crisis the bishop plays no recorded part, and the semi-religious aspect of the campaign is due to the banners of St. Peter, St. Wilfrid, and St. John of Beverley. In May, 1139, at Durham, a conven- tion was signed which recognized the claim of David's son to the earldom of Northumberland, and provided that the rights of the bishop of Durham within the lands of St. Cuthbert should be fully recognized.69 In Geoffrey's time the chapter-house was completed.70 An interesting if discreditable episode was enacted in the interregnum which followed Geoffrey's death in 1141. Cumin, who had been David's chancellor, was by his master's direct help intruded into the see.71 He obtained the goodwill of the great officers in the castle and of some members 65 ' The best account is in Raine, St. Cuthbert, 74. For the physical condition of the body, V.C.H. Dur. i, 124. The original authority is Simeon, op. cit. i, 247-61, ii, 236. 66 Flambard's work at Durham caught the imagination of William of Malm. De Gestis Pontif. (517). For a contemporary account see Simeon, op. cit. i, 139, iii, 260. Summaries as to details in Hutchinson, Hist, and Antiq. of Dur. i, 183 ; Surtees, Dur. i, p. xix. 67 For early position of Carlisle, see V. C. H. Cumb. ii, 7. Another shadowy jurisdiction was Teviotdale, henceforth annexed to Glasgow, as Hexhamshire, (until 1836) to York. For the latter see A Hist, of Northum- berland, iii, 1 1 7. ra For the mint see M. Noble's Two Dissertations. 69 Summary in Hodgson Hinde, Hist. Northumb. 207-15. 70 Greenwell, Dur. Cath. 47. 71 A convenient summary is in Hodgson Hinde, Hist. Northumb, 216-17. The chief original authority is Laurence, prior of Durham (1149-53), who witnessed the occurrences so far as Durham was concerned, and described them in his poems (our chief authority for the Norman Castle), published by the Surtees Society, and also in prose if, as is likely, Laurence is the first continuator of Simeon of Durham ; Simeon, op. cit. i, 143-60. 12 \ WILLIAM Di ST. BA«BA»A, i'43-S* ANTHONY Bit, 1184-1311 ANTHONY Btic, 1284-1311 (Revtru) DURHAM EPISCOPAL SEALS : PLATE I ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY of the cathedral. He managed to hold the place for two years altogether before making an ignominious submission to the new bishop (William de St. Barbara), whom some of the escaped monks elected. But the two years coming so soon after the devastation of David proved a time of terrible woe for the diocese. The borough of Elvet was destroyed, and so was Kepier Hospital, with other buildings in the suburbs of the city, whilst partisan zeal stirred the sympathies of the chief bishopric tenants for or against the usurper. William succeeded as an old man in 1143, and proved himself energetic in healing the wounds of his diocese. Two twelfth-century saints were famous at this time, Bartholomew of Durham,7* an anchorite on the Fame Islands, and St. Godric,78 the hermit of Finchale, who became a great friend of the bishop. In his episcopate Middleham became the property of prior and convent. To the presumably well-defined see-lands Pudsey succeeded with all the prestige that relationship with Stephen gave him.7* He was well received in his diocese, and apparently spent the earlier years of his episcopate in healing the sores of the land. By degrees he was trusted by Henry II, and took some part in the politics of the day. A famous return of 1 1 66 gives a side-light on the military service of the various territories in the sec.71 In 1 1 70, after steering clear of the Becket dispute, Pudsey com- promised himself along with Roger of York over the coronation of Prince Henry, and this led to a brief papal suspension from his bishopric. Two years later he connived at the rebellion of the king's sons, and made terms with Scotland, now active in the prince's behalf. For such disloyalty Pudsey lost his castles, including Durham Castle, and did not regain them for some time. More peaceful days followed, and during the long vacancy of the see of York, from 1181, the spiritual sway of Pudsey in the north of England was much augmented. The crusading frenzy which seized the country after the fall of Jerusalem in 1 187 now gave the opportunity for that advance of power which marks the episcopate of Pudsey. Richard I, desirous of preventing Pudsey from joining the crusade, readily bestowed upon him the earldom of Northumberland for a large money consideration. Some time in the same year the bishop obtained the earldom of Sadberge which, though it was situated between Tyne and Tees, had been no part of the episcopal lands. Installed in the increased power brought him by these transactions Pudsey was able to defy the king's half-brother Geoffrey, recently appointed archbishop of York, a defiance which needed papal settlement in 1191. For the rest Pudsey did well in his new position.74 For the city and county of Durham Pudsey's reign was a prominent epoch in many ways, apart from the large secular sway that he exerted. To Durham he gave a charter in 1 175, as he did to Gateshead and Sunderland. The castle, considerably damaged by fire about 1154, was improved, and at the cathedral the famous Galilee was added, whilst a new bridge led to the borough of Elvet. Here the rectory, with its dependent chapels at Croxdale and Witton, was given to the prior and convent.77 He refounded Kepier, n Life of Bartholomew in Simeon of Dur. op. cit. i, 295-325. " For facts and authorities, see Surtees Soc. Publications, vol. xix. " He is called in a charter of Stephen ' Nepoti meo.' "Given in Hutchinson, op. cit. i, 207. " Facts and authorities in Diet. Nat. Biog. ' Hugh de Puiset.' " The fabric of St. Margaret's, Durham, suggests that it was built now, but the chapclry (it was one of four dependent on St. Oswald's, the others being Croxdale, Witton, and St. Leonard) cannot be yet traced. '3 A HISTORY OF DURHAM founded Sherburn Hospital, built the church of St. Giles, and at Darlington built the collegiate church of St. Cuthbert, and augmented its foundation.78 His grants to lay tenants were numerous. The great importance of the famous Boldon Book is set out at large in another article.79 To the episcopate of Pudsey (1153-95) there succeeded a long interval before the next really great bishop. Yet those who followed, if men in- ferior to Flambard and Pudsey in strength of character, held firmly to the regality which was clearly recognized.80 Our authorities now begin to increase, and in the information supplied by patent and other rolls we obtain frequent mention of bishop, and the various bishopric officers.81 Incidentally during the vacancy of the see we are able to trace in the Pipe Rolls, &c., the accounts of the revenue, the names of the chief tenants, and the regular suc- cession to prebendal estates at Auckland, Norton, and elsewhere in the king's gift during vacancy. The general history of the diocese during the greater part of the thirteenth century is not attractive, as it consists mainly of disputes between the bishop and the monastery, or the bishop and the archbishop of York, with more than enough of personal crime and violence on the part of the chief actors. Glancing briefly at the bishops in question we first notice Philip of Poitou (1197-1208), a friend of King John, who gave him a new grant of a mint at Durham.83 His appointment of a nephew, Aimeric, as archdeacon of Durham, led to a long feud with the monastery, in which the nephew urged his uncle to a series of attacks upon the independence of the monks, and scenes of disgraceful violence were enacted. It is to his episcopate that the well-known description of Geoffrey of Coldingham refers, in which he says that 'Jesus was thought to be asleep whilst the little bark of the Church was tossing in the midst of the sea.'83 One of several prolonged vacancies followed the death of Bishop Philip, during which regular returns of the episcopal revenue in the king's hands were made by the royal officers. At last, in 1217, Richard Marsh was elected, a man of more than doubtful past history,84 who carried on the dispute with the monastery. The feud was so bitter that Bishop Richard appealed to Rome, and perhaps by his influence the suit was protracted without definite sentence. He died leaving the appeal unfinished and the diocese in debt. After another interval of three years, Bishop le Poor followed, and by his excellence atoned for the personal demerit of his immediate predecessors. His fame rests not only on the fact that he added the eastern transept of the nine altars to the cathedral, but on his termination of the embittered strife between bishop and monastery. The convenif, as it is usually called, was drawn up in 1229 as a solution of all the outstanding disputes, and though it was criticized by the monastic element as scarcely fair to prior and convent, it formed a good modus vivendi between 78 Longstaffe, Hist, of Darlington, 213. 79 Pudsey's inventory (Wills and Inventories, Surtees .Soc. ii, 3), gives an interesting list of books, some still preserved at Durham. 90 The claim as to the southern end of the bridge over Tweed in 1199 is an instance in point. Hutchinson, Hist. Dur. i, 229, from Hoveden, Chron. (Rolls Ser.). At least as early as 1255 there is mention in so many words of ' the bishop's regality between Tyne and Tees' ; Close R. 39 Hen. Ill, m. 7 d. 11 The Attestations testium in FeoJarium (Surtees Soc.), 220-300, give incidentally the names of a large number of officers in the first half of the thirteenth century. rl Noble's Two Dissertations is the chief authority on the mint. 83 Tres Scriptorei (Surtees Soc.), 2 1 . 84 Matt. Paris, Chron. Maj. (Rolls Ser.), ii, 531. ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY the two parties, as the long continued pause in disputing now made evident." Poor was no doubt anxious to effect a working settlement, since at Salisbury he had been on particularly friendly relations with the secular canons of the new church. The friars, who were beginning to get a foothold in England at this time, found no welcome or encouragement in the bishopric, and the dominating influence of the great Benedictine order succeeded in keeping them out of the city at all events. After four years' interval, during which the crozier was for a short time forced into the hand of Prior Melsamby, Nicolas Farnham (1241—9) became bishop. His oath of obedience to the archbishop of York survives to show that the direction of 1191 was now observed.8* In his time the Scots began after long quiet to disturb the peace of the borders, and Nicolas was directed by the king to see to the protection of the Marches. Thirty years later the same danger and the same duty became more frequent, and these directions to the bishop mark that idea of the defensive aspect of the bishopric which in the fourteenth century was regarded as the raison d^ltre of the Palatinate. Nicolas resigned the bishopric in 1249, and held (notwithstanding efforts to oust him) the manors of Howden, Stockton, and Easington. One or two echoes of the great ecclesiastical and political questions which agitated the Church of England in the thirteenth century come from Durham in the next quarter of a century. Thus in 1257 the prior and convent made a determined stand against the papal exactions in common with the canons of Gisburn, for which bold action they were put under a temporary interdict.87 Apparently they were ready to contribute a few years later to the tenth granted to the king by the pope in I274.88 There is no special evidence to show the attitude of the bishop or monastery to the barons in the Barons' War, but a document survives which gives the names of the bishopric knights at Lewes in 1264.*' In 1268 Cardinal Ottobon, who was active in promoting peace between the king and his subjects, urged the bishop of Durham and others of the northern province to restore the lands of the nobles recently dispossessed, despite the pressure of burdens already existing.90 Greatham Hospital is connected with the troubles of this crisis. Its land endowments formed part of the confiscated estates of Peter de Montfort, and were devoted by Bishop Stichill to their new purpose in the exercise of his Palatinate powers in regard to forfeits." Apart from these few matters, the episcopates of Kirkham (1249-60), Stichill (1261-74), and Robert of Holy Island (1274-83) left little record, and in general (with small exception) u The chief points in dispute were certain advowsons of churches, estates, and the delimitation of the bishop's apd the prior's courts, 'de curia, Tol, Them, et Infangethef et de placitis latrocinii,' &c. Lapsley, County Pal. Dur. 169. ** Melsamby was prior, and reluctantly submitted to his election, but being an ex-prior of Coldingham was regarded by the king as more than half a vassal of Scotland (Graystanes in Tret Scriptures, 38), and eventu- ally he resigned. For the oath of Nicolas Farnham, see Raine's Historians Ch.ofTork, iii, 122 ; cf. Hoveden, Chron. iii, 74. The origin of this theory is discussed by Lapsley, op. cit. 303. 87 Matt. Paris, Chron. Maj. v, 634-5 (Rolls Scr.), in recording this says: ' O si habuissent in tribulatione sua consortes et in eorum constantia coadjutores ! Quam feliciter ecclesia Anglicana de tortoribus suis et opprcssoribus triumphasset ! ' M Cat. Close, 1272-9, p. 128. * The original is in Add. MSS. 27423, fol. 66, 71. It is printed by Hutchinson, Hist. Dur. i, 267. " Northern Reg. (Rolls Scr.), 15, 18. 91 Hutchinson, Hist, and Ant'tq. of Dur. i, 263-;, gives the particulars of this important constitutional matter. The bishop successfully asserted his right over that of the king ; cf. Lapsley, op. cit. 42. 15 A HISTORY OF DURHAM their relation to the monastery was friendly, partly because the two latter bishops were local Benedictines. Various churches and chapels can first be traced in that part of the thirteenth century which has now been reviewed. We hear of chapels at Streatlam and Stainton in I2io,'8 at Satley in 1221 ;93 of licences to oratories at Stanley in I24I,94 and Old Durham, i 268; 95 of chantries at Easington (a rec- tory before 1222; Surtees, Hist. Dur. i, 2, 12), about 1249, anc^ at St. Nicholas, Durham, in 1250." These are, perhaps, the first known instances of chantries in the bishopric. Heighington was made a vicarage in 1239." The century which lies between the death of Robert of Holy Island in 1283 and that of Hatfield in 1381 comprises what is outwardly the most mag- nificent period in Durham church history. The palatinate power was now at its height, and to a great extent proved itself unassailable in the internal con- troversies with convent and commonalty and the external attempts of king and archbishop. Yet there were contrasts to the success and opulence of the prince-bishops in various episodes which darkened the general splendour. Few years were without prospect or realization of Scotch invasion ; the clergy were still pillaged by direct taxation or by the iniquitous practice of papal provisions ; the Black Death, if less awful than in some parts, left its terrible trace upon the land ; robbery and violence abounded. The epoch was intro- duced by Bishop Anthony Bek (1284— 131 1),98 first friend and comrade in arms of Edward I, then churchman, diplomat, and statesman. Shortly after his elevation Bek was opposed by Archbishop Romanus of York, who stimu- lated by the old jealousy sought from Bek an acknowledgement of his position as suffragan. In the issue certain messengers were imprisoned at Durham, and Bek cleverly urged his palatine jurisdiction as justification of what he had done, and obtained a decision in his favour. The bishop was employed by the king in the marriage negotiations on behalf of the first prince of Wales and the Scottish child-Queen Margaret. Her death prevented the union of the two kingdoms, and led to the dynastic feuds which followed. Bek made use of his crusading experience in the series of wars between England and Scotland. He was appointed custodian of the lands north of Trent, and found himself at the head of a large force of men gathered not only from the bishopric and the northern counties, but from Ireland and Wales. It was, perhaps, in the newly-built hall of Durham Castle that Bek lavishly enter- tained the king in 1296 after a successful campaign. In 1300, and partly as an outcome of this warfare, there took place a recrudescence of the weary controversy between bishop and convent. On this occasion the matter in dispute was not only the bishop's visitatorial powers (in executing which he deposed the prior), but a broadening out of the whole quarrel, scf that the tenants of the bishop were involved. These last had complained bitterly of being drawn outside the bishopric in the late war, and pleaded their privilege of being ' Haliwerk folk,' and so exempt from external service.99 The struggle at last bereft Bek of his palatinate for a time, and brought a summons to u Surtees, Hist. Dur. iv, I, loo. « Ibid. 344. " Wolley Chart, v, 3. 15 Surtees op. cit. iv, 91. » Ibid, iv, 2, 48. " Ibid, iii, 306. 98 For his character and history see Arch. Ael. xx, 115. 99 Cal. Pat. 1301-7, p. 71. Various matters were introduced into the dispute, e.g. the question of coal rights, perhaps the earliest reference to Durham coals ; cf. Arch. Ael. viii, 175. The king compelled the dis- putants to come to terms; Cal. Pat. 1301-7, p. 106. Articles of agreement in Stowe MS. 930, fol. 152. 16 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY Rome which ended in his suspension. Bek saw fit to humble himself to the king and received back his possessions. A new pope gave opportunity for a re-trial of the case, but this pontiff was Clement V, who was a warm friend ot Bek, and made him Patriarch of Jerusalem in I3o6.100 That was the last year of Edward I, who now seized certain lands forfeited by Balliol and Bruce, but the young King Edward II, coming to the throne in 1307, restored to the bishop the rights of his Palatinate almost intact, and made him king of the Isle of Man.101 Two or three untroubled years followed before Bek's death in 1311. He was the first bishop buried in the cathedral. Bek left behind him traces of his magnificence and generosity in his buildings at Auckland and Durham, his foundation of the prebendal churches at Chester- le-Street and Lanchester,108 and in gifts to the cathedral.105 At Bek's death another stage of the convent dispute was reached, when the prior seized the jurisdiction and started a controversy which it took some years to settle.10* The next bishop was Kellaw (1311—16), whose magnificent register,101 with its curious history, swells out the steadily- growing stream of information. It is possible for some years to chronicle the history of the Palatinate with much exactitude. As Kellaw was a Durham monk the bishop and convent disputes ceased for the time. He was a man of quiet character and encouraged learned men. His times were not quiet. His episcopate contains the record of Scottish troubles which led up to the English defeat at Bannockburn. The trace of hurrying troops is on every page of the records. Time and again the bishop is commanded to stay in his diocese and guard the borders.10' All sorts of men were requisitioned either for service or to contribute money. The clergy granted a rate for the protection of the cathedral ; 107 prior and convent contributed 800 marks;108 prayers were ordered in all the churches. Meanwhile marauders ran riot over the bishopric, which was in a deplorable state through pillage and fear, whilst famine was rife amongst the poor. All this is the darker side. The register exhibits many proofs of episcopal vigilance and activity. Large ordinations were regularly held in the cathedral or at Stockton, Egglescliffe, or elsewhere, by the bishop or by some other bishop acting for him.109 Some of these helpers were foreigners. The whole process from getting a title and testimonials until licence was given is fully referred to. Sir Thomas Hardy points out among other notabilia in the register the equal discipline to high and low which is characteristic of Kellaw.110 Eleemosynary indulgences multiplied through the century for purely religious purposes, or for charitable uses, such as the building and repair of churches, monasteries, or bridges for public utility. Ever since the "" Bek was allowed to wear the pallium of the office, titular as the appointment really was ; Cal. Papal Let. ii, 10. 1111 The chief dates are : first seizure of the Palatinate, July, 1302; summons of king to peace, Mar. 1303; restoration of the Palatinate, July, 1303 ; second seizure of Palatinate, Dec. 1305 ; Bek made Patriarch, Dec. i 306 ; restoration of the Palatinate, Sep. 1 307 ; and fuller grant, May, 1 308. lw The date is about 1 297, the year in which the pope confirmed the two foundations ; Cal. Papal Let. i, 570-1. '* Surtees Soc. Pub!, ii, 12. IM The prior's action led to a protest by Archbishop Greenfield ; Reg. Paiat. Dun. Kellato, i, 39. The matter was settled in 1 3 1 6 on the death of Kellaw. 106 In Rolls Series, Reg. Palat. Dun. See introduction of Sir T. D. Hardy, i, pp. i and xciii. '" Cal. Close R. 1307-13, p. 568. "" Reg. Palat. Dun. i, 469. "* Northern Regiiters (Rolls Ser.), 232. " Reg. Palat. Dun. iii, p. bntiii. 110 Introduction to Reg. Paiat. Dun. iii, p. otviii. 2 '7 3 A HISTORY OF DURHAM building of the nine altars in the cathedral church, a century before, the granting of indulgences was constant at Durham.111 The appointment of a diocesan penitentiary in 1312 marks the organization of the penitential system on mediaeval lines.118 Kellaw died at Middleham. The bishops evidently made much use now of their country houses. In Kellaw's time we get the first mention of an episcopal residence in London.118 Two years' interval of disgraceful competition for the Palatinate followed the death of Kellaw in 1316. The one good feature of that time was the final adjustment of the question of sede vacante jurisdiction. This was now left in the hands of the pope,11* who formulated his decision. Beaumont (1318-33) was at last appointed bishop through the queen's influence. Of this prelate strange stories are still told to visitors over the empty matrix of his magnificent brass. His lack of education, his boundless vanity, the huge fees paid to Rome for his election, the story of his being kidnapped and held to ransom, were matters which tinged the mention of his name with interest.116 Fresh outbreaks of Scottish turbulence filled much of his episcopate with the same orders and measures as in the previous episcopate ; directions to garrison and provision the castles are the staple of the years.116 Invasion actual or menacing is mentioned in 1322, 1323, and 1325, rising in violence to Darlington fight, when Douglas fell, in 1327, and finally culminating in the decisive English victory of Halidon Hill in 1333, which retrieved the defeat of Bannockburn. Yet a somewhat famous letter of Edward II to Beaumont still exists in which the king upbraids him for even greater negligence against the Scots than Kellaw had shown.117 This was in 1322, and five years later Beaumont certainly stirred himself to prosecute before the king in Parliament the recognition of his jura regalia, and the restoration of forfeitures, almost at the same time as the Darlington victory alluded to above. The ample acknowledgement of the bishop's liberties is the most constitutionally important event 118 of his episcopate, and the Halidon Hill victory two months before his death was a complete justification of Edward's action, though Beaumont did not in person lead the forces. Beaumont was succeeded for the moment by Graystanes, the Durham chronicler, one of our chief authorities from the early thirteenth century to his time. He was duly elected, confirmed, and consecrated by the arch- bishop of York, but Edward, whose acquaintance with Durham was con- siderable, had from the pope obtained the position for his tutor Bury. This eminent prelate,119 who now came in as a direct papal nominee, is chiefly interesting as the first literary bishop of Durham. Edward had probably learned that the duties of Count Palatine might be discharged by efficient officers. It is certain that Bury was more at home in his study than in camp. Yet he stuck to the rights of the Palatinate when need arose, and 11 Introduction to Reg. Palat. Dun. iii, p. cxrxvi. " Reg. Palat. Dun. i, 1 35. "» Ibid, i, 645. 14 Raine, Hist. Ch. of York, iii, 237 and 265. 15 For all these stories Graystanes (Tres Scriptures, Surtees Soc.), is the original authority. " The Patent and Close Rolls contain many relative entries. See Cat. Pat. 1321-4, p. 92 ; Cal. Close, 1318-23, pp. 562, 663, 679. 17 Translated in Reg. Palat. Dun. i, p. Ixxix. '" Ibid. p. Ixxx. 119 Cf. Hardy, Reg. Palat. Dun. iii, p. cxli. 18 LEWIS nt BEAUMONT, 1318-3; RICHAID MAMII, 1217-26 .*•"•• f*t •*?**. RICHARD or Bi'iiv, 1333-4^ CuTHtEUT TUNITALL, 1530-59 DURHAM EPISCOPAL SEALS : PLATE II ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY was ready to treat with the Scots when directed to do so by the king.180 The whole bishopric was still smarting under the wounds of the late incur- sions. Raids and robbery prevented the sores from healing.1" Society generally was in deep distress, and the king in 1334 remitted the debts of the men of the bishopric in consequence.1" So great was the poverty of the clergy that the new taxation of 1330 was enforced in place of the older assessment preserved for us in Kellaw's register. Particulars of the new scheme do not appear to have survived, but as the older taxatio itself had been drawn up only in 1318 to meet the poverty of the period, we have here an indication of the miserable impoverishment produced by the Scottish wars.123 Many of the clergy in the diocese at this time were aliens, and in 1343 the king demanded a return and specified his reasons for desir- ing the practice of promoting foreigners to cease.1" Bury's episcopate is otherwise noteworthy as being the high-water mark of our manuscript authorities for the history of Durham.1" Bishop Hatfield (1345-81) now follows. Personally he is not so im- pressive as Bek, for instance, though the motto of the hall in the University of Durham named after him describes this prelate as endeavouring to be ' vel primus vel cum primis.'18' His military experience gained in the French wars stood him in little stead, and he figures rather as a political bishop much trusted in matters of state than as a warrior. Within the Palatinate his magnificence catches and retains the eye, but there is a very different aspect of his episcopate due to the circumstances of the time. Its early months were full of rumours of war, and in 1346 the Scotch crossed the border in greater numbers than in any previous invasion, and at a moment when the country was engaged in war with France.137 Once more St. Cuth- bert's sacred banner was borne at the head of the bishopric troops, which formed an important element in the forces hastily gathered to repel the invader.188 Probably Durham men had more to do in the winning of this battle than in any other border victory. Yet it was hardly purchased, for loss and poverty crippled the district owing to the recent invasion.18' The most gloomy period in the history of the diocese now began, when the Black Death apparently for the first time was desolating England, and Durham was not spared.180 One little incidental sentence in a roll of Bishop Hatfield indicates the fearful ravages of the plague, and between the lines of various documents we obtain proof that the death-roll was heavy.181 The " He even purchased an armistice with the Scots ; cf. Lapsley, op. cit. 39. 01 In 1333 the king offered the bishopric men shelter for themselves and their cattle in the southern forest*. Cal. Close, 1333-7, P- IO1- '" &»/. Pat- '33°-4» P- 528- ln Taxation of 1318 ; cf. Pat. Rolls II Edw. II, pt. ii, m. 6 of 1330 ; Cal. Close 1330-3, pp. 65, 67. See Hardy's remarks, Introd. Reg. Palat. Dun. iii, p. Ixi, and text of valuation, ibid. 88. For order of 1336 Cal. Close, i333~7, P- 7*°- " Cal. Close, 1343-6, pp. 215, 1*4. '" Cf. Lapsley, op. cit. 319-330. "• The words come from Chambre's description of Hatfield in Trei Serif tores, p. 137. 117 The account in Surtees' History, i, p. xlix, is clear and not too long. An elaborate examination of the battle is given in Arch. Ael. i, 171. "* For the history of the banner, see Arch. Ael. ii, 57. '" Letters from Northern Registers (Rolls Ser.). 110 Ibid. 399, 401, important evidence for Durham and the northern province. The papal registers for the next forty years give in their concessions to monastic houses conclusive proof of the virulence of the outbreak in the north. 111 Cursitor Roll, Hatfield, where special provision for a land tide is made in the event of the death of the assigns during the pestilence then raging. 19 A HISTORY OF DURHAM years that followed 1349 were in the Durham diocese given to repair and restoration. Hatfield seems to have been solicitous for the spiritual welfare of his flock. In 1353 he issued licence to Carmelite Friars, somewhat against the custom of the diocese,133 to preach, and gave as his reason the wish ' that there should be more preaching that the souls of the people might be fed.' Frequent licences were given to friars and others to hear confessions.183 In 1353 he served the rectors and vicars of churches with a monition respecting the observance of festivals.13* Six years later the condition of the cathedral fabric engaged his attention, and in consequence of its dilapidated state representatives were sent round to places more or less distant in order to solicit contributions towards restoration.135 Soon after this the Neville ornaments were added to the cathedral. But despite the general impoverish- ment bishop and pope taxed the Palatinate unmercifully, until in 1378 the king wrote to Hatfield forbidding him to extort further sums on behalf of the pope.138 Plague and defeat did not stop the Scottish incursions. They recur in 1377 and in I38o.187 In the former year the bishop was ordered to live near the Scottish marches, and in the latter laymen were bidden to remain on their lands where these were worth 100 marks. Traces of money-raising on these occasions survive in the registers.188 Yet Hatfield and his officials found time in these troublous years to foster the growth of Durham College, which in one shape or other had existed in the University of Oxford since 1290, and under Hatfield received a more stable foundation.139 The comparatively peaceful years that fell between the battle of Neville's Cross and the Scottish incursion just alluded to, were troubled by a fresh outburst of the slumbering feud between York and Durham. In 1 349 two of Hatfield's chaplains went to York Minster and made a dis- graceful exhibition of themselves with some suspicion of Hatfield's conni- vance.140 There was further cause of affront in an attack upon the bishop of Chrysopolis, suffragan to the archbishop, which was thought to have been suggested by Hatfield.1" In neither case was Hatfield's personal guilt estab- lished, but the tales serve to show the jealousy that was never far off in the relations of the archbishop of York and the bishop of Durham in the palmy days of the Palatinate. Archbishop Neville who had family reasons for desiring to depress the bishop asserted his right to visit, and this reappearance of the old claim already described 14J was only dissipated by a repeated pro- hibition from the king in 1376 and 1377. The prior and convent seem to have gained much in general prestige and influence by the middle of the fourteenth century. Perhaps in part from a dislike of too close proximity to the monks, the bishop, when in the diocese, resided less and less in Durham. Auckland, Stockton, Middleham 131 Dur. Epis. Register, Hatfield. lss Ibid. 1M Ibid. 35 Mention is made of application to Carlisle in Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. ix, App. i, 191. 136 Lapsley, op. cit. 298; cf. 274. The action of the bishop is all the more capricious in view of a com- mission issued by him in 1358 to inquire concerning all oppressions, extortions, etc., committed by his own officers. '" cf. Cal. Pat. 1377-81, pp. 308, 606. "' Dur. Epis. Reg. Hatfield. 139 An excellent sketch in Dean Kitchin's Ruskin at Oxford, and other Studies. 10 The story is told in 'Northern Registers, 397—9. Can this outburst of blasphemy be due to the general depression succeeding the plague ? 141 Rymer, FaeJera, iii (i), 389. 14> Diet. Nat. Biog. 'Hatfield,' 156*. 2O ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY were favourite places of abode.1*5 Durham indeed was, with its multiple jurisdictions, increasingly the city of prior and convent, so that now the Old Borough and Framwellgate were the sum total of the bishop's pos- sessions in the immediate neighbourhood of the castle and precincts. A papal 'document of 1372 proves the growing magnificence attained by the monastery under this little-checked expansion, and it indicates incidentally how severely other northern houses of less enviable character and attraction had suffered from the Black Death, or from the decay of monasticism. The pope in declining to facilitate a new appropriation by the king to the prior and convent says : As there had been appropriated to the said prior and chapter four abbeys of religious in which only priors are now instituted, in each of which were twenty-four monks and now no more than fifteen in all four ; as likewise two other monasteries in each of which fifteen persons dwelt, in both of which there are now ten ; as moreover thirteen parish churches were appropriated and many other things conferred on them, it is probable that if the king were sufficiently informed of this, he would not petition for the said appropriation seeing further that in Durham there are now only fifty-six resident monks who when they go out travel with three or four horses and spend more on food and clothing than befits the modesty of their religion.144 A few years later under Bishop Fordham the prior and convent made petition to Urban VI for the coveted distinction of wearing the full pontifical insignia of mitre, staff, &c. The monastery pleaded in justification of the concession that their annual income exceeded 5,000 marks, and that less important houses possessed the desired privilege.1" If, as the registers show, Hatfield was rarely at Durham and often out of the diocese altogether, he was certainly not neglectful of that part of the city which was peculiarly the bishop's. It is probable that in his absence the castle became more and more a garrison of soldiers. It was doubtless in connexion with this use of the buildings that Hatfield lengthened the hall, made alterations in the Constable's Hall, and built the lofty mediaeval keep, which was in constant use for the next 100 years.1" The bishop's throne in the cathedral is an apt symbol of the magnificence of Hatfield's episcopate. He also built Durham House in the Strand for his residence when attending at Parliament, and arranged a sumptuous appointment of chaplains in it.1*7 The register and rolls connected with Hatfield bear witness to the enormous amount of business with which he and his officials had to deal.1*8 The number of the latter and the variety of their offices, however, suggest that the work was distributed. Moreover, suffragan bishops were commissioned for intervals longer or shorter.1*9 There is little evidence by which to test the condition of intellectual and spiritual enlightenment, but we must bear in mind the negative evidence of Hatfield's ordinances of 1353 alluded to above, 10 A brief renewal of the dispute with the bishop is alluded to in 1353 when a deed wa» enrolled (cf. Cursitor Rolls, Hatf. i, D. m. 9) concerning criminal matters and the right to various dues. " Cal. Papal Let. iv, 117. "« Low, Dine. Hist. Dur. 196. "The original authority is Chambre's Tret Serif tores, 138. See the forthcoming monograph of C. C. Hodges on Durham Castle. 147 Trei Scriptures, loc. cit. See, too, Surtees Soc. vol. 52, xi ; Cal. Pat. 1377-81, p. 61 1. Later entries, 1387, Stowe MS. 1055 and 1475, Cursitor Roll 2, Booth, H. m. 6. " Described in Lapsley, op. cit. 99-103. ** In Hatfield's Register the bishops of Besancon (also under de Bury), Langonen (Lingo in the Cyclades) [Eubel, Hierarchia Cathol. i, 304], Dimi(ta)cen (Domokos in Greece) [Ibid, i, 233], Le(i)ghli(n)en (Leighlin in Ireland) [Ibid, i, 312-13] are mentioned as holding longer or shorter commissions. 21 A HISTORY OF DURHAM and such considerations as the unrest and turbulence occasioned by the Scottish invasions, whilst on the other hand the clergy at all events frequently received a licentia studendi at the university.150 Instances of murder or riot or wreckage, which appear from time to time on the rolls, do not prove much as to general tendencies. Of the two bishops who fill the interval between the episcopates of Hatfield and Cardinal Langley, Fordham (1382-8), is of little importance. His was a political appointment,151 and as he was deeply involved in the troubles of Richard II he shared the king's unpopularity, being forced to resign his see and retire to Ely. He cannot be proved to have left any permanent stamp on the church in his diocese,162 and his reputed opposition to Wycliffism was probably exercised in London rather than in the north.16* There is certainly no evidence of Wycliffism in Durham during the fourteenth century. As a political force Fordham was more noteworthy, and gained from the king an important confirmation of palatine jurisdiction as the result of a commission issued for the purpose. In 1386 a commission of array was issued in the bishopric to resist the French invasion that was feared, and in 1388 there was another Scottish invasion. Skirlaw (1388-1405) was a great builder. He began the cloisters at Durham, and erected bridges at Yarm and ShinclifFe. Personally he was one of the most attractive of the mediaeval prelates of Durham. His election at the very height of the Wycliffe controversy goes to show that he was of proved orthodoxy. He had been employed in various foreign missions, and once at Rome. As bishop he was used in the Scottish marriage negotiations of 1394. He was steadfast to the new dynasty in 1399. The absence of his register, and the meagreness of other records which have rapidly lessened since the days of Hatfield, leave us in complete ignorance of his personal influence in the diocese. His rolls are all occupied with ordinary business matters, and give no insight into the condition of the church. Political considerations had some weight in the choice of the next bishop, Thomas Langley (1406-37). His previous connexion with the Lancastrian family was expected to ensure his steadfast allegiance to that house, a matter of no small importance considering the recent Scottish wars, and the probable contingency of some alliance between France and Scotland. Soon after his election he resigned his chancellorship,16* and apparently began to devote himself to his diocese, from which he was summoned in 1409 to be present at the Council of Pisa. From the close of that year he was active, as his register shows, until called away on an embassy to Paris in 1414. His reappointment as chancellor in 1417 drew him into the stream of politics again, and for some years he was rarely in the diocese. The bishop of Elphin was appointed to act as his suffragan in 1420. Langley had a large part in drawing up the Treaty of Durham in 1424, and entertained the Scottish James I at Durham. The remainder of his episcopate was, so far as we can * The custom was derived from a mandate of Boniface VIII, and is illustrated in episcopal registers of the time. Cf. Bishop Hobhouse's note in DrokensforJ '/ Reg. (Somers. Rec. Soc.), p. 304. 51 He was Lord Treasurer until 1386 ; Chron. Man. St. Alb. (Rolls Ser.), 374. 53 Is there indeed proof that he was much in the diocese ? Careful provision was made for his lodging in London ; Cal. Pat. 1381-5, p. 122. For his gifts see Surtees Soc. Publ. ii, 43. •i3 Collier is cited as the authority for this opposition, Eccl. Hist, i, 5 74. 154 For dates see article in Diet. Nat. Biog. ' Langley,' with references cited. 22 THOMAS HATFUL^, 1345-81 (Ohvtrtt) THOMAS HATFIILD, 1345-81 (Reverie) JOHN FORDHAM, I J82-88 (Okveru) JOHN FORDHAM, 1382-88 (Reverie) DURHAM EPISCOPAL SEALS : PLATE III ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY trace, largely spent in the work of his diocese, and its record is somewhat full. He exercised the office of the Palatinate with the completeness which the Lancastrians were likely to allow. In his diocese some of the most important of his acts are perhaps those concerned with heresy. The bishop's intimate acquaintance with the religious movements of the day naturally led him to be eager in repressing any erroneous tendency. It has, perhaps, been gene- rally thought that the north of England was quite untouched by Lollardy. This is certainly not strictly the case, though we must be careful not to interpret monitions and mandates beyond their proper value. One of the Nevilles of Raby, who died in 1389, had been a Lollard leader.1" As early as 1414, and expressly on account of the spread of heresy throughout the kingdom, the bishop orders the prior and the priors of cells to hold solemn processions during Lent, in which the citizens are to join, praying God to protect His Spouse the Church from the insults of the heretics, to confirm the people's faith, to confound the heretics. The letter is to be read every Sunday, Wednesday, and Friday, either during mass or in sermone.™ It was perhaps his solicitude for the welfare of his flock which led Langley to seek a proctor for his appearance at the great Continental Councils of 1414 and 141 6. u? An entry of 1418 speaks of prospective danger to the realm and Church.1'8 Our next evidence is about 1422, when a Carmelite prior named Boston has to revoke some error which he maintained as to offering candles at Candlemas. Other articles were exhibited against him which have not survived. The case was not decided at once.1" In the winter of 1428—9 letters were written round to the prior of Durham and to others warning them against the errors of Wycliffe and of Huss.140 It must, however, be admitted that these documents fail to prove the presence of aggressive Lollardy in the bishopric in Langley's time. Later traces will occur further on. Cardinal Langley issued a variety of enactments which, as they multiply in the register, strike the reader's attention. It is probably not fancy to regard as more than formal the repeated injunctions and provisions to promote education, reverence towards things sacred, kindliness to the poor and afflicted.1'1 His will proves his zeal for education ; the repeated help extended to the injured shows his kind disposition ; the erection of the font in the Durham Galilee for the children of excommunicated persons does the same. But Langley's name has been handed down in the bishopric rather as a builder.142 He restored the Galilee of the cathedral, and completed the cloisters. He also rebuilt the great north gate of the castle, which had perished since Norman days, and this new work lasted until 1818, when it "** Sir William de Neville, son of Ralph, fourth Baron Neville of Raby, and victor at Neville's Cross ; cf. Diet. Net. Bug. sub voce. 14 Epis. Reg. Langley, fol. 66. On fol. 67 d. a form of abjuration of heresy is provided. a Ibid. iub annli. M Ibid. fol. 100. M Ibid. fol. 52, 55. The abjuration took place in 1426, when Boston had become prior of the Carmelite house at Newcastle. "Ibid. fol. 153-8. " Indulgences abound for help to debtors, to those who have received injury from fire or flood, to the blind, to widows. There are monitions for theft, cruelty to animals, cutting down trees, &c 10 One will of 1427 (Reg. Langley, fol. 137) is liturgically important. John Newton, late rector of Houghton, leaves to his church a whole legend of the Sarum Use and three processionals of Sarum Use. On fol. 220 is the will of a dean of Auckland, who leaves a Missal Uiiu Ebor. in bequest. Chambre, in Trei Scriptores (Surtees Soc.), is our original authority for Langley's buildings. 23 A HISTORY OF DURHAM was ruthlessly demolished. He erected two schools on the Palace Green, one for plain song and the other for grammar.163 Four episcopates now succeed which must be rapidly dismissed. We still have the bishops' Cursitor Rolls for them, but their ecclesiastical informa- tion is meagre, and there is no episcopal register proper between Langley and Fox. Bishop Neville (1438-57), uncle of Edward IV and Richard III, was a scion of the local house, and son of Ralph the first earl of Westmore- land. His episcopate, which began with a fresh outbreak of the plague, was signalized by a cessation of border warfare. He took part in various truces, which were the means of producing this pause in the international hostility, the chief occasion being in the cathedral in 1449. In 1448 Henry VI paid a visit to the castle and to the bishopric, and has left a bombastic and amusing letter giving a high appreciation of north country character. If the royal visit was the most picturesque incident under Neville, his erection of the still standing exchequer at Durham is the most important event. During part of his time he had the bishop of Dromore as suffragan. Little else is recorded of the bishop. For the second time a queen of England now succeeded in getting her nominee appointed bishop. Laurence Booth (1458—76) was appointed in the early years of the Wars of the Roses, and was placed in a position of great difficulty in consequence. Durham had so far been Lancastrian, and Booth presumably belonged to this party. For the most part the tide of war flowed north and south of the bishopric. After Towton, in 1461, the Lancastrian partisans fled to Scotland. Henry made an abortive expedition thence through the bishopric in that year, and is heard of at Brancepeth.164 A year's pause followed before Queen Margaret came with French help and captured certain Northumbrian castles. Edward came north in December, 1462, with Warwick, and seized these strongholds. The issue appears to show that in this brief Lancastrian revival of 1461 Booth had in some way manifested his sympathy with Henry and Margaret, for when Edward signalized his triumph by spending Christmas at Durham,186 the bishop was deprived of his temporalities.168 It seems equally clear that on the eve of the decisive battles of Hedgeley Moor and Hexham in April and May, 1464, when Edward again led an army into Northumberland, Booth was forgiven and the temporalities restored.187 He was also permitted to reside where he pleased in the realm for the next three years, and to absent himself from attendance at the Parliament and council.188 The permission seems to hint at some restriction of residence during his disgrace which we are not able to trace. A month or two after this concession the king at York reviewed the chief charters of privileges from the forged charters of William the Conqueror down to the fourteenth century, documents on which the prior and convent relied as the basis of their position, and granted them a full confirmation of all.169 The peace of the bishopric was again endangered in 1468 during the brief rising of Sir Humphry Neville, when he caused considerable trouble 168 Surtees (op. cit. i, Ivi) gives a summary of his chief acts in the Palatinate, as does Hutchinson, op. cit. i, 407-8. 164 Par!. R. v, 478. Perhaps the best reconstruction of an obscure period is in Arckaeologa, xlvii, 266. 165 Ibid. 271. 166 Col. Pat. 1461-7, p. 215. 16r Ibid. 347, 375. 168 Ibid. 325. 169 Ibid. 392-3. 24 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY in Durham, and gave occasion to a proclamation by the king ' against breaking St. Cuthbert's franchise, or taking any man or goods within the bishopric of Durham otherwise than according to law.' "° How completely the bishop had regained the king's confidence is proved by the confirmation of Barnard Castle to Booth after its forfeiture by John Balliol in I47O.171 There are just one or two of the scanty entries of Booth's time which throw some falling ray of light on the moral and religious condition of the Palatinate. In 1460 a special commission of important personages was issued ' to inquire concerning insurrections, felonies, Lollardies, conspiracies, and other offences.' ln The special inclusion of * Lollardies,' although pos- sibly only the common form of the commissions of that date, should perhaps be noticed. An undated letter under the privy seal to the bishop of Durham calls attention to the ' grete extorcions, roberes, murders, and other great exorbytances and myschieves ' which had ensued from the late troubled state of the realm.1" The bishop was directed to proclaim the king's will and commandment herein.17* We pass over the episcopates of Dudley (1476-83) and of Sherwood (1484-94) with very brief mention, as they are almost entirely devoid of ecclesiastical record and reference. A survey of castles and manors in Dudley's first year,176 taken in connexion with a rather later letter of Richard III in Sherwood's time, describing the ruinous condition of castles and towns belonging to the Church of Durham,17' seems to be indication of evil days, and to prepare us for the restoring work carried out by Fox and Tunstall. The Scottish restlessness in Dudley's pontificate did not affect the Palatinate save in so far as bishopric men were arrayed to join the duke of Gloucester in his Scottish wars.177 The duke was popular in the north, and had a considerable connexion with the bishopric.178 It is not surprising, therefore, that Bishop Sherwood was ready to attach himself to the duke when he became king. Richard showed his appreciation by asking the pope for a cardinal's hat for the bishop, but this was never given.179 Sherwood was certainly the most learned bishop since de Bury, and in his love of books illustrates the rising influence of the Renaissance in England. Whatever may have been his personal dealings with Henry VII at the beginning of his reign,180 events go to prove that Sherwood had some sympathy with Simnel in the rising of 1487, for the bishop was significantly omitted from a commission issued by the king to inquire into insurrections within the bishopric.181 Sherwood died in Rome,181* whither he went as a special envoy to the pope from Henry VII. It has been assumed that he had retired to Rome in consequence of disgrace, 170 Cursitor R. Booth, 2 P. m. 3 ; Dtp. Keeper's Rep. 102. "' Ibid. 2 D. m. 4 ; Report, 97. 71 Ibid, i D. m. 8 ; Report, 80. "* Ibid. 3 K. m. 15 ; Report, 120. 171 A alight side-light on ways and means in clerical life belongs to this period. The bees at Dinsdale rectory form a source of revenue ; Surtees, Hist, 239 and note. 7i Cursitor Roll Dudley, I K. m. I. Report, 140. '* Hutchinson, op. cit. i, 450, with references. " Ibid. 45 1. ln Surtees, Hist. PubL ii, Ix, Ixi, and notes. n Ibid. Ix, note. * In 1486 he was sufficiently trusted to receive appointment as a king's proctor at Rome on the matter of cathedral preferments ; Materials Illustrative of the Reign of Henry Vll (Rolls Scr.), i, 323. In the text above the view of Hutchinson concerning Sherwood is given, but it is quite possible (so scanty are our records) that Sherwood, who on his tomb at Rome i* called the king's Orator, lived there in the English College without returning. '' Hutchinson, op. cit. i, 451. '"' Cal. Venetian S.P. 21 May, 1492, 12 Jan. 1494. 2 25 4 A HISTORY OF DURHAM because his name had been wanting in various commissions connected with Scottish affairs.182 About this time an interesting if fitful light is thrown upon the otherwise obscure history of the sanctuary at Durham. In the cathedral registers now preserved in the treasury of the church there occur between the years 1477 and 1524 18S some 247 entries relating to the taking of sanctuary. It is curious that so particular a record should be left of these while the earlier centuries of the history of the sanctuary are practically unillumined by the slightest reference, save a mere mention now and again in other documents. It is also remarkable that the entries should be set in the cathedral register for those years, and those only, instead of in a sanctuary book, as at Beverley. Analysis of the instances named discloses certain facts worth noting. The crimes alleged are murder and homicide, debt, horse-stealing, cattle-stealing, escape from prison, house-breaking, theft, and one or two technical offences, such as harbouring a thief. Of the 247 cases, 195 are connected with murder and homicide. As to the locality of the fugitive, Yorkshire gives 120 instances, Northumberland 58, Westmorland 20, Cumberland 13, Lancashire 9, Middlesex 4, Lincolnshire and Warwickshire 3, Nottingham- shire and Cheshire 2, with single entries from Surrey, Suffolk, Somerset, Northamptonshire, Derbyshire, and Gloucestershire. Durham county, of course, does not supply instances (save two by an apparent mistake), since a crime in the county broke the peace of St. Cuthbert, and obliged the accused to seek sanctuary at some other place, say Beverley, or more probably Ripon, though there were others not far off. Thus it appears that guilty persons from all parts might take refuge at Durham, where, in accordance with well- known practice and the evidence of the entries in the register, they were examined and, if approved, were suffered to remain. It has always been the custom at Durham, in showing the sanctuary knocker,18* which still exists, to draw largely for description of the sanctuary customs upon the Rites of Durham. The somewhat garrulous reminiscences of the compiler have been cited even by good antiquaries as evidence for pre-Reformation usages. The value of the information supplied by this book has been recently examined, together with the larger question of the nature and extent of the Durham sanctuary privileges.186 Mr. Forster has reached the conclusion, upon evidence not wholly indisputable, that the rights of the ' grithman ' were far more extensive than a mere temporary sojourn of thirty-seven days at Durham,188 ' and that the liberty of St. Cuthbert protected him and his property within the boundaries of the county palatine of Durham. ... At any rate such a conclusion accords better than any other with the mediaeval reputation of St. Cuthbert, and the princely position of the old-time bishops of Durham ; B The same probabilities have been thought to attach to the bishop's attitude in 1492 in Warbeck's insur- rection ; Hutchinson, op. cit. i, 452. 81 Printed with an introduction by Rev. Canon Chevallier in Sanctuarium Dunelmense et Beverlacense, (Surtees Soc.). The whole subject needs fresh examination in the light of wider knowledge. 84 See a recent paper on the ' Knocker ' ; Brit. Arch. Assoc. Journ. (New Ser.), ix, 1 1 7-3 i* 85 Notes on Durham and other North Country Sanctuaries, by R. H. Forster, esq., hon. treasurer of the British Archaeological Association, reprinted from its Journal, Aug. 1905. 186 Mr. Forster's conclusion is attractive, and, with such positive evidence as he has coK K^\, it is probable. Two things are necessary to prove it, (l) a larger number of particular instances than th/SC ,eicites in support of his contention that the fugitives sought the liberty of St. Cuthbert infra Tynam et SWvV a collection of definite mediaeval allusions to prove that the extensive character of the sanctuary ' "8 t Durham was generally acknowledged. ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY as well as with the view that while sanctuary rights had a religious origin, they were in their later phases based upon temporal jurisdiction.' 187 Henry VII owed much to the statesmanship of Richard Fox, whom he translated from Bath and Wells to Durham in 1494. Fox was bishop of Durham for seven years (1494-1501), having first made acquaintance with the district when he passed to^and fro on the king's business in ^Sy.188 In the first year of his episcopate a new Scottish invasion was feared, and the bishop was directed to array the forces of the bishopric.189 It was perhaps at this moment the bishop took the precaution to fortify Norham with all possible care. During part of 1496 Fox was absent from England negotiating the Magnus Intercursus, and returned to find Warbeck's second attempt just about to take place. In the assault of Norham which followed, the Scots were unable to take the fortress. The bishopric men had all been called out in August, 1497, but a truce was concluded by Fox in December. Next year his skilful mediation prevented the outbreak of war between England and Scotland.1*0 How little the bishop trusted the continuance of peaceful rela- tions with the Scots seems to be indicated by his work at Durham Castle. At all events it is tempting to connect the building, which was in progress there about 1498, with the need of the increased accommodation for a garri- son. His intention to rebuild the keep may point to the same conclusion.1'1 The bishop's greatest diplomatic triumph signalizes the year 1499, when he was successful in arranging the marriage alliance between King James and the Princess Margaret. He was, however, translated to Winchester before the wedding took place. Short as the episcopate of Bishop Fox was, it left more than a material mark on the north of England. Notwithstanding his diplomatic work he was more in evidence in the diocese than his immediate predecessors. He strove to curb the wild and unruly borderers of Tynedale and Redesdale by spiritual process. They constantly made inroads into the bishopric for the sake of plunder, and among them were certain hedge-priests as lawless as any. The presence of these men is a curious side-light on the character of some of the Northumberland clergy at the time, and it is probable that the bishopric clergy proper were of a higher type than their rougher brethren farther north.193 The register of Fox is brief and uninteresting, with the exception of two or three documents. One of these is a long monition to the raiders just mentioned. Elsewhere there is an interesting list of books given by Fox in 1499 for the use of the library in the collegiate church at Bishop Auckland.19* The volumes are biblical commentaries, works of the schoolmen, provincial constitutions, classical writers, books of ecclesiastical law, &c. It is preceded by a list of implements given to the dean of Auckland at the same 117 From Mr. Forster's paper, 134, 139. The reader will still refer to Rites of Durham (Surtees Soc. ed. Canon Fowler), 41, 42, 226. '* For this cf. Hutchinson, op. cit. i, 451. '* Cal. Doc. Scotland, iv, 1608. '* Cf. Diet. Nat. Biog. ' Richard Foxe.' '" Chambre, however, speab of arrangements in the hall which suggest festival rather than barrack use. Trei Serif torts, 50. The date existing on the buttery hatch is 1 499, and it is possible that the changes con- template the marriage of Margaret, which was arranged in that year, though it did not take place until 1503. '" The process is printed in Surtees Soc. Publ. xxi, 37-42. The reference to the register is fol. 19 and On fol. 35 d. is an appeal to the secular arm to put down wizards in Redesdale. Printed in Rev. J. F. Hodgson's account of Auckland in Arch. Ael. xx, Fox, Register, fol. 26 09 Ibid, (z), 4201, 471 1. 10 Winchester is stated in one letter to have been worth 2,000 ducats more than Durham, ibid. (3), 5228, but elsewhere to have been of equal value, ibid. (2), 4898. See Wolsey's letter ibid. (2), 4824. A note from Wolsey's receiver at Durham in 1528 speaks of the great poverty of the district. A commission was issued in 1530 to 'nquire into Wolsey's possessions in the bishopric. 111 Cf;L. and P. Hen. Vlll, iv (3), 6705. "' Ibid, v, App. 9. ™ Ibid. 819. 14 I'/id. vi, 303. '" Ibid. 437. «• Ibid. 653. 7 "toon, Hist. Ch. ofEngl. i, 248. 3° ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY 1535, and in July the bishop reported the values as they had been discovered to exist. The results of the inquiry are recorded in the Valor Ecclesiasticus. Whilst all this was in operation Tunstall and the other bishops were forced to follow up their previous submissions by expressly renouncing the pope, and by sending round letters to their clergy to the same effect.811 The bishop also preached in various parts of his diocese on the same question. It bears testimony to the great personal influence of Tunstall that it should be told Cromwell at the beginning of 1536: ' He has preached the royal supremacy so that no part of the realm is in better order than his diocese,' "* though on the other hand Campeggio in June still hoped that Tunstall would be the means of effecting reconciliation with Rome. A letter of Tunstall to Lord Lumley makes it probable that in the bishopric, as in other places, the justices of the peace were set to watch the clergy and report any disaffection towards the constitutional changes in progress.*80 Almost coincidently with the careful system of inquisition and espionage set on foot in 1535, the visitation of the monasteries began in the autumn. The first trace of the visitors is in February, 1536, when report was made of irregularities in the bishop's household, and in June a list of the smaller houses was drawn up. Alarmed by what was evidently in contemplation, and anxious to preserve some of the dependent houses, the prior in a letter still preserved tried to bribe the all- powerful Cromwell.281 Rumours of abolished privileges, and amongst these the curtailment of sanctuary rights, caused some commotion, and prompted Sir Francis Bigod, a north country magnate, to intercede with Cromwell.888 The summer and autumn were a time of seething, which was intensified by the issue of the Ten Articles, quickly supplemented by the Injunctions, which alike ran counter to many cherished practices. Further south than the bishopric popular resentment burst out into open conflagration in Lincolnshire and Yorkshire. Howdenshire was afterwards remembered as one of the first places to take part in this Pilgrimage of Grace.888 Under Darcy the rebels rushed through the Palatinate to Newcastle, and the whole country-side was soon ablaze. Promises of pardon on submission amused the rebels, and a conference at York ended abruptly. Social chaos brooded over the Pala- tinate.88* At last Norfolk, who was commissioned to tread out the rebellion, turned north, and men understood that the day of reckoning was near. The demonstration began to evaporate. Lancaster Herald, passing through the district to proclaim the king's pardon upon submission, found the people everywhere penitent,886 though in Durham itself he had an ugly brush with the populace.88' For indeed the submissiveness of the people was fictitious, and every man of position knew that it was feigned.887 The truth of this was soon evident in the renewal of the agitation. Tunstall, identified perhaps with the king's policy, had to flee from Auckland at midnight, and betook himself to Norham Castle, whence he wrote to urge Norfolk not to delay. In March, Norfolk at Carlisle proclaimed his intention of dealing with the bishopric. He intended to execute some score or more of the rebels in order to strike terror into the hearts of the others. The trials began, despite a "• Dixon, Hiit. Ch. of Engl. \, 254. '" L. and P. Hen. rill, x, 182. m Ibid. 1077. "' See Gasquet, Hen. Vlll and the Engl. Monasteries i, 416. " L. and P. Hen. fill, xi, 503. " Ibid, xii (2), 536. "' Ibid, xii (l), 568 ; xiii (l). 1313. m Ibid, xi, 1371. w Ibid, xii (i), 101. *" Ibid. 148, 416. A HISTORY OF DURHAM defective commission,528 and in Easter week sentence was passed and execu- tions took place.229 So the rising ended, though seditious talk went on.830 Shortly after this, the Council for the North was formed, and Tunstall was made president. Norfolk left the bishopric now that his special work was done, and Tunstall's time was henceforth much taken up in dealing with the endless business which came before the new body. In view of his necessary absence at York and elsewhere, Tunstall obtained the services of Sparke as suffragan bishop, under the recent Act, who took the title of bishop of Ber- wick.ssl Sparke was one of those present in the year 1537 when the body of St. Cuthbert was exhumed and reburied by the visitors, as is described elsewhere.233 The year that followed was characterized by spasmodic dis- turbances in the bishopric,233 and then by an outbreak of plague, which interfered with the administration of justice.23* Tunstall was almost con- tinuously absent during this dark sequel to the rebellion, being occupied in London or at York. A casual letter to Cromwell shows how little the design of ' tuning the pulpits ' availed in the distant north : — ' Very few preachers in Durham and the other northern counties set forth God's word and the king's supremacy.' 235 There is apparently no record of the final scenes in the history of the great monastery of Durham.838 Her eight dependent cells had gone in 1536 and 1537, and she alone stood undissolved in 1540. Tunstall was absent in London, and it is possible that he used his influence on behalf of the noble house, whose fall was certain to come, but there is no trace of remonstrance or of suggestion, nor is there a hint of popular feeling in the bishopric. The rebellion and its chastisement, together with the plague of 1538, produced, it is probable, apathy towards the change in progress, and, after the dissolution, the lengthy border wars and the long continuance of plague diverted the thoughts of people in the north. At all events the abbey came to an end on the last day of December, 1540, when Whitehead, the prior, signed the deed of surrender.237 Was it intended as an act of conciliation that in the same year the king gave £4° towards the building of Barnard Castle Church ? S38 The new year, at any rate, brought a sense of keen alarm to the bishopric. Before January was out musters were held under Norfolk in connexion with a display of force on the part of the Scots. Next year the war was carried across the Tweed into the Lothians, and in 1543 the rout of Solway Moss filled North-Country prisons with captives. It was in the midst of such wars and rumours of wars that Durham Cathedral was established on its new foundation in May, 1541, under the dedication of the Cathedral Church of Christ and Blessed Mary the Virgin, instead of its old designation of the Blessed Virgin and St. Cuthbert.239 Hugh Whitehead, the amiable prior since 1524, was made the first dean, and from the monks twelve were chosen to be the first prebendaries. Four days later further ™ L. and P. Hen. mi, xii (i), 651, 666. "9 Ibid. 918. >3° Ibid, xii (2), 353. 31 Ibid. 191. Cf. Hutchinson, Hist. Dur. 520. 238 See V.C.H. Dur. i, 251 ; also Raine, S/. Cuthbert, 176. ra Surtees, Hist. Dur. i, 352. 34 L. and P. Hen. nil, xiii (2), 1010. »5 Ibid, xiv (2), App. 7. 16 Ttje visitation described in Raine, St. Cuthbert, 173-6, seems to belong to 1537 ; cf. ibid. 176, note t 17 Transcribed from the Patent Rolls, Hutchinson, Hist Dur. ii, 132. 33Harl. MS 433. 39 Transcribed in Hutchinson, op. cit. ii, 142 32 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY letters patent were issued with full specification of the lands lately in the possession of prior and convent which were now made the endowment of the new foundation.840 Its early years, however, were saddened, not merely by the alarms of war, but by the severe outbreak of plague due, it is said, to the billeting of Scottish prisoners in various parts of the district.*41 The consequent distress was considerable. The next act was the first fingering ot Church goods other than monastic. This will be traced elsewhere. Nothing was carried away during the remainder of the reign of Henry VIII. Inventories of the chantries in Durham were drawn up in May, 1546."* Any alarm occasioned by such measures was diverted by the mad war of Somerset in Edward's first year. In May Tunstall wrote to warn the bishopric to be ready ,*** and the Protector ordered the bishop to search the Registers in support of the boy-king's claim to the fealty of the Scottish monarch.244 During Edward's short reign the bishopric was roughly handled. At the outset the Chantry Act dissolved the chantries surveyed two years earlier, and in addition the various colleges of the district. Six collegiate churches were thus destroyed — Auckland, Chester- le- Street, Darlington, Lanchester, Norton, Staindrop. A royal visitation perambulated the bishopric in the late summer of 1547, during which time the bishop's authority was suspended.246 Details have not survived, as they have for the analogous visitation of 1559, but the character of the injunctions of Edward and the known views of Somerset would lead us to conclude that an effort was made to impress upon the bishopric, as elsewhere, the ceremonial and doctrinal changes so far attained. It is curious how absolutely in the dark we are as to the working of the Edwardine changes of religion in Durham.*4* It is probable that the visitation and the sermons of Ridley, who accompanied the visitors, were tolerated without outward remonstrance. We have no trace of the reception accorded to the Prayer Book of 1 549, which involved the entire supersession of the familiar Latin services. We are not enlightened, moreover, as to the steps which led to the temporary suspension of the see. In 1550 Tunstall, with Whitehead the dean, and Hindmarsh the chancellor, was first accused of some treasonable action by a certain Ninian Menville.*47 It is suggested that the real agent in this accusation was Northumberland himself, who desired to oust Tunstall from the Palatinate and to secure for himself ' an impregnable position ' in the north.848 The charge was so pertinaciously pressed that in December, 1551, Tunstall was sent to the Tower, and after ten months' imprisonment was deprived. Warwick, now duke of Northumberland, was already asking for the gift of the palatine jurisdiction, and pressing Home, 10 Transcribed in Hutchinson, op. cit. ii, 137. *' See the interesting letter of Shrewtbury, L. and P. Hen. 7111, xix (i), 931, from Add. MSS. 32655, fol. loo. '" Surtees Society Put!, xxii, App. iii, pp. xlv-xlvii. For the St. Giles inventory see P.R O. Exch K.R. Ch. Goods, A- 10 Cal. Hamilton Paptrs, ii, 440. "4 Cote. Cal. B, vii, 329. "* For an account of this important event, see Dizon, Hist. Cb. of Engl. ii. 428. The inhibition is in Tunstall's register. "* Mr. Pollard says, without giving proof, that Tunstall though he voted against the Uniformity Act^of I 549 enforced its provisions in his diocese. The fragmentary character of the register at this stage prevents us from following any diocesan regulations. • 147 See the facts as known in Dixon, Hist. Cb. of EngL iii, 320. "• Diet. Nat. Biog. 'Tunstall,' 313. 2 33 5 A HISTORY OF DURHAM the new dean, upon Cecil for promotion to the bishopric.849 Fresh plans suggested themselves. In March, 1553, an Act was passed to dissolve the see of Durham,260 another to make over Gateshead to Newcastle,361 and a third in May handed over the denuded bishopric to Northumberland.269 The act of dissolution provided for the re-erection of the see of Durham, with an income of 2,000 marks, and the establishment of a second see at Newcastle with half that amount. The brief reign of Edward was fast ebbing out, and no action was taken as regards the statutes mentioned, though North- umberland appears to have seized upon Durham House.263 It has been thought, not without some reason, that a famous sermon preached by Bernard Gilpin at court in 1552 reflects the condition of the Durham diocese with which the preacher was best acquainted.264 Over and above the sins common to the times he specifies non-residence, farming of benefices, general ignorance, as characteristic in the Church, and speaks of popular regret for the ' pomp and pleasing variety of painted cloths, candle- sticks, images, altars, lamps, and tapers.' It is long before we get any account of improvement in the former respect, though the ornaments named, where taken away, soon began to find their way back into churches. Within a month of Edward's death Tunstall was restored. The cathedral, probably, returned to its old condition under Watson, made dean in November, 1553, almost immediately after the Act of repeal which swept away all the Edwardine ecclesiastical legislation.266 A further Act was passed annulling the specific acts of Edward's last year by which the see of Durham had been reduced from its ancient position.8" Thus it was ' now by the authority of this present Parliament fully and wholly revived, erected and [shall] have its being in like manner and form to all intents and purposes, as it was of old time used and accustomed.' The queen also granted to the bishop the patronage of all the prebends. In 1554 a commission issued which drew up the present statutes of the cathedral. Heath, Bonner, Tunstall, and Thirlby served on this com- mission.867 The cathedral is known to have suffered much in the last years of Edward, but it is doubtful whether remote parish churches in the diocese were much disturbed, and a list of chantries existing at Coniscliffe in August, 1553, gives one instance in which the demolition of Edward's first year had been quite unsuccessful.868 And so whether change had been wrought or whether no alteration had been effected, and there must have been instances of both experiences, the general aspect in 1558 of church life in the bishopric was little different from what had obtained thirty years before, save where pillage or zeal had left some mark not easily to be effaced. The persecution of Mary's last years certainly did not touch the diocese. The first commencement of change under Elizabeth was seen in September, 1559, when the visitors of the royal commission (modelled on 149 151 S.P. Dom. Edw. VI, vol. 14, No. 18. >M Quoted in Hutchinson, Hist. Dur. i, 529. 7 Edw. VI. cap. 10; cf. Arch. Ael. ii, 219. 51 Hutchinson, op. cit. i, 529. IH Ibid. 530. 54 In life of Bernard Gilpin. Summary in Low, Diocesan Hist. Dur. (S.P.C.K.), 222. 45 Dur. Epis. Reg. Tunstall, fol. 45. «• i Mary, Statute 2, cap. 2. 157 See the statutes, Hutchinson, Hist. Dur. ii, 155. >M Surtees, Hist. Dur. iii, 381. There is mention of the rating of a chantry at Sedgefield in June, 1558; Harl. MS. 608. 34 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY that of 1 547) perambulated the diocese in order to enforce the working of the new Uniformity and Supremacy Acts, and to administer the oath of allegiance. Some details of this important visitation survive.2" Sessions were held at the largest churches in convenient centres, and the clergy were summoned. There is some reason to believe that the services of Gilpin, the most highly-respected clergyman in the neighbourhood, were enlisted to influence the subscribers.**' But there was much reluctance to sign. The chapter was probably more stiff than any other, and six canons were deprived eventually. Some thirty-five clergymen were absent from the visitation out of about 1 80, but of these the large majority sooner or later took the oath. Tunstall, in London, heard with alarm of the work of the visitors, and wrote in dignified protest to Cecil hoping that his own diocese might be spared such scenes."1 Those words were his last recorded utterance in connexion with the north. After his death the see remained vacant, and Home, restored to the deanery, wrote more than once to Cecil with querulous accounts of the condition of affairs, partly as regards morality in general,8" and particularly as to the lack of proper stipends for the clergy.8*8 During the vacancy the queen had confiscated more than a quarter of the Palatinate, much to the indignation of the new bishop, Pilkington (1560—75), who found his authority much impaired thereby, whilst attendance on commission to administer the oath and such police work did not bring him into general favour.8" He made a return of his diocese in 1563, from which we should gather that the various churches in the present county of Durham were gener- ally well served.8" We also find that there were in the same district 1 1,772 households, and this suggests a population of about 58,860. Pilkington was long remembered for his Puritan sympathies, in which he was supported by Whittingham the dean, and Lever, a Swiss reformer, appointed prebendary in 1564. Whittingham, soon after his appointment, wrote to Cecil an account of the cathedral and neighbourhood.8'8 From this we gather that the cathedral staff were busy enough in teaching and preaching, and that the inhabitants * begin to resort more diligently to the sermons and service/ The people generally ' are very docile and willing to hear God's word/ though hitherto ' the town is very stiff.' As for the clergy, conformable for the most part, some of them began from 1564 to 'refuse the apparel.' MT In 1568 Knollys commends the bishop for the condition of his diocese as regards conformity,*88 though two months later a gloomy picture is drawn of the general ignorance, lack of sermons and preachers.889 It appears that in many parishes the vicars had to serve from two to five chapels each, and that in some cases these were served by ' vagabond Scots who dare not abide in their country.' It is even said that they were better served when they belonged to the abbeys.870 "* See Gee, Elizabethan Cltrgj, 71, etc. The manuscript account is in S.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 10. m Gee, op. cit. 74. *' S.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 6, No. 22. "Ibid. vol. n, No. 16. *• Ibid, vol 14, No. 45. *" Ibid. vol. 20, No. 5. ** Harl. MS. 594, fol. 1 86, etc, but see another return below, note 270. *• Lansd. MS. 7, fol. 24. •* Doubtless under the influence of Whittingham and Lever. Lansd. MS. 7. •* Cal. S.P. Scot, ii, 829. "• S.P. Dom. Eliz. Add. vol. 14, No. 42. "* A return, perhaps of 1565 (alluded to in note 265), concerning vacant livings. 35 A HISTORY OF DURHAM This curious entry about the Scottish clergy finds a parallel in what is said by the bishop in 1564 : The Scottish priests that are fled out of Scotland for their wickedness and here be hired in parishes on the border because they take less wages than the other, and do more harm than other could or would in dissuading the people. The same document refers to dispossessed clergy (evidently the six extruded canons and the like) who kept sending in from Louvain books and letters which cause many times evil rumours to be spread and disquiet the people. They be maintained by the hospital of the New Castle and the wealthiest of that town and the shire as it is judged, and be their near cousins.271 The hints of hostility to the new regime which appear in such docu- ments as that just quoted prepare us for the next great episode in Durham church history. The rebellion of the northern earls was in its inception a Durham rising. It broke out in November, 1569, when Tempest and Swin- borne, two bishopric gentlemen, began to agitate.273 The bishop opportunely left for his health a month before this.873 The standard of the earls of Westmoreland and Northumberland was raised at Brancepeth on the 8th. Durham was entered a few days later, and mass was said in the cathedral.874 The whole bishopric seemed to be in sympathy with those who now declared for the restoration of the old religion.875 Emboldened by the gathering force altars were restored in divers parts of the country.878 The host swept on to Darlington and reached Ripon on the aoth. A prudential retreat began. In Durham mass was again sung on St. Andrew's Day, and a skirmish with the queen's musters took place in or near the city. At the approach of Sussex the rebels fled to Hexham. Retribution came with the new year : lands were to be forfeited, and ringleaders were to be executed.877 Some of the pre- bendaries who had shown sympathy were threatened with death.878 Execution took place on January nth, and the whole district was put under martial law. An aftermath of discontent manifested itself, and it was not until June that Sussex dismissed his troops, and even so with orders to be ready if need be.879 A year later, indeed, Pilkington wrote to Burghley of the ill state in the north, which he ascribed to ' the connexions of the persons engaged in the late rebellion.' 88° After the terrible warning given by the punishments which followed the rebellion, it is natural to find Romanism less in evidence. Indeed, Puritanism began to flourish. Bishop and dean were both of puritan sympathy. Lever as prebendary was a congenial spirit, and was joined for a year by John Foxe, the martyrologist. The triumph over the Romanizing party was complete, and confession of destroying church books or building altars was extorted m The ecclesiastical proceedings described in Surtees Soc. Publ. vol. xxi, include libels against hearers of mass, 130 ; erecters of altars and holy-water stoups, 129 ; burners of church books, 132. "' S.P. Dom. Eliz. Add. vol. 15, No. 4. "' Ibid. vol. 14, No. 98. 174 See a r&um6 of the history from the state papers in Dixon, Hist. Cb. Engl. vi, 231. 175 S.P. Dom. Eliz. Add. vol. 15, No. 100. >:* See the informing proceedings in Surtees Soc. Publ. vol. xxi. 877 S. P. Dom. Eliz. Add. vol. 17, No. 10. Ibid. 14, a list is given of those prisoners who are to be executed. Eighty were ' appointed to die ' in Durham, including thirty aldermen and townsmen. Mr. M'Call has made it highly probable (Torksbire Arch. Soc. Proc.) that a small proportion only really were put to death. In the whole county 314 were 'appointed to die.' 178 Ibid. vol. 17, No. 76. r" Cal. S. P. Scot, iii, 284. 180 S. P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 81, No. 48. 36 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY from people.881 In the bishop's register the clergyman instituted is not infre- quently decorated with a distinctively puritan title such as 'minister' or * preacher of God's word.' Sabbath breaking is in 1 573 a punishable offence.888 If prayer books are scanty in 1 574 it is a sign, not of recalcitrance, but of the confusion occasioned by the late troubles.888 Another result of the rebellion was to involve the bishop in difficulties with the queen on the question of the forfeitures.88* A long dispute was the issue, and this impoverished the already attenuated Palatinate, and still further diminished the prestige of the bishop. Pilkington was held in very little account in the north881 at a time when a prelate strong and good might have done much. He complained with justice of the harm done to religion by the constant bickerings over the posses- sions of the see.88* His lamentation might have had more influence had he not contrived to amass a large fortune, which he bestowed largely in dowry upon his daughters. He was never very happy in his northern home, and a letter written three years before his death pictures pathetically the trial which he found in the bleakness of the Durham winters : ' the common griefs that he had suffered there for sundry winters past made him to think what he should look for in the winter that was then at hand.'887 Pilkington was a poor business man, and left the episcopal property in great neglect at his death.*88 Bishop Barnes (1575—87) followed Pilkington, being promoted according to a tradition known to Strype M9 in order to watch the borders against the passage of messengers to and from Mary queen of Scots. Barnes followed in the footsteps of his predecessor in trying to enforce conformity, but with- out the genuine puritanism of Pilkington. He certainly copied him in his servility to the queen, carrying the alienation of parcels of the bishopric to an outrageous extent.890 His relations with his own tenants were somewhat strained.891 He seems to have done his best with what was left of the diminished bishopric, raising the rents and also repairing the see houses. As a true Elizabethan bishop, he was much concerned with the compulsory discipline expected from him, and coerced the Nonconformists. Regular recusant lists were drawn up and injunctions were issued at his visitations.8" He had the reputation of reforming the north. His picture, however, of the bishopric is gloomy enough, and he describes the cathedral as an augie stabulum, the people as 'truly savage.'898 There was no love lost between him and his flock, who * practised to deface him by all slanders, false reports, and shameless lies.' He connived at the rapacity of his brother, who was his chancellor, and received a celebrated rebuke in consequence from Bernard Gilpin, the most influential clergyman in the diocese.894 Yet he must have credit for some •" Surtees Soc. Publ. vol. xi, 168-9. ** ^rcb. Ael. iii, 158. *• S. P. Dom. Eliz. Add. vol. 23, No. 59. m See Hutchin»on'» summary, Hist. Dur. i, 560-3. ** For. Cal. ERz. 1571, No. 2114. "* Quoted in Hutchinson, op. cit, 562. " Ibid. 561. •* Ibid. 565. "* Strype, Am. ii, 431, App. 105. "° A list is given in Hutchinson, op. cit. i, 561, from Strype, Aim. App. "' S. P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 159, No. 48, and vol. i6o,No. 35. *** The most material references are : 1577, list of persons refusing to attend church, S. P. Dom. Eliz. Add. vol. 25, No. 42 ; 1577, visitation injunctions, Surtees Soc. Publ. vol. xxii, 13 ; letter about sectaries, 1578, ibid, xvii, 59 ; cases of church discipline, ibid, ami, 1 13-42 ; inquiry into conventicles, 1582, S. P. Dom. Add. vol. 27, No. 128; Barnes' dealings with recusants, 1586,8.?. Dom. Eliz. vol. 187, No. 49 ; Papists in Durham, ibid. vol. 192, No. 57. See/ Printed in Peck's Desiderata curiosa. m S.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 262, No. 1 1. 334 Cal. Bord. Papers, ii, 1331. 325 S.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 262, Nos. 10, 1 1. » Ibid. 887 Ibid. Jas. I, vol. 3, No. 42 ; cf. ibid. vol. 13, No. 52^. 28 Ibid. Eliz. vol. 262, No. ii. 3K Cal. S.P. Dom. 1603-10, pp. 286, 294, 332, &c. 33° Ibid, passim. 40 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY to the harbouring of seminary priests occur in the state papers of the period. In 1 609 the judge of assize writes that whilst Northumberland, Cum- berland, Westmorland, and Lancashire are quiet, and show an abatement of recusancy, Yorkshire and Durham are not so quiet nor so free from recu- sants.831 In the whole diocese of Durham they had been estimated as about 700 in the early years of the reign, which shows a marked increase, but the vigilant commissioners reduced them to 400, though a personal visitation by Bishop James in 1615 revealed an increase once more.*88 Later in the same year the bishop was much occupied in trying to unravel the intricacies of a plot which does not seem to have left much impression on the records of the time, and yet promised, it was then thought, to develop into a conspiracy of some magnitude. He was shrewd enough to obtain the services of a renegade Romanist, or at all events one who knew Romanist ways well, and was able to insinuate himself into assemblies of seminary priests and others in the north of England. The bishop believed at one time that the king's life was in danger, but his fear probably exaggerated matters.88* Another spy reported to Win wood in 1616 that * throughout the bishopric of Durham popery prevails, so that at the ports Hartlepool, Sunderland, &c., the recusants can import as they will.'88* The writer's opinion was that the bishop and his officers were slack and covetous, so that law was not well administered ; he desired to see the reduction of the bishop's prerogative, and the introduction of a system of government similar to that which obtained in Northumberland. This criticism of the bishop's way of using his position had come up in the previous reign, and recurred at intervals in later days. Its interest at the moment lies in the transient glimpse that is given of the condition of affairs in the Palatinate. The people, for instance, were now unused to arms ; woods had been cut down in the county ; recusancy was rampant.88' A lull followed, and the last nine years of King James have left no proof of severity in Durham. This accords with the general character of those years in the larger history of England, where little or nothing is heard of the penal laws and their enforcement, though there is no reason to doubt that papal agita- tion still flourished in those gentler days.888 The beginning of the reign of Charles was signalized by an attempt to seize the arms of recusants.887 This was of a piece with the declared policy of the new king in the early days of the reign, and was endorsed by a letter from him in which he specially directed the enforcement of the laws.888 Bishop Neile unearthed a good deal of correspondence between Sir Robert Hodgson, of Hebburn, and some others ' reputed pragmatical in ill offices of conveying, receiving, and " Cat. S.P. Dom. 1603-10, p. 54.3, &c. " Ibid. 161 1-18, p. 289. 'Ten years before there were 700 recusants in his diocese ; by the Ecclesi- astical Commission, &c. they were reduced to 400, but have increased again. Has spent three weeks in personal visitations to make a true report on them.' James had been appointed dean in 1596, and became bishop in 1606. He spoke, therefore, with nearly twenty years' experience of the diocese. " Cat. S.P. Dam. 1611-18, pp. 301-2, &c. 134 His name was Berridge or Morton. His paper gives some details as to the recusant ladies of Durham and Northumberland, and of the Durham prebendaries ; ibid. 395. 04 See the suggestions of Henry Sanderson ' for the good of Northumberland and the bishopric of Durham,' 1615 ; ibid. 329, also Cat. S.P. Dom. for 1625. 14 The reasons are given by Gardiner in his Hiit. of Engl. iv, 34 and 289. * Cal. S.P. Dom. 1625-6, p. 134. ** B.M. Add. MSS. 33207, fol. 32. The letter is dated 22 Dec. 1625. 2 41 6 A HISTORY OF DURHAM harbouring of persons of all sorts ill-affected to the state.' m A return of the same year speaks of 1,000 convicted recusants in the county of Durham.310 This report is connected with an inquiry for Recusants' Lands recently ordered, which led to the drawing up of an ' estimate of the true value of lands of recusants found by inquisition in co. Durham.'8" In 1628 an important commission was issued to the President of the North and to others for compounding with recusants in various counties (including Durham) for forfeitures. The proceeds of the composition were to be employed in maintaining six men-of-war to guard the coasts from the north-east to the mouth of the Thames.84* The Romanist priests harboured by such bishopric gentlemen as Sir Robert Hodgson confined themselves in the main to the quiet performance of their sacred functions wherever they might prove to be acceptable. A small volume of proceedings of the High Commission survives for the years 1626— 39.s*s We have in it evidence of various clan- destine marriages and secret baptisms. One such case will serve as an illustration of many. Ralph Huntly, of Pittington, 'confesseth he was married to Frances, his now wife, by one Flood an old man, whom he thinketh was a Popish priest ; and hath had four children all privately baptized in his own house.'844 Huntly was fined £5° with one month's imprisonment, and was directed to bring a certificate of baptism for his children from the vicar of Pittington. But about this time the attention of the ecclesiastical authorities began to be taken up by other matters, as the sequel will show, and recusancy was either suffered to maintain itself unmolested, or to receive merely occasional warnings. Reverting to the point from which digression was made to survey the fortunes of recusancy, a few words may be said about the episcopate of Bishop James (1606-17). ^ts importance lies rather in the history of the town than of the bishopric at large. It forms an epoch in the relations of the bishop and the citizens. A feud broke out in 1609 over certain municipal rights and led to a large amount of ill feeling.845 In 1 6 1 1 the bishop was troubled over the case of Arabella Stuart. He had been appointed by the king to prepare lodging in Durham Castle for the reception of this young lady, whose attachment to Lord William Seymour was thought to be a possible menace to the succession. She left London with the bishop, but managed to make her escape on the way to the north. Her custodian was so greatly perturbed by the worry of his task that he fell ill in consequence.848 Some few years later Bishop James received the king at Durham Castle during his somewhat memorable progress into Scotland in i6i7,347 the first royal visit which has been recorded since the marriage feast of Princess Margaret in 1503. Bishop James left no mark on the northern Church. The parish books of Pittington and of St. Oswald's, Durham, which are more or less contemporary, throw some little light on church life and practice in and near the city.848 Mention *" Dur. Univ. Mickleton MSS. 2, 394, quoted by Surtees, Hist. Dur. ii, 75. M Col. S.P. Dom. 1625-6, p. 420. M1 Ibid. 488. M Ibid. 1628-9, p. 205. M Surtees Soc. Publ. xxxiv. '" Quoted in Surtees, Hist. Dur. i, 1 1 8. " These are described elsewhere, 'Political History'; cf. Cal. S.P. Dom. 1603-1 1, p. 573. 848 The narrative is given in Gardiner, Hist. Engl. ii, 113 and 1 17. For the S.P. Dom. references, 1603, &c. There is an account of the expenses in Harl. MS. 7003, fol. 94, 96, 97. 147 Described in Gardiner, Hist. Engl. iii, 223—4. M8 Surtees Soc. Publ. Ixxxiv. See the summary, pp. viii-xv. 42 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY is made of the erection of pews, their lease to houses or to individuals, graves in the church, the use of incense for purposes of fumigation. Holy Communion was celebrated at the important parish church of St. Oswald's at rather rare intervals, despite the attempt of Bishop Barnes thirty years before to increase its frequency in the diocese."9 There was, however, a great annual communion at Easter. The vestry seems to have been duly elected. Mention is made of a church flock at Pittington,860 of the churchwardens' attendance at visitation, of the payment of rogue money."1 Bishop Neile (1617-27) had gained favour with the king in 1614, and accompanied him to Scotland in the tour alluded to above. He was not the least conspicuous in a long line of repairers of the breach, and built much at Auckland, Durham and elsewhere. To him was due the restoration of some of the see houses, notably the castle of Durham. The king made him lieutenant of the bishopric and county of Durham, an office recently instituted and of comparatively brief existence. In the time of Bishop James it had been held by the favourite Somerset. But Neile's importance lies not so much in the general eclat of his episcopate as in the great ceremonial and doctrinal changes with which his name is connected. He came from Lincoln to Durham at the very moment that the new Arminian school of thought was making itself felt in England. The friend and patron of Laud, Neile was now the chief spirit of the new movement, as also an abettor of the king's growing views of the prerogative. As bishop of Durham he had a unique opportunity of spreading ideas which he had conceived during days of rapid promotion and wide experience. Some little sign of sympathy with the rising school had been seen, perhaps, in the transference of the altar in Durham cathedral from its position in the nave to the east end, where it soon became a cause of offence.8" This was in 1617 during the vacancy of the see, when a lay dean, Adam Newton, allowed the affairs of the cathedral to fall into neglect through his own non-residence, and probably suffered the prebendaries to do much as they pleased. We can almost trace the formation of the two parties — Arminian and Protestant. To the one belonged the Prebendaries Morecroft, 1614, and Burgoyne, 1617, who were joined rather later by Laidsell, 1618, Birkhead, 1620 (when a new dean, Dr. Hunt, appeared on the scene), Marmaduke Blakiston, 1620, Newell (Bishop Neile's half-brother), 1620, James, 1620, and also the archdeacon of Durham, Gabriel Clark, 1621, formerly of Northumberland, 1619."' John Cosin, who joined the capitular body in 1624, was brought into the diocese by Bishop Neile first as master of Greatham Hospital.8 354 ** Bishop Barnes enjoined a monthly communion. Surtees Soc. Publ. Izxxiv, p. xiv. 10 The ' church flock ' is the name given to sheep kept not for pasturing the graveyard (ibid. 4), but as a means of profit to the parish. Their wool was regularly sold. 11 This yearly payment for the maintenance of prisoners is explained, ibid. 19. 151 Some information as to the position of the communion table in the diocese is given by Mr. Longstaffe in a paper on the ' Screen of Darlington Church,' Arch. Atl. vii, 248. *" The best source of information as to the little coterie of men who made such changes at Durham is the first volume of Bishop Cosin' i Correspondence (Surtees Soc.), 52, where the familiar letters of Cosin, Morecroft and others enable us to catch the spirit of the proceedings. The literature connected with Smart (see below) gives a mass of detail in an unchronological sequence. 144 Cosin, famous in English church history for his connexion with the Prayer Book of 1662, is a very prominent figure in Durham history. His name will recur. At this point he begins to come forward as the leader of the Arminian movement. He held many preferments in the bishopric, and must be regarded at the Keble of the new school of thought so far as the north was concerned. 43 A HISTORY OF DURHAM A letter of Richard (afterwards Bishop) Montague, written to congratu- late Cosin on his promotion to a prebend, indicates the methods of the new school, and the advice which its leaders gave : — All that I now advise you is, do nothing suddenly nor without my Lord [Neile]. Make him your counsellor that is the author of them [his preferments] to you. So he can not take it but well, and you shall further engage him. A most honest, thorough friend he is, and such must be held amni modo. Refer all to him so shall you hold and endear him.3" We cannot clearly trace the progress of Arminian influence outside Durham through the diocese,358 but when we take into consideration the number of benefices held by the little knot of prebendaries, and the opportunities of influence enjoyed by the archdeacons in their visitations and at other times, it is natural to conclude that the impress left upon the 1 1 8 parishes then exist- ing in the county of Durham367 would be profound. There is no surface proof that resentment was widely felt towards innovations which were intro- duced. If opposition was manifested it came probably from the clergy themselves. Two of the prebendaries were conspicuous in this connexion. Robert Hutton, son of the former bishop, and rector of Houghton-le-Spring, preached a 'reflecting' sermon in the cathedral in 1621, taking occasion to give his own views as to ' the king, the bishop, and the church ceremonies.' Peter Smart became famous throughout England 888 for the fierceness of his attack upon the changes at the cathedral. Under Neile he had contented himself by staying away from Holy Communion, perhaps limiting his protest to this negative action out of friendship for his former schoolfellow. Neile was translated in 1627, and Monteigne was appointed bishop, but was trans- ferred to York after three months. During the vacancy which followed, Smart, as the senior prebendary, save one, undertook a manifesto against the spread of Arminianism. This took the form of a sermon at the July assize, 1628, when the cathedral echoed with the violent recital of all that had been done in the way of innovation. The sermon, ' almost Miltonic in the strain of its invective,' was at once considered at a sitting of all the available mem- bers of the recently reappointed High Commission to the province of York. Suspended after a month or two by this court, Smart had his case transferred to the London High Commission at Lambeth, which deposed, degraded, and fined him ^oo.869 Smart might have found the money, for friends were ready to help him, but he preferred to languish in prison, from which he was only released some ten years later by the Long Parliament in its early sittings. The whole case is important as illustrating the Laudian changes in progress, and also because there is no evidence to show that there was any real volume of sympathy with him. Indeed, his wife in a curious letter tells him to make the most of his case, because ' there is not one man that will shew himself in all this country for you but Mr. Wright.'860 In the growing irritation felt M Surtees Soc. Publ. cii, Cosin' s Correspondence, 35. 168 In certain articles exhibited before the High Commission in 1630 (Cotin'i Correspondence, i, 165) it is alleged : ' All which your abominations both town and country began to imitate ... to the complaint of all well affected people in the king's dominions.' '" So summed from Camden's Map by awriter in S.P. Dom. Addenda, 1580-1625, vol. 43, No. 4. "* Surtees, Hist. ofDur. i, 149. 859 The best source of information is C. Hunter, Illustration of Mr. D. Neal's Hist, of the Puritans, 1736 ; a summary of the case in Diet. Nat. Biog. ; cf. too, Gardiner, Hist, of Engl. vii, 44. 360 Hunter, op. cit. 64. 44 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY by the Commons at this juncture towards the king and the bishop, great capital was made out of the Smart case, and a note of 27 January, 1629, records that the Commons ' propose to inquire . . . how ceremonies are crept in as at Durham.'8'1 As the months went by, and the weary proceed- ings were dragged out before the High Commission — now at Durham, now at Lambeth, and again at York — the comparative apathy of the diocese was stirred by degrees to something like excitement : ' You have much disturbed the peace of the church, and ministered great cause of offence and distraction to the weak and tender consciences of sundry inhabitants of the city and country.' "* Such was the objection made against Cosin and his adherents at York on the day that Smart was finally sentenced after a protracted considera- tion of the case during two years."3 The long document from which this quotation is given sets out in the most bitter way the case against the reform- ing prebendaries. It is possibly the work of the lawyer, Mr. Wright, who had sided with Smart from the outset."4 It shows how thoroughly Cosin was the leading spirit in the changes at Durham."1 He had in the earlier days of the agitation forced the dean into compliance with his own methods and aims, and on one occasion he brawled in the church with the Dean himself about the gentlewomen who would not stand when he bade them, whose pew he locked up and afterwards nailed because they would not stand, and again with him about the lighting of three or four candles upon each candlestick on the altar. He called the same gentlewomen ' lazy sows,' and tore their sleeves because they refused to stand."* At a later date, apparently, the gentle dean was more active in his sympathy, and introduced the stone altar which still stands, though somewhat injured, under the present communion table in Durham Cathedral. You have lately so set it [says the indignant protestor] that the minister can not possibly stand on the north side of the Table, there being neither side standing northward, and contrary to the example either of St. Paul's Church or any other. You Richard Hunt have cast out the Communion Table of wood which was light and portable, and you have erected a mighty altar of stone, immovable, fastened to the ground and standing (being a double table, one below, of which there is no use at all, and another above), upon six pillars upon which are curiously wrought nine pair of white cherubins' faces. You beautified the same altar with paintings and gildings, and hangings and coverings of silk and velvet, of silver and gold, so brave and glorious that all the altars in England (for so our popish Arminians have lately began to term all communion tables) I say all altars may cast their caps at our Durham altar which hath cost with the furniture thereunto belonging above ^ 3,000. IW Nor was it the furniture and ornaments alone which gave offence to the party of Smart. A variety of ceremonies had been introduced, standing at the Nicene"8 Creed, bowing (or as the Durham people called it), 'making legs to m Lonidalt MSS. (Hist. MSS. Cora. Rep. xiii), App. vi, 64. ** Surtees Soc. Publ. lii, 164. •" Cat. S.P. Dom. 1634-5, P- 3*1- *** Sec above note, and C. Hunter, Illuitration of NcaPi Puritans, p. 64. " This is evident from other authorities : 'A great part, if not the most of the evil of our church, at this present, is supposed to proceed from him, and those he wholly ruleth, as My Lord of Durham whom he wholly ruleth.' In strictness of date, since the paper is dated 29 March, 1628, the bishop to whom reference is made is Bishop Monteigne, who was only bishop from 3 March to 16 June, 1628. If this is correct it shows that Monteigne was under the direction of Cosin even before he entered upon the see. The passage is given in Surtees Soc. Publ. xxxiv, 198, from the Baker MSS. » Surtees Soc. Publ. lii, 174. •" Ibid. 179. ** Ibid. This was a source of considerable contention, and led to a successful defence on the part of Cosin, which is given in his correspondence, ibid. 200. 45 A HISTORY OF DURHAM the altar,' 8M the singing of anthems instead of psalms, the wearing of ' Baby- lonish robes called copes . . . embroidered with images' instead of 'decent copes,' 87° and so forth ; whilst it was averred that strange and novel doctrines had been imported in sermons by the reforming prebendaries.871 It was for these reasons, probably, that Archbishop Harsnett, of York, took the extreme step of proposing to visit the diocese of Durham.878 Bishop Howson at once wrote off to Laud, then bishop of London, and quoted precedents to show that the idea, if not unheard of, was unconstitutional. ' The people,' he says, ' now on the first motion proclaim that they know none but God, the king, and Saint Cuthbert, which is their bishop, to whose government they submit.' The protest was successful, and the visitation abandoned. Later in the year (1630) Howson undertook his primary visitation and gave certain ordinances to the dean and chapter, in which it was directed that ' to prevent scandal of innovation the uniformity of Common Prayer used before the alteration in the time of the late bishop be observed.' 87S The State Paper containing these injunctions is indorsed bine illae lacrymae, which may lead us to suppose that the precept was not palatable. The bishop's own position was difficult. He did not fully sympathize with Smart, but owing to the excited state of feeling in England he found it best to temporize, and in the end sr* rather took his side. It would seem that despite a partial incrimination of Cosin for the offences alleged in introducing changes without due authority,876 the ultimate issue was to justify his party, so that the triumph lay almost wholly on the side of the reformers and innovators. Some evidence of this is given in the acts of the High Commission, which show renewed activity after the final sentence given at York in 1630. A comparison of their acts from this time with what was done in 1627 shows far greater vigilance, and a very much widened range or inquisition. Moral offences, irreverence, profanation of the sacraments, hindering divine service, assaults on the clergy, defamation, fortune-telling, are some of the various cases from all parts of the diocese which multiply in and about i63o.878 Bishop Howson was promoted to the see of Durham when he was. seventy-three, and was succeeded by a prelate of much the same advanced age. No post-Reformation bishop had found the see of Durham a bed of roses, but no one had so uneasy a tenure as Bishop Morton (1632—47),. the pathos of the situation being intensified by his distinguished merits and his great age.877 The new bishop was of a somewhat different school from his immediate predecessors. The friend of Casaubon and of many well-known scholars, Morton represented rather the school of Hooker than of Laud. He was an ardent apologist of the Church of England, but in a day when strong language was used and vehement action taken, Morton was as conciliatory as 869 Surtees Soc. Publ. Hi, 179. "» Ibid. 184. m Ibid. 1 86. 171 S.P. Dom. Chas. I, vol. 162, No. 32. 373 Ibid. vol. 1 86, Nos. 97, 107 ; cf. Surtees Soc. Publ. Hi, No. 202. 374 r— • - 1 This is not quite the view of the editor of the Surtees Soc. volume, ibid. 204, foot-note, but is. justified by the bishop's own correspondence ; cf. S.P. Dom. Chas. I, vol. 154, No. 95. Complacent reference to Cosin's fine and temporary suspension is given in the articles previously cited, Surtees Soc. Publ. Hi, 191-2. 76 For the Acts of 1629 onwards, see Surtees Soc. Publ. xxxiv, passim. A summary (if it maybe trusted) of 1627 is given by Dr. Carter in his previously cited reply to Neal, p. 44. 177 A very eulogistic and almost contemporary account of Morton was written by his chaplain,. Dr. Barwick. For his ' Catholic Apology ' and other important works see Diet. Nat. Biog. 46 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY he was strong in his own convictions. It is possible that this disposition recommended him for promotion to Durham at a moment when recent events must have left behind them a strong sense of irritation. He took pains to try to bring into the diocese men in whom he felt confidence.878 In this way Dr. Naylor was promoted to the rectory of Sedgefield, with a prebend in the cathedral ; Johnson, an excellent preacher, to Bishopwear- mouth ; Dr. Feme, later master of Trinity, Cambridge, and dean of Ely, to the rectory of Stanhope and archdeaconry of Northumberland ; and last, but not least, Dr. Isaac Basire to the same two preferments as Dr. Feme held before him. Morton scattered over the diocese copies of the church catechism, and insisted strongly on the duty of catechising.879 His extreme liberality, his care in ordinations, his promotion of real learning, his per- suasive influence with recusants (amongst others he brought back one of the Swinburnes to the Church of England), are points over and above his own steadfast character to which his biographer draws special attention.880 He was, however, firm as well as amiable, and made a stand for Palatinate rights stronger than any predecessor had made since the spoliation of the episcopal prerogative under Henry VIII.881 He displayed greater activity than his immediate predecessors in regard to the train-bands. A writer of a strange little tract which belongs to 1629 had stated that the train-bands were very rarely called together even for the sake of practice; but in 1635, owing to the threatening aspect of Scottish affairs, Morton summoned the train-bands to appear before him at Durham, both horse and foot completely furnished and exercised. The various gentlemen of the county were bidden to provide themselves with fit arms, and the clergy in like manner to be answerable to their abilities.88* But before this gloomy cloud presaged the storm that was soon to fall upon the north, one of his most pleasant, if most exhausting, experiences came to the bishop. In 1633 Charles announced his intention of making a progress into Scotland. Great preparations were made in the bishopric, the various parishes contributing to the mending of roads and repairing of bridges, and other expenses of the journey, as different parish books attest.888 An extremely interesting account of the event written in Latin by Cosin still survives, from which it is easy to picture the manner of the king's reception at the cathedral and the castle.88* It is a tradition that his entertainer, the bishop, was impoverished by the great expense of the function, which cost him £1,500 a day. Charles, who was destined to return to Durham under very different circumstances, seems to have shown much interest in the cathedral. At the instigation of Laud, probably, he gave directions for the removal of some unsightly buildings annexed to the church,881 and by his presence virtually endorsed the changes that had been wrought in services and furniture. A letter from Arundel to Windebank written at Durham 8M testifies to the king's satisfaction with the cathedral. A m Banvick, Life, 83. ** Ibid. 89. *° Ibid. 93, 95, 97, &c. m S. P. Dom. Chas. I, »ol. 301, No. 6. "* Ibid. vol. 196, No. 20 ; vol. 398, No. 46. m Ibid. vol. 134, No. 1 6. Entries in Gatcshcad parish books. See also Surtees Soc. Put!. Ixzziv, 9 5 a. •" Surtees Soc. Publ. Hi, ^\^. For the expense, Hutchinson, Hist. Dur. i, 6 1 8. •* S.P. Dom. Chaj. I, vol. 240, No. 10. m This must be remembered as explaining the flight of the prebendaries in 1640 on the approach of the Scots. 47 A HISTORY OF DURHAM quaint and interesting view of an ordinary service and a residence dinner is given in 1634 by three Norwich soldiers who came to church and were entertained by Dean Hunt.387 As for the king's visit, church discipline seems to have been tightened by the countenance it gave to the party now in the ascendant, and evidence survives of much activity in the next two or three years. Shadows, however, soon fell. The year 1636 saw a severe visitation of the plague.388 Throughout the bishopric the royal exactions which were being forced upon the people were particularly galling, whilst throughout England popular resentment was rising rapidly.889 The first note of the coming storm was sounded in Durham at the end of 1637, when the old bishop was directed by the Privy Council to look to his train-bands, for the Scots were signing the Covenant.390 Then came a year of suspense, until the bishop at the close of 1638 was ordered to make special musters over and above the ordinary train-bands.391 For the first time in its history it was owned that the city could no longer be held against Scottish artillery ,m so that Newcastle was chosen for the military head quarters in the coming bishop's war. Again Charles passed through Durham,893 and Morton at the cathedral preached on the text, ' Let every soul be subject to the higher powers.'39* The first bishop's war fizzled out in the summer of 1639 in the pacification of Berwick, but in the spring of 1640 the temporary peace was again disturbed. There was now widespread sympathy with the Scots,396 but Morton rallied the bishopric forces on Elvet Moor, and consecrated the band on the eve of their march to Newcastle. The shock of battle with the crusading Scots took place in August, 1640, at Newburn-on-Tyne, and resulted in a Scottish victory followed by the occupation of Newcastle. Intense interest was taken at Durham in the course of events. One prebendary wrote to report the unwise speeches current in the town.398 The fugitive English army rushed south through Durham. The flight of the army was followed by the general exodus of all the church party in Durham, who had little hope of good treatment from the covenanting Scots.897. The bishop fled,398 and the new Dean Balcanqual fled too, as did most, if not all, of the prebendaries. As for the city of Durham [says one who saw], it then became a most depopulated place, not one shop for four days after the fight open ; not one house in ten that had either man, woman, or child in it, not one bit of bread to be got for money, for the king's army 387 Quoted by Surtees, Hist. Dur. iv, 1 66, Addenda. The full narrative has been edited by L. G. Wickham Legg, 'A relation of a short survey of 26 counties.' 188 Surtees Soc. Publ. ii, 122, 123 ; ibid, iv, 69, 142. 889 Ship-money and carriage of timber were the chief complaints. S. P. Dom. Chas. I, vol. 317, Nos. 37 and 96 ; ibid. vol. 369, No. 47 ; ibid. vol. 385, No. 22 ; vol. 387, No. 13 ; vol. 401, No. 60. 190 S. P. Dom. Chas. I, vol. 398, No. 46. m Ibid. vol. 404, No. 6 1 ; cf. 99, which makes it clear that Durham was meant at first to be, at all events, head quarters for the bishopric. S9> Cal. S.P. Dom. 1638-9, p. 325. 193 For the various visits of Charles to Newcastle, and for an excellent resume of the history about this, time, see Mr. Terry's paper, Arch. Ael. xxi. 14 The learned Royalist sermon was printed, A sermon preached before the kings majesty, 1639. * This sympathy in the bishopric is frequently cause of complaint in the State Papers ; cf. vol. 420, No. 121 (drinking to the covenant in a Durham tavern), and passim. 886 Cal. S.P. Dom. 1640, p. 347. 97 Rushworth, Coll. 1239, cf. S.P. Dom. Chas. I, vol. 466, No. 67. 398 The bishop went to Stockton, thence to Helmsley (Belvoir AfSS. Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. xii, 523), and later to London. For his fortunes see Diet. Nat. Biog. 48 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY had eat and drank all in their march into Yorkshire, the country people durst not come to market, which made that city in a sad condition for want of food. Most of the church- men having removed all that they had considerable, left their houses with some trash open, which their servants and neighbours spoiled. Durham became a military dep6t for the year that the Scottish army remained in the northern counties. The references to the misery of the occupation, and of the longer period that followed three years later, are numerous in documents of the time. As for the church the time of reprisal had come."* Cosin was attacked by the Long Parliament, and Smart was restored. A petition from the parishioners of Muggleswick about this time mentions the flight of the incumbent.*00 The Arminian prebendaries who held various livings had disappeared. No doubt they were joined by others of like views who feared the Scots. Those clergymen who remained at their posts were probably called on to support soldiers billeted upon them.401 Everywhere property was insecure and poverty intense.40* At last the departure of the Scots in August, 1641, was hailed with relief, but the church soon felt the severity of the Long Parliament. Means were at once devised to protestantize the whole country, and early in 1642 the Protestation was very generally signed in every ward of the Palatinate. There is no evidence of resistance to the ' Shibboleth to discover a true Israelite,' which men everywhere found it politic to accept.40* Before the actual outbreak of the Civil War in 1642, the bishopric had very generally become strongly Royalist404 owing to the universal disgust at the late Scottish exaction, so that recruiting went on apace during the summer, the old recusant families even supplying officers for the king's troops.401 Another flight began408 whilst these forces were massing for the protection or Newcastle, but there was at present only one skirmish between the troops of Newcastle and those of Hotham at Piercebridge.407 The real danger came with the beginning of 1644, when it seemed as if the bishopric would be crushed between the Scots coming south and Fairfax operating in Yorkshire.408 A second Scottish invasion followed, avoiding the city of Newcastle and crossing the Tyne at and near Bywell.40* Leven, their commander, seized Sunderland and other places, and marched in force to Durham, which was evacuated by the marquis of Newcastle, who fled on towards York, the Scots following in pursuit. During this renewal of troubles the Covenant was imposed upon the country,410 and its taking can be traced in various places, "• Ids. Journ. iv, 249, 256 ; cf. Hist. AfSS. Cm. Rep. iv, 63-66. 400 Surtees, Hist. Dur. ii, 388. 401 Instances Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. iv, 59 (Lilburne and Perrott). ** ' Not a man in the bishopric dare call anything his own,' S.P. Dom. Chas. I, vol. 467, No. 12. The dean and chapter lands were controlled by Leslie's Commissioners, as were also those of the bishop, but at present there was no eviction of tenants; cf. Hutchinson, Hist. Dur. i, 621 ; S.P. Dom. Chas. I, vol. 467,. No. 60. Rents from the prebendal and other estates went to maintenance of the army. *" Ordered 30 July, 1641, but returned in February or March of 1642. For a summary of the Durham returns see those of Lords1 AfSS. (Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. v), 125. ** 'The people of this country,' says a dispatch to Denbigh, 4 Feb. 1644, 'are unwilling to give intelli- gence or supplies, and all either of their own accord or by force are in array, so great power hath the cathedral here.' Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. iv, 264. At Whorhon the parish register shows that the beacons were lighted to warn against the Scots. " Portland MSS. (Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. jiii), App. i, 68. " Ibid. 75. *" Surtees, Hist. Dur. iv, 32. ** Gardiner, Hist. EngL i, 315. ** Mr. Terry's excellent paper in Arch. Ael. x», 146, gives full details. Add to his authorities Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. iv, 264, 269 ; viii, App. ii, 60 ; x, App. i, 53. 410 For Easington cf. Arch. Ael. xrii, 300. 2 49 7 A HISTORY OF DURHAM as for instance at Easington, where the Scots were quartered in April. Other details of the connected circumstances were collected by one of the Durham minor canons.*11 With the return of a Scottish army after Marston Moor the bishopric was again in trouble. Garrisons were placed at Hartlepool and Stockton ; Gateshead was seized and the siege of Newcastle began.412 The Scottish grip of the county was complete, and was not relaxed until 1 647. During these years the bishopric was subject, not only to the Long Parliament, but to the Scottish Commissioners who were on the spot.*18 Exaction and poverty were again the fortune of the miserable inhabitants.*1* For the direction of secular affairs a standing committee was appointed, by whose negotiation with Parliament the whole personnel of the county was altered.*16 As for church affairs a meeting of the parliamentary party was summoned in Durham and itinerating preachers were sent down at their solicitation.*16 Parliament appointed to livings in some cases at all events, but these were probably benefices in the gift of the bishop or dean and chapter.*17 The Committee for Plundered Ministers in London appointed sequestrators to deal with the church property of ' delinquents.'*18 They have left a record of their doings for the diocese of Durham from which we can watch their operations.419 They made inventories of recusants' lands and issued warrants to seize them, to demise, let, collect, and gather the glebe, tithes, rents, and averages c for the use of the commonwealth.' The churches were no doubt purged from all ' monuments of idolatry ' in accordance with the contemporary order sent round in that behalf in 1 644-*80 In their previous occupation of the county the Presbyterian Scots had no doubt anticipated that ordinance so far as Durham was concerned.*81 In 1645 Presbyterianism was completely victorious when the Prayer Book was abolished, the Directory substituted, and the Presbyterian Classes carried out for the whole county.*28 These arrangements survive.488 Sir H. Vane certifies the division of county Durham into six different classical Presbyteries, with a list of the persons nominated for each ; he further certifies that of the many other churches in the county divers are destitute of any ministers, while the ministers in others are some so weak and others so 411 D. and C. of Dur., Hunter MSS. 411 Mr. Terry's paper in Arch. Ael. 21 is again a careful reconstruction of dates and movements. For the revival of royalist sympathy between the departure of the Scottish army to York in April, 1 644, and its return in July, see S.P. Dom. Chas. I, vol. 502, No. 20 ; 'Northumberland, Westmorland, and Durham lie under the present pressure of the enemy ' (Royalists). 4U Some friction apparently existed between the two authorities. S.P. Dom. Chas. I, vol. 506, No. 15. 414 'Almost ruined,' ibid. vol. 503, No. 60 ; 'oppressed by insupportable burdens,' vol. 503, No. 65. 415 Ibid. vol. 506, No. 38 ; vol. 507, No. 57 ; vol. 510, No. 40. 416 Portland MSS. (Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. xiii), App. i, 181 ; cf. Com. Journ. iii, 593. 417 Parliament appointed to Bishopwearmouth, Stanhope, Gateshead, Houghton-le-Spring, and eight other benefices in Durham between 1643 and 1648. 418 For this committee see W. A. Shaw, Hist. Ch. of Engl. 1640-1660, ii, 178 and 185. 419 D. and C. of Dur. Hunter MSS. Surtees, Hist. Dur. has put in several references to this book, e.g. Dalton-le-Dale, i, 3; Kelloe, i, 69 ; Egglescliffe, iii, 201. A plague in this year (1644) accentuated the misery. It is mentioned in the registers of St. Oswald's, Durham, EgglesclifFe, Whorlton, &c. 410 Transcribed in Houghton-le-Spring Vestry Book (Surtees Soc. Publ. Ixxxiv, 322). 4" St. Oswald's Vestry Book, ibid. 191, speaks of repairing 'the fount stone broken by the Scots.' 482 The Whitworth Parish Register notes that the use of the Prayer Book was suspended from 27 July, 1645, until 12 May, 1660. ta Portland MSS. (Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. xiii), App. i, 325. The paper is fully described by W. A. Shaw, op. cit. ii, 367. 5° ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY scandalous or malignant or both, that they cannot as yet recommend any more to be added to the several classes. With the evidence at present available it is not possible to watch the Presbyterian system in operation. Such parish documents as have been published seem to ignore it, and show variety in the working of the spiritual machinery. At Pittington, for instance, communions were still celebrated; at St. Oswald's and at Houghton-le-Spring they ceased during these years of Presbyterian supremacy ; nor were they resumed until the Restoration.*** The vestry uses of the parish went on. Churchwardens were elected, but were not sworn. Rates were levied. The church buildings did not always suffer either at this time or during the Protectorate. It may be questioned, for instance, whether at any period more care was bestowed upon the fabric of Houghton Church than in the years immediately preceding the Restora- tion.*" A survey of the existing parish account goes to prove comparative neglect of the building during the Presbyterian period, followed by increasing care from about 1653. After the abolition of bishops in 1646, an Act was passed for the sale of their lands, and a survey was made.*" They were not handed over to charitable uses, but were bought up by laymen. A list of those sold in Durham survives.*37 The Scottish army left in 1647, an(^ a CI7 °f Jov again went up from an impoverished county.**8 More than one Royalist outbreak in the following years proves that the king's cause was still dear to many in the north.**' The year 1 649 was an important epoch in the vicissitudes of church property. In it an Act was passed for the sale of the dean and chapter lands which had been held in trust since the abolition of chapters in I648.*80 A detailed survey was made and trustees were appointed to sell the lands for the main- tenance of ministers.*81 All this work was carried out by an intricate series of parliamentary committees. The same year witnessed the inauguration of the famous but short-lived society for the propagation of the gospel in the northern counties.*81 Its chief work was to carry out the augmentation of the livings of ministers, and to appoint suitable schoolmasters. An account of some of its proceedings survives, more particularly of services held at New- castle in 1651—53, when ministers were settled and assessments made upon various parishes for their support.*" Spasmodic help had been given before this committee came into being,*8* so that it marks the culmination of a series of attempts to organize the Presbyterian parish system more efficiently. Indeed, whatever the shortcomings of the Long Parliament, it strove valiantly 414 Dur. Parish Bki. (Surtees Soc. bonnv), 102, 192-3, 304. ** Ibid. 312-15. Compare the entries in the volume for the years 1644 to 1652 with those after 1653. °* Text of the Act in Hutchinson, Hitl. Dur. i, 632. For the history cf. W. A. Shaw, op. cit. ii, 210. The ordinance for the sale is dated 1 6 Nov. 1646. Shaw, op. cit. 213 ; cf. 242. For the survey, ibid. 603. m Printed by Strype, Aimalt, ii (appendix), 65 ; also by Hutchinson. The first sale was on 1 8 Oct. 1647. The total amount realized was £68,121 15*. <)J. including parcels outside the bishopric. «" Hiit. MSS. Com. Rep. ri, 160 ; S.P. Dom. Add. 1625-49, vols. 509, 436. *" July 1 648, defeat of Royalists in Northumberland, where many of the chief gentry of Northumber- land and Durham were taken prisoners ; S.P. Dom. 516 ; cf. Hut. MSS. Com. Rep. vi, App. : List of loyalist gentlemen in 1651-2 ; Surtees, Hiit. Dur. i, App. i, cxxxix. The S.P. Dom. for 1655 indicate further risings. •» W. A. Shaw, Hut. Ch. of Engl. ii, 213. 411 For the survey, ibid. 603. The question of improving benefices was first stirred in 1646, ibid 214. ** Described by Shaw, op. cit. ii, 226. "•Lambeth MS. 1006, fol. 426-30. 'An abstract of the settlement of ministers in the counties of Durham and Newcastle.' *" Shaw, op. cit. ii, 218. 51 A HISTORY OF DURHAM to improve the value of poor benefices. In connexion with this task a parochial survey was undertaken in 1650, and the presentments of jurors were returned into Chancery giving much detail as to the various parishes surveyed.436 All these Committees of Parliament were discharged by the dissolution of the Long Parliament in 1653. The instructions given to the commissioners will illustrate the business- like character of these parliamentary dealings with the church : To find out (i) What parsonages, vicarages, and other benefices, with or without cure of soul, there are in your division ; (2) The value of each per annum ; (3) The names of the present incumbents and proprietors ; (4) Who receives the profit ; (5) Who supplies the cure, and what is his salary ; (6) The number of chapels belonging to parish churches; (7) How the parish churches and chapels are situated, and how they might be united ; (8) How the churches and chapels are supplied with preaching ministers ; (9) What chapels might well be reassigned or made into parish churches ; (10) Where new churches should be built and parishes divided. So far as Durham is concerned, the remarks appended to the returns are very interesting, and the details given are a useful piece of parochial church history. About eighty parishes in the county of Durham appear to be described, exclusive of annexed chapelries. One or two returns may serve as specimens, e.g. ' Stockton a chapel value £35 ; minister Rowland Salkeld, salary £35.' It is desired by the inhabitants that ' being a corporation it may be made a parish church.' 436 Another scheme of these years was the foundation of the Durham College, which in its educational aspect has been more fully described in the previous volume.486 Mooted first in 1650 the design took six years to come to maturity. From the very first the idea was to promote an institution which should be ' as well in reference to the promoting of the Gospel as the religious and prudent education of young men there.'*87 It is natural to suppose, though exact proof is wanting, that the idea of the college owed something to the splendid Ripon College scheme which had been projected seventy years before.438 After various propositions as to using fines from delinquents for carrying out the Durham plan, subscriptions were invited,439 and the college began work in the late summer or autumn of 1656. The tradition is that it prospered well during the short period of its existence.440 Coincidently with its inception in 1650 a disgraceful episode took place when Cromwell rilled cathedral and castle with what remained of the rabble of prisoners taken at Dunbar.441 Tradition ascribes much defacement of the ** Shaw, op. cit. ii, 603. The Durham return is among the Hunter MSS. in the Dean and Chapter Library. 4343 The volume is the fourth of the Lambeth MSS. described by W. A. Shaw, Hist. ofCh. ofEngl. ii, 467. 436 V.C.H. Dur. i, 380. See, too, J. T. Fowler, Hist, of Univ. of Dur. The dates are : 7 May, 1650, original petition for erection of a college, Hutchinson, Hist. Dur. i, 636 ; August, petition for fines to go to its support; 1 1 Mar. 1651, Cromwell's approbation secured, Hutchinson, ibid.; 14 Jan. 1652, further petition, ibid. 638 ; 28 Apr. 1653, further petition from the county, ibid. 639 ; 29 Jan. 1656, citizens' petition, S.P. Dom. 12480 (17) ; i Feb., 6, 10 Mar., 3, 10, 22, 25 Apr., 16 May, i, 7 Aug., 5 Sept., 1 1 Dec. are days for which there is some report in S.P. Dom. An article in the Gent. Mag. (Ser. i), ix, 606, purports to describe the final steps, but perhaps it betrays some imagination. 137 From Cromwell's approbation, Hutchinson, op. cit. 641. 139 One of the provisional drafts has been printed in Peck's Desiderata Curiosa. 439 S.P. Dom . Interregnum, vol. 126, No. 28. "° Hutchinson, Hist. Dur. i, 655. 441 Mercurius Politicus, 8 Nov. 1650 ; cf. also Several Proc. 8 May — Burney newspapers in B.M. 34 and 36. 52 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY cathedral to the prisoners. They were not discharged until the middle of 1652."' Next year, which saw the discredit of Presbyterianism in England, marked the earliest known traces of Quakerism in the county, when some trouble was taken at Gateshead *** to put a stop to the increase of Quakers in Durham. It is possible that they had been more stringently treated under the Presbyterian regime. Increasing severity, however, was shown by the Independents in other directions. In 1654 a proclamation was enjoined by the Council to forbid horse-racing and other meetings in the north, since these gatherings were made the occasion of spreading Royalist sympathy.4*4 Under the Protectorate proper, trustees were reappointed to take the place of the now discharged committees of the Long Parliament which had dealt with church lands until 1653. They carried on the work of their predecessors and directed another survey of parishes to be carried out.*" It is not quite clear how far this dealt with the same places as were returned in 1650. Some of its returns for the county survive at Lambeth and correspond exactly in character with the earlier work of the Committee for Propagating the Gospel, which they confirmed and carried on.448 A printed protest of October, 1654, against the confirmation of the sale of the bishops' lands seems to indicate that the new owners were turning the old tenants out of doors, their wives and children going a-begging. The old Committee for Scandalous Ministers was revived as a ' commission for ejecting scandalous ministers.'447 The same principle of organizing the administration was carried out in other directions. Assizes were restored and took the place of martial law.448 The county and the chief boroughs were at last represented in Parliament. Itinerating preachers were appointed,449 yet there was a restless undercurrent. Royalist feeling reasserted itself, and a considerable rebellion broke out in 1655.**° Lambert was appointed major-general of the district, and Robert Lilburne his deputy for Durham. Next year Hyde sent to feel the pulse of the Royalists and to ascertain their names.461 After the death of Oliver Cromwell Royalist sympathy was further stirred, and when, in January, 1 660, Monk began his march, active measures were taken by men of influence.462 In February a riot took place in Durham and the people called for king and a free parliament.468 It would be difficult to disprove the assertion that the citizens of Durham were only voicing the desires of the bishopric at large. 40 Order for release given I Mar. S.P. Dom. Interregnum, vol. 23, No. 105 ; countermanded 17 Mar. ibid. No. no ; finally given I July, ibid. vol. 24, No. 60. ** Arch. Atl. vi, 229 ; viii, 222. 444 Council to Capt. Howard, Cat. S.P. Dom. 1654, p. 245. 444 Hist, in W. A. Shaw, Hist. Ch. Engl. ii, 221, 230. m Lambeth MSS. 1000, fol. 8, &c. 447 Ibid, passim, where directions are given by the trustees to these commissioners. ** Hutchinson, op. cit. i, 629, for the years 1651 and 1652. In the former year all cases were to be heard depending in the Dur. Ct. of Pleas in 1642 or instituted since. In 1654, 31 Mar. and 9 June, petitions were made to the Protector to hold assize*, S.P. Dom. Interregnum, vol. 68, No. 8 1, and vol. 72, No. 14. 449 Durham College wa» to maintain two of these preachers by a grant from Sedgefield Rectory. t*0 Instruction of Protector to suppress the present rebellion, conspiracies, &c. 14 Mar. 1655. S.P. Dom. Interregnum, vol. 95, No. 28 ; 5 Apr. commissions for trial, ibid. vol. 96, No. 10. 441 Sir E. Hyde to Sir M. Langdale, I Sept. 1656, from Antwerp, ' Please send me the names of five or *ix persons of the Bishopric ... on whose interest and discretion we may depend.' Norf. Home MSS. (Hist. MSS. Cora. Rep. for 1903), 353. *** Thos. Lilburne was specially prominent, as he reports to Haselrig, Cat. S.P. Dom. 1659-60, p. 294. «• Described in Littlecote MSS. (Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. 1899), 159. 53 A HISTORY OF DURHAM With the Restoration the old conditions were brought back. Those who had been extruded from any benefice unjustly during the troubles at once began to sue for restitution/5* a proceeding which a special Act of Parliament soon legalized, appointing the justices to act as commissioners for such suits.465 The Church services were resumed.*58 Multitudes of petitions from those who had suffered began to flow in."7 From the Act of Oblivion three or four names were specially excepted in the county of Durham.*58 At some early date the chief inhabitants of the district petitioned Parliament for the full restoration of the old form of government, and many were willing to sign this document whose names appear on the parliamentary side in previous years.*59 A flood of loyalty spread over the bishopric at first, nor is there any apparent sign of a discontented minority until two or three years had passed. During the vacancy of the see all benefices were in the king's gift, and to these Charles at once began to prefer incumbents. He also placed new men in the chief vacant Palatinate offices.*60 At the end of the year Cosin was consecrated bishop of Durham, and next year began the course of renovation for which his precise knowledge of city and county so well fitted him. His entry into the bishopric was delayed until August, 1661, after the main part of his labours on the revised Prayer Book were completed. An active autumn followed, in which he confirmed, ordained, and preached widely.*61 Durham was a partly demolished city. Elsewhere the see houses were ruined. He did over again the work which Neile had done so bountifully forty years before. From London he kept up a vigorous correspondence with his agent, who was pressing on the building and decorating in the castles at Auckland and Durham.*63 In July, 1662, his primary visitation was undertaken and was carried out with a minuteness which recalls the exactitude of Barnes a century before. It was succeeded by a progress ' through the larger part of this county palatine, preaching on every Sunday in several churches, and being received with great joy and alacrity both of the gentry and all other people.'*63 The cathedral which was in course of restoration was also visited and articles of detailed inquiry administered. A precise return of all the money expended by the new Dean Barwick and his chapter shows as well the ruin caused by the Scottish prisoners, and the munificent scale of restora- tion now set on foot.46* The Puritan hold of the county had been firm. Organization had been carried out more widely than in many parts. No voice of remonstrance has come down to us from the early days of the Restoration. The Puritan party no doubt sulked in silence. It seems quite impossible to estimate the propor- tion of their various constituents. C^uakers were first heard of in the county '" See the action of Cosin's friends on his behalf, Surtees Soc. Publ. Iv, 3-4.. 455 1 2 Chas. II, cap. 17. K Thus in the Whitworth Register it is noted that the Prayer Book was used again for the first time since July, 1645, on 12 May, 1660. "The S.P. Dom. of 1660 give numbers of these. 58 The document is given in the Lambeth MSS. "'Given in Surtees, Hist. Ditr. i, p. cxxxix. "° S.P. Dom. Kl Surtees Soc. Publ. Iv, 27. 61 The correspondence is preserved in the Durham University Mickleton MSS. and has been printed in part, op. cit. 183 Ibid, xvi, from Mercurius Politicus, xxxii, 531, and Kennetfs Reg, 831. *" Printed Surtees Soc. Publ. xxxvii, 260, from Mickleton MSS. 54 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY in 1653.*" One or two mentions of Baptists survive from the Cromwellian period.*" Independents are likely to have flourished in the Protectorate, but cannot be clearly traced yet. In the religious confusion of the period other sectaries may well have maintained themselves. At all events the first proof of religious dissidence after the Restoration that has yet come to hand is at the end of 1 66 1, when we are told that ' the Fifth Monarchy men are strongly at work in Yorkshire, Durham,' and other places.4*7 The same informant represents them as going about from county to county and fanning the flames of rebellion. There does not seem to be evidence of secession when the Uniformity Act came into operation in 1662.**" Doubtless, however, the Act stimulated latent sectarian irritation, for we find secret treasonable corre- spondence with foreign Baptists in active operation that same year, and the presence of Baptists in Durham is asserted.4" All this agitation came to a head in 1663 in what has been called the Derwentdale Plot. It gets its name from the head quarters of the Durham confederates in the conspiracy. It has been the practice of writers to make little of this affair,470 but if we may credit the mass of state papers connected with it and now accessible to the historian there was during the whole of 1663 and afterwards a widespread and determined effort to crush the religious settlement, and to overthrow the restored dynasty in reliance on the combination of the Dutch Protestants. Who the chief agitators were it is not possible to say, but the confessions of those ultimately apprehended indicated all manner of sectaries as involved in it, and sketched the proportions of a deeply-laid and dangerous stratagem.471 A fair summary of what is really a long story is contained in the following information of one of the leaders : The design was laid in the South. The chief designers in the North were Lieut. Col. Mason, Dr. Edw. Richardson, John Joplin once gaoler in Durham, and Paul Hobson. . . . They intended to force the king to perform his promises made at Breda, grant liberty of conscience to all but Romanists, take away excise, chimney money and all taxes whatever, and restore a gospel magistracy and ministry. They have sworn to be secret, and to destroy all who oppose them without mercy, especially the Dukes of Albemarle and Buckingham etc. 2,OOO horse and dragoons were ready in Durham and Westmorland, and many of the train-bands all over. . . On October 12 the rising was to be in London, in two places near Blackwell Hall, to fall on the city in St. James' Fields, and attempt Whitehall. . . . Many in the Life Guards and Duke of Albemarle's regiment, in the Fleet, in Scotland, and beyond the seas, and divers of quality over England were consenting to it.47' At all events it was estimated that ' in Durham 700 or 800 men were ready.' Ultimately the plot, which was known to the authorities from the first, fell to pieces when the leaders were taken and their close colleagues imprisoned. 4- Above, p. 53, Mr. J. W. Steel has collected from documents surviving at Darlington and elsewhere an interesting account of the early days of the cause. Early Friends in the North, 1905. «" As early as 1630 or so the name occurs in the Acts of the High Commission Court, Surtees Soc. Publ. vol. xxxiv ; see further below. m Cal. S.P. Dam. 1661-2, p. 161. •* Mention is made in the State Papers of ministers who have been extruded and are fomenting rebellion in the county, but they may belong to other parts. Tradition does not seem to speak of any large deprivation in the diocese. Calamy gives the names of eighteen rejected ministers, amongst whom two were tutors in the college erected by Cromwell at Durham. *" Cal. S.P. Dam. 1662, p. 564 ; cf. 1664, p. 577. They never took root in Durham. 470 In the accounts, for instance, by Surtees, Hist. Dur. ii. Addenda pp. 389-91, and Canon Ornsby, Surtees Soc. Publ. Iv, p. xx. 471 The authorities are the S.P. Dom. for 1663 and 1 664 passim. 471 Cal. S.P. Dom. 1663, p. 540 ; see also p. 352. 55 A HISTORY OF DURHAM Even so, and when further danger was at an end, it was admitted that in the bishopric ' things are far out of order, and there is great alteration in the deportment of the people.'*73 So much was this the case that in the spring of 1664 a second attempt was feared, so that it was even desired to fortify Raby Castle as a stronghold against the rebels, and ' associations for peace ' were formed in the county.47* It is almost impossible to distribute the guilt,, for party names are so loosely used that we cannot discern the actual delinquents. Anabaptists and Quakers are mentioned frequently in the con- temporary accounts, but it is probable that these appellations were given indiscriminately. Mutterings and discontent attributed to persons so called recur at intervals all through the post-Restoration period. The next episode is the working of the Conventicle Acts. The first Act was not so severely pressed as the second. It was passed just before the outbreak of the great plague, which took men's minds off to other things, and prompted vigilance rather against the entrance of infection than against the gathering of Quakers or Baptists for worship. It called out a stream of charity such as had never yet flowed from the bishopric, every parish more or less sending contributions to the great subscription organized.476 Whatever proceedings may have been taken under the first Act there is abundant proof of the increase of meetings in the Palatinate. Persons of position were ready to- foster them, as at Raby for instance, where Lady Vane aided the fanatical gatherings over which her steward presided.476 Conventicles multiplied, and admired preachers, such as Blackett the Anabaptist, were eagerly sought.*77 So out-of-hand had the Nonconformist cause grown by 1670 that the operation of the more stringent Act was carried out with difficulty. The sectaries were much discouraged by it, but maintained themselves notwith- standing. Indeed it was just at this time that the Durham Quakers were beginning to organize their quarterly meetings over the county.*78 Cosin was not at all inclined to be severe against the Conventiclers, and only pressed the matter at the royal bidding, sending orders through the archdeacons to report all guilty of taking part in conventicles.479 It can scarcely be supposed that Cosin was quite successful in the restoration of his diocese. His energy and strong personal influence, how- ever, must have improved the face of the Church very widely, as Archdeacon Basire with forty years' knowledge of the diocese expressly stated in the funeral sermon.480 His four periodic visitations of the cathedral and diocese m Cal. S.P. Dom. 1663, pp. 517, 552. "* Ibid. 646. 47S The Durham regulations signed by Dean Sudbury and other justices of the peace are given in Arch, Ael. xv, 18. For the subscriptions see Surtees Soc. Publ. Iv, 322-32. m His name was Cocks. Particulars in Cal. S.P. Dom. 1666-7, P- 42^- Note the Congregation of Saints in Newcastle, ibid. 1668-9, P- 72- 477 Letter of H. W. [Wm. Haggett], a spy in the northern counties, Cal. S.P. Dom. 1668-9, PP- 4!9~ 420. For Blackett, see also ibid. 1667—8, p. 154. His name suggests a connexion with a considerable north- country family. Foxey and Pooley were two other preachers sent over at the time from Germany. 478 J. W. Steel, Early Friends in the North, 12, gives 1671 as the date of the establishment of the Durham Quarterly Meeting at Lanchester. On the subject of Quakers in Durham see, loo, Arch. Ael. xvi, 191, 479 The bishop was informed in 1670 that the round number of women recusants in the city of Durham was 700. Surtees Soc. Publ. Iv, 237. He seems to suspect its accuracy, ibid, and 242. At Norton, he hears with regret, there are ' many obstinate men and women . . . that will not yet let down their conventicles,' ibid. 243. 480 The sermon was printed in 1673 under the title The Dead Man's Real Speech. Text, Heb. xi, 4. Brereton's account of the sumptuous and impressive funeral is worth reading, Cal. S.P. Dom. 1671—2, pp. 397-8. 56 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY show that the irregularities of the mother church of the diocese were hard to correct, and it is only reasonable to presume that the infection of Noncon- formist opinions, so widely spread in the diocese, tainted the loyalty and activity of not a few of the incumbents.*81 But the episcopate left a tradition of care and punctiliousness which those that followed Cosin willingly accepted. A glance at the work of the archdeacon of Durham from 1673 to 1677 proves how wholesome, in the main, and how varied was the discipline exercised by this official in his courts.481 In the influence which it exerted the work of Cosin compares very favourably with that of Pilkington, who had a somewhat similar task of restoration before him. The view taken in the text is based upon a general survey of the various references to Nonconformity in the diocese that exist for the period. An incomplete return in the Treasury of Durham which survives for forty-six parishes in the archdeaconry of Durham gives, at first sight, a somewhat different impression. It is dated July, 1669, and is made in reply to interro- gatories furnished by the archdeacon. Few active conventicles are acknowledged, but mention is made of the incursion of strangers from outside the district who hold meetings in various places. These are chiefly Quakers, and Norton is their great rallying point. A conventicle raided at Darlington proved to contain about twenty-four persons. It is expressly stated more than once that few of the Nonconformists are of any special rank. The vicar at Washington returns : There is not one of the viperous brood sojourning among us, neither is there any person (save a few simple and ignorant people of the Romish persuasion) that are dissenters from the divine service of the Church. From my heart, worthy Sir, I wish that all parishes in this flourishing Kingdom was as free from such noisome contagious vermin as this, and then I'm sure both Church and State were happy. It is not possible to reconcile the Durham City (St. Nicholas) return with that given in Surtees Society Publ. vol. Iv, p. 237, and one is inclined to suspect that the return is partial in more than one sense of the word. In the preceding paragraphs the view has been taken that it is almost impossible to discriminate between the various religious bodies of the time, since the references to them in contemporary documents are apt to confound the various sects. A few words, however, may be added as to the early days of the Baptist cause.*8* The Baptists never have been a strong body in the county of Durham, yet there are certain periods in which their history comes out into relief. The first local Baptist centre was at Muggleswick in or about the year i653,*8*and, during the years that immediately followed, Major Lilburne of Sunderland, then in command of the troops in Scotland, himself a strong Baptist, may have encouraged the spread of the sect.*8' Lady Liddell, a daughter of the Lady Vane who was active at Raby, patronized the struggling church,*88 and aided Ward, who, as far as Durham is concerned, *" In 1674. Archdeacon Grenville said to the clergy: 'I have looked on it as a very fateful presage lince the restoration of our Church Service that the clergy have expressed no more affection to it, especially in this diocese, after so many admonitions and injunctions of their several ordinaries.' Surtees Soc. Publ. xlvii, 15. ** Surtees Soc. Publ. xlvii, I ; Introd. pp. xix-xxi. 40 An excellent summary of early Baptist history is given in History of the Northern Baptist Churches, 1648-184;, by David Douglas. This rare work was brought to the writer's notice by Mr. H. A. Raine, of Durham. - Ibid. 31. "•Ibid. 33. -Ibid. 64. 2 57 8 A HISTORY OF DURHAM was the real apostle of the Baptists, and continued to lead them on Derwent- side until his death in 1717.*" But Blackett, already mentioned, was a more important man, and being possessed of some means was able to consolidate the work at Beechburn, his residence near Bishop Auckland, which for some years became the Baptist head quarters in the northern counties, until Ham- sterley succeeded to a position which it maintained for at least a century.488 It is curious that the first toleration of Nonconformist congregations, though for a brief time, synchronized with the death of Cosin. For a year from the beginning of 1672, royal licences were granted in England to certain ministers.*89 The returns for these indulgences in county Durham show that seven Presbyterians and two Independents applied for licences. There were no Baptist applicants, nor were there any in Northumberland. Of all the counties in England, Westmorland alone supplied fewer instances. Even Rutland had more than Durham. The places in which the licensed ministers were to preach were : — Presbyterian : Bishop Auckland, Brancepeth, Darling- ton, Durham, Lamesley, Stanhope, Sunderland ; Independent : Stanhope, Stockton, West Pans near South Shields. After the frequent mention of Nonconformity in the previous years, this paucity of recognized congregations is at first sight remarkable. It is of a piece with what we find in the early eighteenth century,490 and is explained partly by the circumstances of the county which was so largely * held under the church ' as the people describe their tenure, and partly by the fact that the places represented are just those towns (with the exception of Gateshead) in which, generally speaking, Dis- senters would be likely to congregate. A long interval followed the death of Cosin. A contemporary paper gives the reason for this delay, ascribing it to the king's wish to look into the revenues of the see, and to consider some change of government.491 Discredit- able rumours gained currency as to the use made of the revenues,498 but nothing came of the proposed alterations save the long demanded concession of parlia- mentary representation which Cromwell had allowed during his supremacy. Of course all palatinate offices and prebends were filled sede -uacante by the king. Some trouble arose between Charles and the chapter, who had ever since the Restoration lamented the king's frequent demand to dispense with the residence of prebendaries who were royal chaplains.498 The vacancy of the see let down somewhat the rigid carefulness which Cosin had tried to effect.494 Grenville, the archdeacon of Durham, strove by numerous visitations to restore a better standard of clerical life and work. His charges and letters show that licentiousness and even atheism abounded in the county ; that small irregular conventicles did exist ; that the clergy were inclined, in many instances, to make themselves and their office too cheap and contemptible ; 487 Douglas, Hist, of the Northern Baptist Churches (1648-1845), 1*7. 488 See further, ibid. 189 An account and summary are given in the Cat. S.P. Dom. for 1673. 190 A rough return for 1715 is given in Brit. Mus. Add. MSS. 32057. 191 ' A successor to Bishop Cosin will not be nominated until the King has issued his commission for governing that county Palatine and revising its revenues,' RyJal Hall MSS. (Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. xii, App. vii), 87. 191 Given in Hutchinson, Hist. Dur. \. 19S Cal. S.P. Dom. 1673, pp. 377, 397-8,472-3. Dispensations of residence are frequent during the reign, cf. Cal. S.P. Dom. 1673-5, P- z86- " This was the lament of Archdeacon Grenville, Surtees Soc. Publ. xlvii, 15, 16 ; cf. ibid, xxxvii, 177. 58 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY that there was too widespread a neglect of canons and rubrics.*'1 Yet the archdeacon was always ready to boast that ' the bishopric of Durham is with- out dispute the most conformable part of England,' and to compliment the clergy on its general condition.4'* The new bishop was Nathaniel Crewe (1674—1722), whose episcopate was destined to be longer than that of any bishop of Durham, and less memor- able than most. In 1697 he succeeded to his father's barony. All through his tenure of office he was more the rich man and the nobleman than the chief pastor of the diocese. He owed his advancement to the duke of York, and was not ashamed to aid the designs of the prince when he became king. He did not absolutely neglect his diocese,4'7 but his presence in it was chiefly for the purpose of entertaining lavishly at Durham and Auckland. The loss of his register prevents us from tracing his work in the county. In 1680 we get a passing mention of Romanists in the district in connexion with the extra- ordinary Act then proposed for transplanting the more notorious Romanists in different parts of the county. Eighty-one names are given in the county of Durham, a number which is below rather than above the average for other places. In Northumberland 106 were named, and in Newcastle itself eighty- two.4'8 In the city of Durham the Roman Catholic cause received considerable impetus in the work of the Jesuit Father Pearson who served a mission which had been established there since 1590. About 1685 Pearson erected a chapel and residence in Old Elvet, and opened a public school or college which drew together a large number of scholars at a time when it was thought that by the action of King James the whole of England would shortly embrace Romanism. So successful were the efforts of Pearson that in 1687, when Leyburn, the vicar-apostolic, visited Durham, 1,024 persons were presented to him for confirmation. Sixteen months later a paralysing blow fell upon the mission when William of Orange entered London. A large mob collected in Durham and made their way to the residence. In a few minutes the chapel was completely destroyed, and the cross was publicly burnt. The houses of the leading Roman Catholic residents were sought out by the excited rioters, who pillaged right and left with apparently very little check laid upon them by the inhabitants. The Jesuit priests had to flee for their lives and seek refuge where they might, as they wandered up and down the country. Pearson, the head of the mission, ventured back again somewhat later, but it is believed that no attempt was made to resusci- tate the pillaged mission in Durham until nearly the end of William's reign. The residence, or missionary district, was served by thirteen Jesuits in Anne's reign, when it comprised Cumberland as well as Durham and Northumberland.4'* m Surtees Soc. Publ. xlvii, 1 1-14. Grenville as prebendary was frivolous, as archdeacon scrupulous, as dean dignified. For his improvement, ibid, zxxvii, 150-1. His excellent ideals of parish work are contained in many letters and papers, cf. ibid. 42, 43. ** Ibid, xlvii, 23, cf. 15. ** The life written by one of his household credits him with frequent visits to the diocese : ' He was con- stantly in his diocese every year till his sickness in London in 1715-16. His visitations till that time were constantly triennial and his confirmations annual ' (CamJen Mite, ix, 33). Of his first visitation it is said : ' My lord made a pompous visitation over his whole diocese. He visited the Dean and Chapter' (Life, 1790, P- 39)- * The draft and particulars are given in Hut. MSS. Cam. Rep. xi, App. it, 224-6. ** The facts as to the Durham mission have been put together by the Rev. Canon Brown of St. Cuth- bert's, Durham, who is now in charge of the secular mission which took the place of the Jesuits in 1827. See the 'Story of an Old Mission* in the Uihato Mag. for 1900. 59 A HISTORY OF DURHAM Grenville was the chief force in the diocese at this time, and when he became dean he was successful in bringing the cathedral services up to the standard which he had often desired.600 He proved an excellent preacher and took pains to attract young men of promise to the diocese, guiding them after ordination and promoting monthly meetings of the clergy. At the cathedral he revived the practice of Lenten sermons, and encouraged the mayor and corporation to attend. He drew tight the reins of discipline too, so far as the officers of the church were concerned, but his hospitality was bountiful and well ordered.601 It was in the midst of all this activity that the crisis of his life came. The events of the reign of James II were doubtless followed with keen attention in the north. In 1688 the bishop, who had abetted the king so far, came to the diocese to promote the policy of the indulgence.603 The dean was in sympathy with his attitude, but had the courage of his convictions, which the bishop ultimately had not. The declaration was read in the cathedral and in Little St. Mary's in Durham, together with nineteen other churches in the county. m The rest of the incumbents could not be moved by the solicitation of bishop or dean. The latter was the one conspicuous instance of refusal to take the oath among the clergy of the diocese. He was vigorous in his Jacobitism, raising a subscrip- tion of £700 in which some of the prebendaries joined. The dean fled from Durham when a troop of horse entered it to proclaim William, and refused consistently in his exile to take the oath which was often pressed upon him.604 No successor was appointed until 1691. Durham was not a non-juring county.606 Despite the earnest endeavours of the dean to persuade the clergy in his archdeaconry to refuse the oath they were steadfast almost to a man and resisted the pathetic appeal of written leaflets, of sermons in the cathedral, and of visitation charges.606 Only eight clergymen in addition to the dean are known to have stood firm against the oath, and of these two saw fit to forgo their scruples.607 Some effort was used to propagate disaffection in the county, and papers of libels were sent up by the carriers into the district addressed to persons of position in the bishopric, endeavouring to seduce them from their allegiance.608 It was even reported in Whitehall that near Sedgefield considerable sums of money were collected on behalf of King James, and there were dim hints that some design was intended.609 No clerical complicity, however, is proved, and 00 The authority for the statements about Grenville is the two volumes previously quoted, Surt. Soc. Publ. xxxvii and xlvii, with Canon Ornsby's prefaces. *' Surtees Soc. Publ. vol. xxxvii. The directions, ibid. 161-3, as to the cathedral throw much light on the conduct of its services. a This has been denied (Camden Misc. ix, 23), but contemporary evidence of the fact will be found in Kenyan MSS. (Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. xiv, App. iv), 189, and Leeds MSS. (ibid. Rep. xi, App. vii), 30. An explicit denial is given by the bishop of Carlisle in May, 1688, who says that the bishop is much annoyed by the report. 803 Surtees Soc. Publ. xlvii, 147. 0< For the rest of his life spent in exile see the Surtees Society volumes xxxvii and xlvii. 105 'The drum beat for ten days at Durham for volunteers, but got none,' 12 Oct. 1688. RyJal Hall MSS. (Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. xii, App. vii), 215. 'The gentlemen of the bishopric of Durham have all signed a petition for x free Parliament,' 13 Dec. 1688, ibid. 228. There is evidence that many Roman Catholics in the district managed to evade the oath. *6 Full particulars of these appeals will be found in Surtees Soc. Publ. xlvii, 124, 11-36, 43-59. The letter to his curates is interesting, ibid. 119-27, written from Rouen in 1691. 07 They are given, ibid. 1 277?. from the appendix to the life of Kettlewell. m Cal. S.P. Dam. 1689-90, p. 177. W9 Ibid. 412. 60 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY almost the only non-juring episode that has come down to us is the action of a Mr. Grey who had been one of Bishop Crewe's chaplains, and turned the coronation sermon into * a virulent ballad.' "° A few events of some local importance mark the episcopate of Bishop Crewe. Perhaps the most outstanding of these in the history of the county is the erection of Stockton and of Sunderland into distinct parishes, and the building of a new church in either place. At Stockton the borough and township had been situated within the ancient parish of Norton, but with some increase of trade and prestige in the early eighteenth century the inhabitants of the rapidly-growing town desired to separate it from the mother parish, and to erect in place of the old chapel-of-ease built by Bishop Poor in 1234 a new and suitable church. Two Acts of Parliament were accordingly passed, the one in 1711 and the other in 1714, which made Stockton, with East Hartburn and Preston, a distinct and independent parish."1 The new church was con- secrated in 1712 by Bishop Crewe, and the sermon was preached by Dr. Smith, prebendary of Durham, the most learned Durham man of his generation probably, and long famous for his classic edition of Bede.11' The preacher took occasion to point out that Stockton was setting in the north the same example of church-building zeal which characterized the reign of Queen Anne elsewhere. At Sunderland the like proceedings took effect rather later, in 1719, when an Act of Parliament was obtained for constituting the ancient township a distinct parish from Bishopwearmouth, with a rectory church of its own, its population at the time being about 6,000. The new church was consecrated by Bishop Robinson of London, the bishop of Dur- ham being now too old and infirm to come frequently to his diocese. At Winlaton, on the Durham side of the Tyne, tradition pointed to the site of an ancient chapel destroyed in the rebellion of the earls in 1569. Sir Ambrose Crowley, who owned extensive lead mines in the neighbour- hood, set an example which has been followed by other employers of labour in the county since then by building on the spot a large chapel-of-ease to accommodate the workmen on the estate."8 Elsewhere the excellent fashion *'° Cal. S.P. Dam. 1 689-90, p. 308. That some turbulent scenes were enacted would naturally be supposed, and the following extract from a news-letter preserved in the State Papers gives an example : ' Upon Sunday, 23 June 1689, in the parish church of Chester-le-Street, immediately after the Nicene Creed, several persons, according to previous agreement, rushed out of their pews to hinder the minister from going into the pulpit ; and, instead of the psalm which should then have been sung, there was nothing but outcries, according to different affections, some roaring out : Hang him, we'll hear none of him, we'll be revenged ; others : God bless him ; etc. The minister, who was then in the vestry as usual, goes into the choir, where he put a stop to several as they were going out at that door, and called to them to return to their seats and duties. In endeavouring to gain the pulpit he found the whole body of the conspirators drawn up in very formidable order, not suffering him to pass, till they were satisfied why he did not pray. Being unable to gain the pulpit door, though he had made considerable advances, he at last told them that by the present authority none were to be prosecuted till the 1st of August next, which reason availed more than the others he had advanced, and the minister at length gained the pulpit. When he was seen there, shouts were raised of : Out ; turn out ; and the congregation rushed out of church, some threatening the minister with their sticks and fists. About three score of sober persons, mostly women, remained in their seats, and the minister proceeded, when about a score of persons returned with their hats on, and proceeded to ring the bells.' [S.P. Dom. William and Mary, vol. 14, No. 2.] *" Interesting particulars are given in the gossiping Hut. of SunJerlanJ, written by Brewster, a lecturer of Stockton Church, in 1776. See op. cit. pp. 119-126. *" John Smith, 1659-1715, was not the least in the long list of Durham antiquaries. He had been domestic chaplain to Crewe, and by him was appointed in succession rector of Gateshead, and then of Bishop- wearmouth. He supplied Dr. Gibson with the Additions relating to the bishopric of Durham, which were incorporated in the new edition of Camden's Britannia. '" See Surtees, Hut. Dur. ii, 273, and Richardson's Table Book, i, 337. 6l A HISTORY OF DURHAM of erecting charity schools, which was so characteristic of the period in Lon- don, was copied with effect in the bishopric, in 1701 at Gateshead, in 1715 at Darlington, in 1718 at Durham, and in 1721 at Stockton.61* The last three still exist, after various vicissitudes, and are doing good work. No record exists of the formation of religious societies in the county at this time, though Newcastle had its Society for the Reformation of Manners, founded in 1700 among the keelmen. An excellent charity, still known as the Cor- poration of the Sons of the Clergy, was first established in Newcastle in 17O9,515 and took in later the southern end of the diocese. The disciplinary traditions of Archdeacon Grenville, of which some mention has been made, were continued by his successors. In the registry of the archdeacon of Durham an imperfect series of presentments survives dealing chiefly with moral offences, and ranging over the latter part of Crewe's episcopate. The returns give evidence of diligent inquiry at the visitations of the archdeacon with the sentences of penance which seem to have been carefully carried out.618 No doubt the registries of archdeacons in other dioceses would, if examined, yield similar results ; but, so far as is known, such an examination has never been systematically carried out. At all events, there is direct proof that during the first forty years of the eighteenth century a system of strict church discipline was in use in the diocese of Durham. With Bishop Talbot (1721—30) commences a series of prelates who were, with the one great exception of Butler, characteristic of the period, and generally merit the appellation of the courtier prelates of Durham. Talbot, in the words of Hutchinson, was magnificent in taste and temper, and, if a liberal patron, was on more than one occasion embarrassed by his generous, perhaps prodigal, inclination. His theology is said to have had something of the Arian tinge which affected the writings of Clarke and others at this time. His sermons, however, do not seem to bear out the assertion,617 and " The particulars are given in the Talk Book under the years mentioned in the text. 16 The society of the Sons of the Clergy was founded in 1 709 in order to help the widows and orphans of the clergy, and such clergymen as might be in need of monetary assistance. It was very scantily supported at first, but as its operations extended it met with some success, and at last, in 1773, took in the county of Durham as well as Northumberland. 116 A large bundle of ' penances ' survives, the form being common to such documents elsewhere, and running as follows : ' A declaration of Penance to be done and performed by is appointed to be present in the parish church of upon some Sunday before the where being in penitential habit, having a white sheet on and a rod in hand, and standing upon some form or other high place immediately after the Nicene Creed in the morning shall with a distinct and audible voice say after the Minister as followeth, to wit : Whereas I, good neighbours, forgetting and neglecting my duty towards Almighty God, and the care I ought to have had of my own soul, have committed the grievous and detestable sin of to the great danger of my own soul and the evil and per- nicious example of all sober Christians offended thereby, I do here in a most penitential and sorrowful man- ner acknowledge and confess my said sin, and am heartily sorry for the same, humbly desiring Almighty God to forgive me both this and all other mine offences, and so to assist me with the grace of His Holy Spirit that I may never commit the like hereafter, saying " Our Father," etc.' A note is then added : • is to certify the performance thereof under the hands of the minister and churchwardens.' The particular document from which the above is copied is endorsed by the parish clergyman: 'October 25, 1741. Jane Brown this day at the time and in the manner above described made the above declaration of penance.' The same person appends a note : ' Sir, I have at length got one of our Excommunicated persons to perform her penance. If you will be so good as to send me an absolution for her I shall be much obliged, and if you would please also to- send me a couple more of the forms of penance that if the others will submit I may have the declaration ready for them you will much oblige.' This note shows that excommunication was sometimes neglected. As the returns, which are scattered over the years 1705-49, are only those of persons who submitted to the sentence, we are without accurate means of ascertaining the total number of those who came under the ban ecclesiastical. "' As bishop of Oxford and Salisbury, successively, Talbot had published various single and collected sermons. After his translation to Durham he published nothing more. See his Twelve Sermons. 62 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY there is no trace of protest or dissatisfaction in the county at the time of his appointment. Friction there was, but it was due to reasons which touched the men of the bishopric in a more tender part. He got into great difficulty by an attempt to pass through Parliament a Bill * to enable archbishops, bishops, colleges, deans and chapters, hospitals, parsons, vicars, and others having spiritual promotions, to make leases of their mines, which have not been accustomably letten, not exceeding the term of one-and-twenty years, without taking any fine upon the pecovering or granting of the same.' It was construed as an attempt on the bishop's part to divert a great deal of money to the use of his own family, who would naturally prove the chief recipients of the benefit of such leases.118 An urgent petition was promoted against the bill, and proved successful. The stigma of the attempt, however, attached to the bishop, who entered the diocese for the first time after the humiliation of his failure. It has been represented that he now brought into the diocese several promising men, on whose friendship and loyalty he might rely in order to counteract his unpopularity. Be that as it may, so far as the motive is concerned, Joseph Butler, promoted to the rectory of Haughton-le- Skerne, was one of those ready to welcome him when he made an unusually impressive'1' entry into the diocese in 1723, as also Thomas Rundle, his favourite chaplain, recently appointed to the rectory of Sedgefield, and to a prebend in the cathedral. In 1724 Seeker and Benson were both collated to prebends which were steps to subsequent bishoprics. During the nine years of his episcopate at Durham, Talbot made seven appointments to canonries, two to archdeaconries, and had to fill most of the important benefices in his gift. Of all his appointments none is more interesting than his introduction to the diocese of Butler, his son's college friend, who was destined to do his most important work in a diocese to which he afterwards returned as bishop. Exchanging the rectory of Haughton-le-Skerne for Stanhope in Weardale in 1726, Butler now gave up his preachership at the Rolls Chapel, in London, and devoted himself to the composition of the Analogy which was published in 1736. The first edition of his Sermons appeared in the year that he first went to Stanhope. The bishop's great friend, Rundle, seems to have lived much at Auckland with his patron, and as Stanhope was easily accessible from the Castle, it is probable that Butler was frequently there. Bishop Chandler (1730-50) came to Durham with a great reputation as a successful controversialist in the Deistic disputes which had been long engaging the attention of the more serious thinkers of the day. His chief work appeared in 1725 under the title of A defence of Christianity from the Prophecies of the Old Testament^ and was intended as a reply to the famous treatise of Collins, Grounds and Reasons of the Christian Religion. No further work, however, came from his pen after his translation to the north,"0 and no trace of contact with Butler survives, although the rector of '" Particulars are given in Hutchinson with the comments of Spearman. *" His appearance at a review was much commented on : ' I hope you have seen Thursday's Flying Post, and read the martial equipage in which the Bp. of Durham appeared at the review : "an haec est tunica filii tui ? " But it may be proper for a Palatine or Lord Lieutenant. I think he should be made General of the Ecclesiastics as Peterboro' [Kennett] is of the Marines.' 16 June, 1722, Portland MSS. (Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. vii), 328. "" The brilliant band of clergymen introduced by Talbot were beginning to disappear. Seeker went in 1734, Rundle in 1735, Benson in 1735- 63 A HISTORY OF DURHAM Stanhope continued to reside in Weardale for nearly seven years whilst Chandler was bishop. The only personal touch connected with Chandler is a speech made by him at Quarter Sessions in 1740. A time of great scarcity had led certain traders to buy up all the corn upon which they could lay their hands in order to keep up prices for their own benefit. This drew down upon them a dignified rebuke from the bishop who presided and addressed621 those present upon the importance of enforcing an Act of Edward VI against those guilty of such action. Otherwise the episcopate of Chandler is marked by two matters of importance in which the bishop had no hand. The first is the deepening of that stream of educational and chari- table activity of which there had been some commencement under Crewe and Talbot. Schools were erected in Newcastle and at Easington, and alms- houses were built at Gateshead and elsewhere.623 The other is the beginning of the Evangelical Revival which made its appearance fitfully before 1750, but matured after that year. Wesley first passed through the county in 1742 and 1743, on his way to and from Newcastle.623 At this place he made a very considerable impression, and it is scarcely probable that the zeal which found expression in Newcastle during Chandler's episcopate was confined to Northumberland. Constant communication with the northern city and its enthusiastic societies would inevitably draw into the bishopric itself some influence from a revival which was already stirring so large a part of England. The first recorded work of Wesley in the county of Durham was a sermon at Sunderland in 1743, when he preached in the High Street. 'The tumult subsided in a short time so that I explained without any interruption the one true religion, Righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.' Butler, who had been familiar with the diocese for sixteen years as vicar, returned to Durham as bishop in 1751. His tenure of the see was brief, and although appointed in 1750 on the death of Chandler, he did not enter the bishopric until nearly a year had passed. In July, 1751, he delivered his famous primary charge, and, it would seem, in Newcastle, not in Durham, as is generally supposed.124 This historic document, which is almost the only relic of his episcopate in the north, draws a very gloomy picture of the general condition of religion.626 ' It is impossible for me, my brethren, upon our first meeting of this kind, to forbear lamenting with you the general decay of religion in this nation.' So he begins, and after pointing out that this is admitted, he proceeds : ' Different ages have been distin- guished by different sorts of particular errors and vices, the deplorable distinction of ours is an avowed scorn of religion in some, and a growing dis- regard of it in the generality.' The picture, of course, is perfectly general and is not intended to be a representation of the state of a diocese which he had left thirteen years before. Indeed, in view of the probably indifferent state of Butler's health at the time, and the somewhat antiquated references 11 The speech is preserved in B.M. Add. MSS. 6468, fol. 54, where there is also a contemporary print. The statute referred to is 5 and 6 Edw. VI, against Forestallers, Regrators, and Engrossers. Hl Schools at Easington, Surtees, Hist. Dur. \, 39. Almshouse at Gateshead, Sykes, Local Records, 1738, a useful authority for many events and dates in the northern counties. An act of moo violence directed against a Romanist chapel in Sunderland in 1 746 is described in the Gent. Mag, for that year, p. 42. K* For his early work at Newcastle, see J (turn, of the Rev. John Wesley ('Everyman's Library'), i, 373 ; ibid, i, 426. 14 The dates are given in Sykes's Local Rec. and Richardson's Table Book. 414 Printed in Butler's Works, first by Bp. Steere, and by later editors. 64 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY in the charge to other writers and authorities, it is tempting to believe that it was written by him at an earlier period and was adapted in the opening line to the present occasion."' He ignores the work of the Wesleyan societies, which in England generally, and in the diocese of Durham in par- ticular, were now in vigorous activity. It is an interesting fact that from a month or so before Butler came to Durham as bishop, until the time of Wesley's death, the great preacher made the county a constant scene of his mission work, and for many years strove to visit the district every other year."7 His first recorded visit to Durham itself was in May, 1751, when he met a few people on his way to Stockton. He came again in 1752 and addressed at Durham 'a quiet stupid congregation,'"8 whereas at Sunderland he found ' one of the liveliest societies in the north of England.' "' At Barnard Castle a jostling crowd gathered round him, and in rough horse-play some of the rabble pumped water on the listeners from a fire-engine which they brought up.'*0 It was at this time that the important work of Wesley in Weardale 5S1 was begun, which matured rapidly and en- countered many vicissitudes in the years that followed. Bishop Trevor (1752—71) was one of the most amiable of the Durham bishops, and the remembrance of his character recorded at the time of his death by a Durham friend was long cherished in the diocese. Occupied much with improvements which Butler had only begun, he was not idle in the administration of his diocese, and some fragmentary notices and returns of some of his visitations survive."* More than one building, as at St. John's, Sunderland, and at Esh, also Parkhurst's Hospital, remains to attest, at all events, some activity at the time. There is, however, no proof of any active sympathy manifested by the bishop for the rapidly deepening volume of the Wesleyan revival in all the chief centres of the county, and also in parts more inaccessible."8 At the beginning of Trevor's episcopate Wesley made a tour of some duration in the county, and at Gateshead drew together on Whit Sunday ' a huge congregation,' for he had already found in the pitmen listeners as sympathetic as those he had known at Kingswood."* He returned to the county in 1755, and again in 1757. On the latter occasion he preached in Durham ' in a pleasant meadow near the river side,' identified not improbably with the Sands below the city.'" The congregation was large, and many of them he noticed as wild in appearance. As he crossed the Tees and reached Yarm on his way south he summed up his impressions : ' I find in all these parts a solid serious people quite simple of heart, strangers to various opinions, and seeking only the faith that worketh by love.''! Two prebendaries of some importance were promoted by Bishop Trevor — Dr. William Warburton and Dr. Robert Lowth. The disuse of the ** He quoted three or four writers who had lived in the earlier years of the eighteenth century. Buxler, in ill-health, left the diocese for Bath a few months after his charge was given. *" See the handy edition of Wesley's Journ. in ' Everyman's Library,' 4 vols. " Ibid, ii, 195. •" Ibid. 225. •" Ibid. 228. "' Ibid. *" Visitation returns for Dur. City 1754 ; cf. Surtees, Hilt. Dur. iv, 165. A visitation of 1770 is referred to in Hutchinson, Hist. Dur. \, 726. For the chapel at Esh, Surtees op. cit. i, 337 ; Sunderland, ibid. 254 ; Parkhurst's Hospital, ibid, iv, 391. *" Wesley's Jour*. 414 He says, ' They shame the colliers of Kingswood, flocking from all parts on the week-days as well as the Sundays,' ibid, iii, 211. " Ibid, under 4 July, 1757 ; cf. ii, 461. " Ibid, ii, 383. 2 65 9 A HISTORY OF DURHAM famous Durham copes which are said to have been worn in the cathedral according to the terms of the canons of 1 604 is ascribed to Warburton.537 His residence at Durham was the least productive period of his life, until his promotion to the see of Gloucester. Lowth appears to have written some of his later works either at Sedgefield, where he was rector, or at Durham. In these two eminent men the bishop carried on the tradition of promoting learned divines from without to Durham prebends, but generally speaking the dignified clergy were not at this time conspicuous for learning. There seems to be no means of estimating correctly the general standard of piety and efficiency reached by the contemporary local clergy. Wesley says of South Shields in 1761 : Why is there not here, as in every parish in England, a particular minister who takes care of all their souls ? There is one here who takes charge of all their souls ; what care of them he takes is another question.638 It is said that some of them opposed his work, whilst others, as at Whick- ham, were glad for him to address their people.639 One interesting con- temporary proof of a widening interest in clergy and people is the great success which attended a tour made by an ordained Indian to solicit help for work amongst the tribes of the north-west.640 The societies founded by Wesley and his helpers in the county of Durham continued to flourish during the episcopate of Egerton (1771-87) and of Thurlow (1787—91). Wesley's own visits were perhaps less frequent, but he came to the north at intervals until 1790. He says of Darlington in 1777, 'I have not lately found so lively a work in any part of England as here.' 6" But his labours were not confined to the towns ; in Weardale the efforts he had made in previous years were now producing a considerable result, and particularly among the children. A tour of 1772 is fully described by him, in which some account of the people of the district is given. He does not seem to have reached the upper parts of Teesdale, but the embrace of his journeyings through the county is prodigious. The last, or almost the last, notice of Wesley's work in the county is as follows : I preached a charity sermon in Monk Wearmouth Church, for the Sunday School, which had already cleared the streets of all the children that used to play there on a Sunday from morning to evening.642 The abiding result of the influence of the societies upon the county must have been very considerable, and one proof of its permanence on the material side is to be found in the large number of trust deeds connected with the various Wesleyan societies between 1736 and i836.648 In the return made from the Close Rolls 63 such deeds are credited to the Methodists, and 37 only to the Church of England.6*4 Other causes, so far as property goes, were not strongly represented during the period named, for the Independents claim 8, the Romanists I, Presbyterians I, the Baptists 5. 537 There is at Auckland Castle a MS. account of the prebendaries of Durham in the time of Warburton. For the copes see Low, Diocesan Hist, of Dur. 314. 638 Wesley's Journ. iii, 60. M9 See Low's account (as above), 302. 440 Sykes, Local Rec. i, 263. 441 Wesley's Journ. iii, 473, &c. M Ibid, iv, 504. 543 The returns are given in the Dtp. Keeper's Rep. xxxii, App. ii. One deed may include various buildings and lands. 414 For the further progress of Wesleyanism see below, p. 70. 66 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY It is curious how little can be recovered as to the period represented by the episcopates of Egerton and Thurlow. The former was one of the most popular of Durham bishops, and if his rule yields few traces of church extension or administrative energy, a picture of the courtly and amiable prelate was handed down, in which he appears as a peacemaker whose delight it was to reconcile contending parties and interests.1" He made him- self popular in the county by his long summer residences and his bountiful hospitality at Auckland. At Durham he recovered something of the lost prestige of the bishops in the city by restoring the charter which had been suspended for some years. A stronger character or a more statesmanlike bishop would in all probability have done incalculable harm at a time when the long Whig ascendancy was breaking up and party politics were absorbing the attention of the gentlemen of the county. It seems to have been feared that the question of Roman Catholic relief and the Gordon riots in 1780 would find more than an echo in the north. Major Floyd was accordingly sent down in that year to test the state of feeling. His report gives an interesting view not only of the groundlessness of the fears referred to, but, so far as the city of Durham is concerned, of the general relations of religious parties. He says, writing from Durham : — All is quiet in the country. Newcastle is only thirteen miles off: a very large place and full of colliers, mightily disposed to be troublesome, but at present they are quiet. They have five companies of the loth Foot among them. Sunderland is a very populous place, thirteen miles from here. A squadron of our regiment is there. All quiet. There are prodigious numbers of Catholics in and about this town [Durham]. The street I lodge in is almost all Catholic. The people of this house, too, are Catholics. This place is very large, but not populous, being prodigiously over-run with clergy, who in all countries take up a great deal more room than they ought, and eat out the industrious and useful. The chief good I know of the clergy here is that they are quiet, and the populace is too inconsiderable to be an object of terror to the Catholics.64* The words harmonize with the general impression of respectable religious apathy and dulness which a survey of the bishopric at this time leaves on the mind so far as existing records survive."7 The really energetic religious force was the societies of John Wesley to which reference has been made. The Baptist churches, never considerable though often vigorous, had been passing through a period of stagnation and decay, and were just beginning to revive under the leadership of a minister called Whitfield, who rallied the cause at Hamsterley with much fervour.'48 The Calvinistic controversy which had elsewhere paralysed the progress of the evangelical revival greatly impeded the work of the Baptist community and divided their churches."9 M See the account given by Hutchinson, Hist. Dur. iii, p. zi. ** A/SS. of the Earl of Pembroke (Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. ut, App. ii), 383. 447 It may be worth while to quote in illustration of the religious conventionalism of the time the follow- ing extract from a private letter dated Newcastle, Nov. 1760: ' Mr. Montague is gone to-day to attend Mr. Bowes" funeral, which according to the custom of this country is to be magnificent. There is more pomp at their funerals than weddings.' Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. xiii, App. iii, 140. *" The account is given in Hist, of the Northern Baptist Churches. In 1740 there was much complaint at the annual meeting of the decrease of piety and of members. Differences between the minister and the people prevailed (p. 154). Whitfield, a Weardale man, had been a convert of Wesley, but turning Baptist became a real power in his native county and outside it in frequent journeys and conferences (pp. 201, 214). He had the reputation of considerable Hebrew learning (p. 264). He died in 1797. "* Ibid. 170. See too the estimate of the condition of religion in and out of the Church of England about 1770. Ibid. 200 : The writer is inclined to minimize the activity of all religious bodies at that time. The Presbyterians, thoroughly Scottish in their affinities, were a prey to the Modcratism which then characterized the Church in Scotland. The Independents were not numerous, and were not remarkable for piety or activity. 67 A HISTORY OF DURHAM It was in Bishop Egerton's time that the dean and chapter of Durham Cathedral ordered a survey of the building. This revealed a condition of such insecurity and rapid decay that repairs were begun in 1776, which pro- ceeded with little intermission for many years to come at considerable annual expense.550 The period is otherwise remarkable as having witnessed the last instances of public penance which have been recorded by tradition.661 Bishop Thurlow presided over the see for only four years (1787-91), having won his way to Durham through the good offices of his brother, the Lord Chancellor. He seems to have carried on the easy-going and hospitable traditions of his two predecessors, but nothing that illustrates the church history of his episcopate has been preserved. The one fact that the centenary of the landing of William III was celebrated in all the large towns of the county without riot or disorder goes to prove that the violence of religious dissension had entirely died out at this time, and testifies to the truth of Major Floyd's observations as quoted above. With Bishop Barrington (1791-1826) we reach a period which some of the oldest inhabitants of the county can just remember. It forms in several ways a connecting link with the still older generation that passed away with the eighteenth century, and a real point of transition from the old to the new. Bishop Barrington came to Durham in the critical days of the French Revolution. His charges reflect the excitement and unrest, both religious and political, which are characteristic of the years that followed. To meet what he considered to be the chief dangers which threatened England in consequence of the Revolution he addressed himself with great assiduity to a vigorous Protestant campaign and to the improvement of the clergy. Son of the first Viscount Barrington, he had inherited his father's strong Protestant feeling. His view was that the doctrines and practices of the Church of Rome were among the chief causes of the Revolution. To this he gave expression in various charges and sermons. At the same time he professed himself willing to grant Romanists ' every degree of toleration short of political power and establishment.' It was also characteristic of one of the most generous of men that he helped the emigrant bishops and clergy of France with money and hospitality. One or two of his tracts on the Roman question became standard treatises in the religious world, where they long maintained their popularity. As to his measures for the improvement of the clergy, he set himself to work to introduce into the diocese men of some prestige and position who might prove an elevating influence upon the rank and file of the clergy throughout the diocese. He brought Archdeacon Paley into the diocese in 1795, and made him rector of Bishopwearmouth, which was then worth at least >C3>5°° a year. Paley's Moral Philosophy, published in 1790, was already a Cambridge text-book, and his Evidences of Christianity was, in all probability, the immediate cause of his preferment by the bishop. Despite ill health in his new home Paley was able to complete his Natural Theology whilst rector of Bishopwearmouth. George Stanley Faber held more than one benefice by Barrington's collation, and 550 From Sykes's Loc. Rec. sub anno. 551 The tradition has been preserved in a footnote by Dr. Barmby, Surtees Soc. Publ. xcv, 1 60. Instances of penance in Durham in the reign of Queen Anne and long after are quoted above. A paper in Arch. del. ii, 59, refers incidentally to contemporary change in the cathedral ceremonies on 29 May. For the blowing in of the east window, ibid, vii, 131. 68 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY began his literary career in the vicarage of Long Newton near Stockton, returning to the diocese under Bishop Van Mildert, who made him master of Sherburn Hospital. Barrington was a munificent patron of Benjamin Kennicott who, at Oxford, was beginning the search for Hebrew MSS. of the Old Testament.1" The younger Kennicott was brought to Sunderland as rector by the bishop. Several prebends at Durham were given to men from other dioceses who afterwards became famous, as, for instance, Bathurst bishop of Norwich, Gray bishop of Bristol, Jenkinson bishop of St. Davids, Phillpotts bishop of Exeter, Sumner archbishop of Canterbury. Others promoted by him were Gaisford, afterwards dean of Christ Church, and, of those who remained long in the diocese to do excellent work in their different ways, Thorp first warden of the university, Gilly a canon and rector at Durham, and Townsend, still remembered for his edition of the Acts and Monuments of Foxe, and other works of a Protestant character. But a more direct influence on the younger clergy of the diocese was exercised by Barrington at the ordination seasons. It is often supposed that at the beginning of the nineteenth century examinations before ordination were a mere form, and that bishops accepted all candidates of competent learning. To Barrington, then, belongs the credit of having anticipated the stricter methods of later days. His charge of 1794 shows, in an appendix, the really well-chosen list of books which the newly-ordained were directed to read, and his exhortations in his various subsequent charges prove how high a standard of really useful theological learning they were expected to reach. He recurs to the subject in nearly every surviving charge. With the bishop's influence upon agriculture we are not here concerned, but mention must be made of the generous liberality which promoted the cause of good learning in the diocese, and still promotes it. The Barrington fund for 'promoting religious and Christian piety in the diocese of Durham' was the outcome of a successful lawsuit which he won on the question of certain leases of lead-mines which had lapsed through neglect. It may have been through emulation of the bishop's benefactions that the dean and chapter of his day set to work to bring the poorer livings in their gift up to £150"* a year, and this task they nearly accomplished before the formation of the Ecclesiastical Commission."* A very different action on the part of the dean and chapter concerns the fabric of the cathedral.6" External restoration had been in progress since 1776, as recorded above, and this consisted chiefly of a process of chipping and paring designed to obliterate the weathering of the stone. Wyatt, of notorious memory, was now called in, and not content with carrying on the same policy dictated still further destruction, which culminated in 1799 with the demolition of the chapter-house. About this time was founded the important Roman Catholic institution known as Ushaw College, the fuller name being St. Cuthbert's College, Ushaw."' Reference has already been made to the permanence of Roman » •*• See, for instance, his letter* in B.M. Add. MSS. 35129, No. 492. *" Such is the assertion of Van Mildert in his second charge, 1831, Sermont and Charges, 551. Canon Low in his Diocesan Hist. 316 says £300. *** See again below, p. 73. ** Carter's letters written in 1795 on the state of the cathedral fabric will be found in the Gent. Mag. (ist Ser.), Ixxi, 1092 ; buii, 30, 133, 228, 399, 494. "* For the history see Ushaw College — A Centenary Memorial, 1894. 69 A HISTORY OF DURHAM Catholicism in the county, and to its varying fortunes since the days of Elizabeth. The neighbourhood was a continuous stronghold of the cause, and several of the oldest families in the county are Romanist to this day. A Jesuit Mission had made the district a 'residence' since about 1590, with its head quarters in the city of Durham. The mission continued to work side by side with a secular mission until 1824. In its earliest days the mission had been reinforced from Douai and other seminaries. In 1793 the French Revolution drove away from Douai the English college founded there by Cardinal Allen in 1568. Despite an Act of 1791 which declared it illegal to found any Roman Catholic school or college, it was decided to found a new Douai in the north of England, not only as a nursery for the priesthood, but also as a public school for boys. Settled first for a brief interval at Tudhoe, under the Rev. John Lingard, after- wards famous as an historian and controversialist, and then in 1794 at Crook Hall, ten miles from Durham, the new institution was at length in 1808 transferred to the breezy heights of Ushaw, some four miles from Durham. Here the old Douai manner of life was followed, and is still followed after a century with great fidelity. Since the first establishment at Crook more than 900 priests have been trained in the college, and a large number of laymen, numbering in all over 3,000 who have shared the common life and work of the place have gone out into various walks of life.657 Towards the end of Barrington's episcopate a popular religious move- ment of some importance made its appearance in the county of Durham in the shape of Primitive Methodism.668 Like the ordinary Wesleyan Method- ism in all essentials, this new kind of Methodism, which had commenced its career in 1807, differed from it in the great use made of the camp meeting and in the prominence of the lay element in church organization. There can be little doubt that the opportunity which it gave to its humbler members to exercise any gift of prayer or preaching rendered it attractive to the miners of Durham. Its first preachers, Clowes and Branfoot and Laister, entered the bishopric in 1820 and i82i.559 Finding its converts at first amongst the older Wesleyans, the movement soon gathered out in every important town and in some country districts a rapidly-increasing band of adherents.660 These, in no few instances, were men of the humblest classes, whom the characteristic organ- ization of the society taught not merely religious principles, but social and in- dustrial improvement, as they learnt in their meetings to express their views and to band together for protection.661 The miners of those days were sub- ject to many disadvantages, and by degrees the men themselves formed unions to gain some kind of amelioration of their condition. Certainly a large chapter in the local history of the labour movement is connected with the Primitive 657 Nothing perhaps is more eloquent as to the changes that time brings than the fact that several Ushaw students are regularly matriculated undergraduates of the University of Durham, and come to and fro daily in term time to attend lectures under the shadow of the cathedral. 568 The story is well told in the Hist, of the Prim. Meth. Church, written by Rev. H. B. Kendall, a Durham graduate. 559 The exact dates are : Darlington, 1820 ; Sunderland, Weardale, South Shields, 1821 ; and Gateshead rather later. 660 In 1823 a considerable religious revival occurred in Weardale, which had previously been the scene of Wesley's efforts. 661 See Kendall's Hist, ut supra, ii, 186-188. 70 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY Methodists of Durham. It has been said by the historian of the Northum- berland and Durham miners that the earnest men who have been stigmatised 'Ranters' have been working out the social, intellectual, and moral improvement of the miners, and in this great reform they have been materially assisted by the temperance advocates who have from time to time laboured amongst the miners.8*1 On the death of Bishop Barrington kthe see was offered by Lord Liver- pool to Bishop Van Mildert, of Llandaff. The appointment was made at a moment when the dignified clergy, and indeed church institutions generally, were beginning to be the objects of a hostile criticism, which increased as the years went on."3 The announcement was received with mingled feelings — of surprise that Llandaff should prove a stepping stone to Durham, and elsewhere of satisfaction that the new bishop was an exception to the long list of prelates of distinguished family, and that he had neither sons nor nephews to promote."* Letters which survive sketch pretty vividly the early months of a bishop new to the county and engrossed by the multitude of engagements of all kinds which awaited him.6" The description will stand mutatis mutandis for an account of the first entrance into the diocese of any bishop of the eighteenth or early nineteenth century. The bishop's primary charge, delivered in 1827, gives expression to the anxiety which all churchmen then felt in regard to the growing disposition to ' wage war with established opinions, chiefly because they are established.' "* He considered the diocese to be ' in general well conditioned, and its pastors well disposed." "7 This somewhat optimistic im- pression was rather modified in the next years, so far as the diocesan organiza- tion was concerned. Van Mildert opposed the bill for the Emancipation of Roman Catholics, and beheld its triumph with feelings of considerable misgiving, if not of alarm."8 He did not, however, oppose the repeal of the Corporation and Test Acts, and in such an attitude to the two measures felt that he carried the diocese with him."9 In 1831, despite ill-health, the bishop gave his second charge shortly after the rejection of the original Reform Bill. Such a time of political exasperation was not a good opportunity for pastoral work.'70 He complains of the preoccupation of men's minds with the con- troversies of the day, and also he complains of the animosity and exaggeration which characterized the attack upon the Church. And yet substantial pro- gress had been made in the four years since the former charge : twenty-seven new schools had been added, and eighty-five united to the National Society. Various glebe-houses had been built, and fourteen churches or chapels had been erected, whilst eight others were proposed or in progress.'71 Increasing acquaintance with the diocese had displayed a great and increasing want of 40 Fyncs, The Miners ofNorthumb. and Dur. 182-3 — quoted by Kendall, op. cit. 187-8. A summary sup- posed to have been written by Mr. W. T. Stead in 1875, says, speaking of the early days of the movement : •The accounts published at the time concerning the results produced by their ministrations among the semi- savage colliers of the North remind us of the glowing narratives of the most successful missionaries.' Ibid. 188. ** Sermons and Charge t, 525. **4 Dur. County Advertiser, Feb. 1 8*6, quoting current London newspapers. •* ' Life ' (by Ives) prefixed to Sermons and Charges, 74-7. "* Sermons and Charges, 523. •"Ibid. 8 1. "Ibid. 94. "Ibid. 91, 541. *™ Ibid. 535. See also a sermon, 279, 'A sort of anti-pastoral spirit singularly characteristic of modern times continually undermines our best efforts.' " Ibid. 537. 7» A HISTORY OF DURHAM places of worship, which he proposed to remedy by erecting ' auxiliary chapels similar to those in ancient times called oratories.' Van Mildert hailed with satisfaction Archbishop Howley's bill to em- power deans and chapters, impropriators, and parochial incumbents to make voluntary acts of endowment, which eventually took shape in the Ecclesiastical Commission.673 Tradition ascribes to him the representations to the dean and chapter of Durham which induced them, after much deliberation, to con- template the founding of the university of Durham.673 Towards this scheme the bishop himself contributed first £1,000 and then £2,000 a year during his life, in addition to the annexation of prebends to certain professors, and the surrender of Durham Castle, which he had used with a hospitality more lavish than that of any prelate since Egerton.67* The institution of the university opened a new chapter in the history of education in the north of England at a time when, as yet, there was no rail- way communication with the south. It had an immediate effect upon the clergy of the north in general, and of Durham in particular, which has not been properly appreciated. The long distance of Durham from the older universities, and perhaps the wilder, bleaker character of the county, had brought it to pass that even when Van Mildert became bishop, men from Oxford and Cambridge were few, so that the clergy were largely non- graduate, and not merely non-graduate, but 'literate persons,' and without very definite preparation. Ten years before he came to Durham the Theological College at St. Bees in Cumberland had been founded in order to train men for the ministry in the diocese of Carlisle and elsewhere. Van Mildert determined to ordain no more literate persons, but to demand some course of training at St. Bees.676 The early archives of that college are too imperfect to enable us to trace its influence upon the diocese of Durham, which was probably considerable. The new university, whose graduates largely sought ordination, though not necessarily in the diocese of Durham, must before long have contributed a regular supply of duly equipped men for the clerical office. The university from its connexion with bishop, dean, and chapter was largely clerical, and of the four bachelors in arts who graduated in 1839 three were at once ordained. In 1846, of 224 M.A.'s on the books, 165 were ordained. Of a staff of twenty-four, all but five were in orders.676 The full course in arts and theology, which all were desired to take if possible, occupied five years. Provision was made by various scholarships for those who would probably become clergymen. Thus the Barrington trustees for some years gave scholarships to the sons of clergymen, and a theological scholarship was founded as a memorial to Van Mildert. The subjects of examination in arts comprised, as they always have at Durham, a large amount of theology. 671 Sermons and Charges, 550. *" Mr. James Raine, the elder, who was brother-in-law to Dean Peacock of Ely, used to say that the dean took the dean and chapter of Durham to task for being unwilling to make a move, and warned them of the consequence that their recalcitrance would probably bring to all capitular bodies. Evidence of the bishop's part in the matter will be found in the introduction to the early numbers of the Dur. Univ. Cat., also in the speech of the Warden at the first University Convocation in 1839 (Dur. Advertiser, June, 1839). The bishop, of course, made much of the generous action of the chapter, and scarcely mentioned his own part. Kt Sermons and Charges, 77. The letters quoted are now in B.M. Add. MSS. 34589, fol. 248-5 I. 575 See Van Mildert's charge of 1827, Sermons and Charges, 520. "6 The evidence for the figures given will be found in the Durham University Calendars for the years named. 72 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY There was, however, no test until the degree was reached, and the test was swept away in 1865. Bishop Van Mildert's last year was troubled by ill-health, and the prospects of radical changes in the church at large, and in the diocese of Durham in particular, which were due to the first report of the Ecclesiastical Commission published in 1835. When the bishop died in February, 1836, the dignities of the see, in the attenuated form which a second report now proposed, were offered to the Whig Bishop Maltby of Chichester (1836-56). The main idea of the second report, so far as Durham was concerned, was to appropriate episcopal and capitular revenues estimated to be in excess of the needs of the diocese itself, and to hand over the £40,000 so accruing to the work of the church in other dioceses. Seldom had the diocese been so much moved.'77 Meetings were held, and petitions flowed in from every consider- able town and village in the old bishopric. A vigorous correspondence in the local journal pointed out that the proposal was radically unjust, since there were in the county of Durham at least eleven benefices below £yo a year, twenty-eight under £100, sixty under £2OO> an^ seventy-nine under £300, and this notwithstanding the effort of bishop, dean, and chapter to improve the value of the poorer livings which had been in progress since the passing of the Augmentation Act of 1831."* Hard things were said in Parliament of the vast wealth of the diocese compared with the backwardness of the people in religion and in education. To such charges an effective reply was made by producing statistics of what had actually been achieved.17* It was pointed out that the Diocesan Society, instituted in 1812, maintained in a population of 250,000 some 309 schools with an aggregate of 23,428 scholars, and that of the total funds provided by the society nine-tenths were supplied by bishop, dean, and chapter, and the clergy generally. One writer asserted on the strength of such figures compared with government statistics that ' there are more children in proportion to the population under a course of instruction than in any other part of England save Westmorland and Rutland.' 58° Lord Londonderry was the chief champion of the diocese and its claims in the House of Lords, and strove hard to get a select committee to inquire further into local claims. Whilst this storm was in progress the bill to separate the palatine juris- diction from the bishopric was introduced into Parliament and was carried without special difficulty."1 The diocese was lukewarm to this proposal, and the flood of petitions do not seem to have had it in view. The palatinate power had long ceased to be really popular, and found few defenders. Nevertheless its transfer to the king marked the extinction of one of the most interesting anomalies in English history. Thanks to the petitions, the Act which was passed in August, 1836, to give effect to the reports of the commissioners recognized the intentions of Bishop Van Mildert, and provided for the augmentation of certain benefices *" The Dur. Advertiser of 2 5 March, 1836, contains the following extract quoted from the liberal SunJerland UeraU. ' We have to call the attention of our readers to the intended appropriation of a considerable pro- portion of the revenues of the See of Durham for the benefit of the poor dioceses. We understand that Dr. Maltby, the new Bishop of Durham, is to have £8,000 per annum, and that the remainder of the large revenue is to be diverted into a channel altogether foreign.' The reference is to the second report. "' See the Dur. Advertiser, i July, 1836. The Augmentation Act is I and z Will. IV, cap. 45. *" Ibid. 8 April. *° Ibid. 6 May. '" See Lap.ley, Palatinate of Dur. 204. 2 73 10 A HISTORY OF DURHAM in the diocese.'82 The Act swept into the coffers of the permanent com- mission now erected by it all the episcopal revenues in excess of the £8,000 assigned to the bishop, and further annexed under the powers given to it the episcopal estates.683 The lands and funds of the dean and chapter were untouched for some years to come, until the Act of 1840, which suspended six canonnes.584 Bishop Maltby succeeded to the diminished external prestige of the see without real regret. ' I can no longer,' he said, * exercise the large hospitality, nor what is more important, the unbounded beneficence which marked the career of my predecessors. ... I relinquish secular power without any regret.'686 His appointment was greatly due to the hopes entertained of the influence so eminent a scholar was likely to exert upon the nascent university, and there can be no doubt that at a time when great pressure was being brought to bear upon government to widen the whole scope of the university and to throw it open to Dissenters, Maltby was able to keep the control of dean and chapter upon it, and he certainly proved a considerable benefactor to it.688 The more absorbing problem that faced the bishop was the enormous growth of population on the one hand, and on the other the diminished resources of the church. The population of the county proper was 239,256 in 1831, 307,963 in 1841, and the proportion of sittings was decreasing year by year. At the beginning of the century the church provided accommoda- tion for one person in 4-232, but in 1841 only one in 6'268. Church- building did not increase rapidly, though progress was made. It was a sore point with Durham people that the original understanding by which local claims were to receive some satisfaction was not fulfilled. As a result of this injustice church accommodation became more inadequate in the county of Durham and in Northumberland than in any other part of England. Eventually, but not until Bishop Maltby had resigned, a strong effort was made to compel the Ecclesiastical Commissioners to take a proper view of the claims of the diocese.687 This effort was too late to make up for arrears. The rapid multiplication of railways and collieries was filling the county with a huge rough population for whose social and spiritual welfare church machinery was imperative. The numbers had about doubled during the twenty years of Maltby's episcopate. The translation of his successor, Bishop Longley, who had pressed forward the question, left its further solution to Bishop Baring. He inaugurated a new fund which gave an energetic im- pulse to church-building, so that between 1871 and 1881 fifty parishes were added, a record which no decade has exceeded. The mediaeval see of Durham had remained untouched during all the vicissitudes recounted in these pages. It contained, of course, not merely the 681 6 and 7 Will. IV, cap. 77, supplemented as regards this point by an Order in Council dated 21 June, 1837, and a second dated 30 July, 1838. 4SS Sect. I, 41, 42 and 54. 84 The question was before Parliament for four years, and only received solution in the Act I and 2 Viet. cap. 30. The dean and chapter had already under the Act of 4 July, 1832 (2 and 3 Will. IV, cap. 19), conveyed to the university certain estates, and in 1841 canonries were assigned by an Order in Council to two professorships, the actual money and securities being handed over to the university in 1842. 685 Reported in Dur. Advertiser, Sept. 1836. 488 Account of Bishop Maltby, Gent. Mag. 1856 (2). 687 The figures and facts as set forth in the text are given in a charge of the Ven. Archdeacon Watkins of Durham in the Diocesan Mag. for Oct. 1884. 74 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY county of Durham, but the whole of Northumberland, save Hexhamshire, subject to York, and one or two stray districts in Yorkshire and in Cumber- land. North Durham had been stripped from the bishopric, though not from the see, in i844.'M Hexhamshire was added to the see in 1836, on the recommendation of the second report of the commissioners, and a new archdeaconry of Lindisfarne was carved out of Northumberland in 1842. A change more momentous than anything that had taken place in the history of the diocese was carried through by Bishop Lightfoot when the division first suggested in the reign of Edward VI was effected.689 This question had been constantly revived, and indeed was especially brought up by the Town Council of Newcastle in 1854, who desired to see it carried out, since ' the effective administration of the diocese had become impossible.' "° Dropped for the moment, however, it reappeared despite the objection constantly reiterated that the division would still further lower the prestige of the diocese. The nucleus of the endowment fund was given by Mr. T. Hedley in 1877, and the design was completed in i88i.691 Only second in impor- tance to this diminution of the see was the institution of a new archdeaconry of Auckland, preceded by a rearrangement of rural deaneries.8" From time immemorial the archdeaconry of Durham had been co-extensive with the county.198 Partly in it and partly in the rest of the old see was the old peculiar jurisdiction known as the Officially of the Archdeaconry.'9* It consisted of all those parishes which by ancient grant had been placed under the supervision of the prior and later of the dean. This curious exempt jurisdiction, consisting of thirty-nine parishes, was abolished in 1882. The ancient seven rural deaneries in the county were increased to eleven in 1880. *" Stat. 7 and 8 Vic. cap. 61. ** The whole story is best told by Bishop Lightfoot in his Charge of 1882. "Ibid. 8. "'Ibid. 10. "« Ibid. 15. ** For its history cf. ibid. 16-19. 181 See the Schedule, ibid. 103. 75 A HISTORY OF DURHAM APPENDIX ECCLESIASTICAL DIVISIONS OF THE COUNTT As part of the province of Bernicia, the district which was later to become the county of Durham came under the influence of Celtic Christianity and was included in the see of Lindisfarne, which, co-extensive with the province, was established by Oswald under St. Aidan in 63 5. 1 The work of Archbishop Theodore hardly affected the district,2 but after the Danish ravages of the latter part of the ninth century the seat of the great northern see was transferred from Lindisfarne to Chester le Street.3 Again, in 995, according to Symeon of Durham,4 in fear of a Danish raid the seat of the see was finally transferred to the newly-founded city of Durham, the self-chosen resting-place of St. Cuthbert's body. From this date until the taxation of Pope Nicholas of 1291 there is nothing to mark the pro- gress of the ecclesiastical organization of the county. The names and limits of the deaneries were fixed by 1291, and although those of the diocese included in the county are not given under a heading as within the archdeaconry of Durham, a footnote to the effect that the church of Easington was appropriated to the archdeacon of Durham proves that the archdeaconry was then in existence.5 There were five deaneries in the county, including altogether fifty-seven parishes, viz. : — THE DEANERY OF DURHAM, including the thirty-five parishes of Billingham, Boldon, Brancepeth, Castle Eden, Dalton le Dale, Durham St. Oswald, Durham St. Nicholas, Easington, Ed- mondbyers, Elwick Hall, Gateshead, Greatham, Hart, Hartlepool (chapel of), Hesleden, Hilton, Houghton, Jarrow, Kelloe, Merrington, Bishop Middleham, Pittington, Ryton, Seaham, Sedgefield, Stanhope, Stranton, Trimdon, Monkwearmouth, Bishopwearmouth, Washington, Whickham, Whitburn, Whitworth, Wolsingham. THE DEANERY OF AUCKLAND,6 including the parish of Auckland. THE DEANERY OF LANCHESTER, including the parish of Lanchester. THE DEANERY OF CHESTER LE STREET, including the parish of Chester le Street. THE DEANERY OF DARLINGTON, including the twenty parishes of Aycliffe, Cockfield, Coniscliffe, Darlington, Dinsdale, Egglescliffe, Elton, Gainford, Haughton, Heighington, Hurworth, Long Newton, Middleton in Teesdale, Middleton St. George, Norton, Redmarshall, Sockburn, Staindrop, Stainton le Street, Winston.7 On account of the system of arrangement of the Valor of 1535 as regards Durham, it is some- what difficult to gather clearly what the ecclesiastical divisions of the county were at that date. The parishes belonging in 1291 to the deanery of Durham are not grouped under the deanery, which is nowhere mentioned, while under the archdeaconry of Durham only the two churches Easington and Houghton, appropriated to the archdeacon, are given. The constitution of the three deaneries of Chester le Street, Auckland, and Darlington had considerably changed since 1291. Several parishes belonging to the deanery of Durham had been added to each, in several cases the rectory being attached to one deanery, the vicarage to another. 1 See ante, p. 2. ' Stubbs, Const. Hist. \, 246. 3 See ante, pp. 5-6. 4 Symeon of Durham, Of era (Rolls Sen), i, 78-83. * The archdeaconry of Northumberland, including that part of the diocese without the county of Durham, is given (Pope Nick. Tax. (Rec. Com.) 316-17), and in all probability both archdeaconries date from the general foundation of territorial archdeaconries after the Conquest (See Stubbs, Const. Hist. i, 255, »). At any rate, the archdeaconry of Durham existed before 1311 ; See Reg. Pa/at. Dunelm. (Rolls Ser.), i, 12. * The heading under the taxation of 1291 is 'Porciones de Aukland,' and the last entry in the group is 4 Vicar Ecclesie de Aucland,' to which a note is added, " Q ' dicitur Decanu' Aukelan' ' ; Pope Nich. Tax. (Rec. Com.), 315. Again, in the 'Nova Taxatio ' made in 1317-18, under a similar heading, 'Porciones de Aukland,' comes 'Decanatus de Aukland tax. etc.' (ibid. p. 329-330), clearly proving the existence of the deanery. The same evidence applies to the existence of the deaneries of Lanchester and Chester le Street. The three deaneries were undoubtedly in existence before 1311, and are constantly referred to in Kellawe's Register ; See Reg. Pa/at. Dunelm. (Rolls Ser.), i, 3, 21, 107, &c. 7 Pope Nich. Tax. (Rec. Com.), 315. 76 CL z -I y H (A) U _! O o LJ :=:• s=s sssicS sssssssss Q 1 2 i • • « < • J < (1 cn 1 ' va rO 4 V*3 § * 1 1 « 2 •cfl >O 2 ^^ .£ «O ^T^ 'D >O ^ § ^ r _ ^, 4 V) I S - HOUSES SIASTICU I • 0 L, tf) Q w y i a 0 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY LANCHESTER DEANERY remained unchanged. THE DEANERY OF CHESTER LE STREET now included the seventeen parishes of Boldon, Brancepeth, Chester le Street, Durham North Bailey, Durham South Bailey, Edmondbyers, Gateshead, Kimblesworth, Ryton, Stanhope, Washington, Bishopwearmouth, Whickham, Whitburn, Witton, Wolsingham. THE DEANERY OF AUCKLAND included the eleven parishes of Auckland, Aycliffe, Billingham (rectory), Gainford (rectory), Grindon, Hart and Hartlepool (rectory), Heighington (rectory), Merrington, Middleton in Teesdale, Seaham (rectory), Sedgefield. THE DEANERY OF DARLINGTON included the parishes of Bishopton, Cockfield, Coniscliffe, Darlington, Dinsdale, Egglescliffe, Elton, Elwick Hall, Gainford (vicarage), Houghton, Hur- worth, Bishop Middleham, Middleton St. George, Norton, Redmarshall, Sockburn, Staindrop, Stainton le Street, Stranton, Winston. In 1882 under the Act of 1878 the diocese of Durham was reconstituted, and being narrowed down to include only the county of Durham, with part of the parish of Sockburn (Yorkshire), was divided into the two archdeaconries of Durham and Auckland. THE ARCHDEACONRY OF DURHAM consists of eight deaneries as follows : — Jarrow, containing 23 parishes ; Chester le Street, containing 20 ; Gateshead, containing 1 5 ; Durham, containing 17 ; Houghton le Spring, containing 15 ; Wearmouth, containing 26 ; Easington, containing 2O ; Lanchester, containing 13. THE ARCHDEACONRY OF AUCKLAND consists of five deaneries, namely : — Auckland, containing 23 parishes; Stanhope, containing 16 ; Darlington, containing 28; Stockton, containing 16 ; Hartlepool, containing 15. 77 THE RELIGIOUS HOUSES OF DURHAM INTRODUCTION The great religious work carried on in the district now known as the county of Durham during the seventh and eighth centuries under the guidance of St. Aidan and his followers centred itself in the Saxon monas- teries at Wearmouth and Jarrow, and in the smaller foundations of St. Hieu and St. Hilda. These were the homes, not only of religion, but also of culture and civilization, and their history so far as it is known is full of interest. They were, however, almost completely swept away by the Danes in their repeated invasions, and for some two hundred and fifty years the monastic life almost ceased to exist in co. Durham. It was revived in 1073 by Aldwin, the Benedictine prior of Winch- combe ; and ten years later the great Benedictine abbey of St. Cuthbert was founded at Durham. Thenceforward that house dominated the entire bishopric. As early as 1239 the Franciscans penetrated to Durham, but they never attained to any degree of power or importance either there or at Hartlepool. An attempt made at the end of the twelfth century to introduce the Austin Canons resulted merely in the endowment of a cell to Durham at Finchale ; and it is doubtful whether the Austin Friars ever obtained a footing in the bishopric at all. Traces of the Dominicans are few and uncertain. The only independent houses that really flourished were the small Benedictine nunnery at Neasham, and the great hospitals under the bishop's immediate control. These latter were, considering the size of the county, very numerous, and some of them were wealthy. The enormous power and influence exercised by the monks of Durham were no doubt largely due, at all events in the first instance, to their possession of the remains of so eminent a saint as Cuthbert. As time went on this effect might very possibly have worn off, had it not been for the curious, or as it was then thought miraculous, preservation of the revered relics. When after intervals of many years, sometimes even of centuries, the coffin was opened and the saint's body discovered to be still intact, the impression of his unusual sanctity was naturally deepened ; and awe-struck worshippers hastened to pour their gifts at his shrine. So it came about that the temporal power of the monks increased until their possessions rivalled even those of the great prince-bishops themselves. It must, however, be said to their credit that they do not appear to have become nearly so worldly as the religious of some less famous houses ; and their worst enemies found very few charges to bring against them as to their life and character. 78 RELIGIOUS HOUSES The behaviour of the members of the collegiate churches was far less satisfactory. In spite of vigorous efforts at reformation on the part of Bishop Kellaw in the early fourteenth century, and of Bishop Langley a hundred years later, the canons neglected their duties, both spiritual and temporal, to a disgraceful extent. This was probably due to the fact that they were pluralists on a large scale, many of them holding five, six, or even ten ecclesiastical preferments in various parts of England. A striking feature of religious life in the county of Durham was the number of hermits, notably in the fourteenth century, who found a home there. At first, no doubt, their existence was wild and solitary enough ; but after a time it became a much more formal matter, and persons were admitted to the profession of an anchoret, and collated to their hermitages, just as in the case of any other order. In the time of Bishop Bek the Templars held lands, rents, &c., in Barnard Castle and Summerhouse, besides various places in the bishopric, but not in the county of Durham.1 In 1313 the pope directed an inquiry to be made as to what lands the Knights Hospitallers held in the Northern Pro- vince. The bishop of Durham replied that in his diocese they had nothing but the house of Chibburn in Northumberland.* The pope then commanded the bishop to hand over to the Hospitallers all possessions whatsoever lately belonging to the then dissolved order of the Templars in his diocese.8 Durham was rich in historians; Bede, Simeon, Reginald, Geoffrey of Coldingham, Robert of Graystanes, and William Chambre, were all inmates of one or other of her religious houses. SAXON MONASTERIES i THE MONASTERY OF t'on °^ Aidan and other learned men, established HARTLEPOOL a reSu'ar anc^ orderly monastic life at Hartlepool (Heorthu).6 It seems probable that she had The ancient monastery at Hartlepool was under her rule men as well as women ; Bede founded about A.D. 640 by Hieu, a native of speaks of male students in the monasteries of the Ireland, under the auspices of St. Aidan. Hieu Abbess Hilda,' and on the tombstones in the was the first of the saintly female recluses of little cemetery of Hartlepool Monastery, which Northumbria,1 and the first also of the specially were excavated early in the nineteenth century, gifted women whom St. Aidan placed in charge some names of men were found.8 of double religious houses for men and women.' Jn 655 King Oswi, in fulfilment of a vow Nothing is known of her parentage, but her made before the battle in which he defeated ability as organizer and administrator is vouched Penda, gave his daughter Elfleda, who had for by St. Aidan 's selection.1 barely completed her first year,' to be conse- After ruling the new monastery for a few crated to God in perpetual virginity,10 and sent years Hieu* retired in 649 to Tadcaster, and her to Hartlepool to the care of Hilda. Two was succeeded by Hilda,6 who, under the direc- years later (A.D. 657 or 658) Hilda, by Aidan's ' Reg. Ptlat. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), ii, 857-8. desire>H went ^'^/TuV^ h( i jbi(i j ,8_ -g_ so renowned as Whitby Abbey, and took 1 Close, '7 Ed'w. II, m. 16 Sched. This order was with her.18 repeated in 13*4 ; Close, 17 Edw. II, m. 7, 4. 1 Bede, Hilt. Ecclei. lib. iv, c. 23. * Ibid. ' Ibid. 'Arch. Aeriana,™,^. 'Ibid. ' Journ. of Brit. Arch. Assoc. i, 185; 4 Hieu has frequently been confused, by Leland Dur. i, z 1 2. (Coll. iii, 39) and subsequent writers, with S. Bega 'In Fitat Sanctorum it is stated that Elfleda was or Begu ; but there are strong reasons for thinking born in 654 and died in 713. that they were distinct persons ; see Arch. Aeliana, " Bede, Hist. Ecclet. lib. iii, c. 24. xvii, 202, note. " Matt. Paris, Cbrm. Maj. (Rolls Ser.), i, 302. 5 Bede, Hut. Eccles. lib. iv, c. 23. u Bede, Hist. Ecclti. lib. iii, c. 24. 79 A HISTORY OF DURHAM After her departure the monastery at Hartle- pool is heard of no more,13 but it is thought that it did not long survive. Such at least is the inference to be drawn from the discoveries made in the cemetery.14 This was apparently only some 20 yards in length, and in it were two rows of interments, all, with two exceptions, those of females, and all lying, in pagan fashion, north and south.16 The heads rested on pillow- stones, and the appearance of the teeth shows that these Christians lived on the same kind of food as the pagans in Kent. Some bone pins, a bone needle, and a few pieces of coloured glass were found, and the tombstones were adorned with crosses.16 2. ST. HILDA'S FIRST MONASTERY In the year 648 Hilda, being recalled from East Anglia to her own country by Bishop Aidan, received from him a hide of land l in the district north of the River Wear called Werhale or Wyrale, where for one year she led a monastic life with a very few companions ; 2 but Hieu relinquishing her charge 3 in 649, Hilda at once abandoned her small monastery, and repaired to Hartlepool, where she became abbess.4 The site of her first monastery is not known, but it is thought that it may have been at South Shields, where St. Hilda's church now stands.8 Churches in Northumbria were usually called after the saints who founded them, and certainly Hilda's name has clung with great pertinacity to this particular locality. The chapel there has always been called ' St. Hild's,' often with no other indication of locality ; and the name clings to the spot in other ways, e.g. in the case of the 'St. Hild's fish,' so-called from 1402 to 1734.* Moreover, Bede speaks definitely of a monastery on the south side of the Tyne, near the mouth of the river, as existing in 65 1 7 (i.e. only two years after St. Hilda left her 11 Arch, Aeliana, xvii, 205. In the 'Legend of St. Cuthbert' by R. Hegg (1626) the following passage occurs : ' Then [i.e. in A.D. 800] perished that famous emporium of Hartlepool, where the religious Hieu built a nunnery . . . whose ruins show how great she was in her glory.' "Ibid. 206. "Ibid. 16 Jcani. Brit. Arch. Assoc. i, 189. See fuller ac- count in V.C.H. Dur. \, ' Anglo-Saxon Remains.' 1 Arch. Aeliana, xvii, 203-4. 1 Bede, Hist. Eccles. lib. iv, c. xxiii. 3 See above, under Hartlepool. 4 Arch. AeKana, xvii, 203-4. ' Ibid, xix, 47-75. 6 Ibid. The above statement is peculiarly true of St. Hilda. Short as was her sojourn in Hartness, she has ever since been taken as the patron saint of Hartlepool (Surt. Hist. Dur. iii, 99, note C), and the same is equally the case at Whitby, with which she was connected for a longer period. 7 Bede, De Mirac. Sti. Cuthberti, i, 5 ; Vita Sti. Cuth- b*rti, iv, 214. establishment), and relates an anecdote of the brethren belonging to it. This same story occurs in a life of St. Cuthbert written about I45O,8 where the site is thus described : — ... We rede Be the telling of Saint Bede, How sometime was a monastery That eftir was a nonry [nunnery], Bot a litil fra Tynemouth. That mynster stode into the South, Whare Saint Hilde Chapel standcs nowe, Thar it stode some tyme trewe. Bede says the house was founded for men, but was afterwards changed, and filled with virgins only.9 By 686 this change had taken place, for in his final visitation of his diocese Bishop Cuthbert came to a monastery of virgins which, as has been shown above, was situated not far from the mouth of the River Tyne, where he was honourably welcomed by the religious, and, in a worldly sense, most noble handmaid of Christ, the Abbess Verca.10 An additional reason for thinking that this might well have been the site of St. Hilda's first house is afforded by the fact that it is thought to have been the birthplace of Oswin. n Nothing is known of the ultimate fate of this monastery, and no trace of it has been found. It was probably wholly or partially destroyed by the Danes.12 3. GATESHEAD HOUSE There appears to be no record of the founda- tion of this house, but it was in existence before A.D. 653.* At that time Uttan the priest, the brother of Adda, was abbot.2 He was an illus- trious presbyter, a man of great gravity and veracity, and on this account was honoured by all men, even by princes.3 Bede tells how Uttan was sent4 to Kent to bring thence a wife for King Oswi ; how before starting he asked the prayers of Bishop Aidan for himself and his people on their long journey ; and how Aidan 'Life of St. Cuthbert (Surt. Soc.), bk. ii, 11. 1 123-30. 9 Bede, Vita Sti. Cuthberti, iv, 214. St. Hilda was in other instances placed by St. Aidan in charge of mixed monasteries of men and women. 10 Ibid. 316. It was this same Verca who pre- sented him with the linen in which, at his own request, his body was wrapped after death ; ibid. 324, cf. Reginald of Durham, Libelhts (Surt. Soc.), 86. "Arch. Aeliana, xix, 47-75. "Ibid. 'Mr. Hodgson Hinde in the Gent. Mag. (1852 [2], p. 391) says: 'It seems probable that the monastery was founded in the episcopate of either Aidan or Finan, and was abandoned when Colm.in and his followers left Northumberland. A chapel (ecclesiola) existed in Gateshead in 1080, and was the scene of Bishop Walcher's murder ; this probably marked the site of the abandoned monastery.' * Bede, Hist. Eccles. lib. iii, c. 2 1 . 'Ibid. 4c. A.D. 651. 80 RELIGIOUS HOUSES foretold a great storm at sea, and gave him a flask of oil to pour on the waters, which when he had done the waves subsided. All which, says Bede, was told to a faithful priest of the church by Uttan himself.* This monastery, which had a chapel of its own, is said to have been a cell to St. Bartholomew's, Newcastle,* and to have paid an annual rent to it of 2s.7 Bourne says that Uttan's monastery stood where the present Gateshead House stands ; * but the tradition in Leland's time placed it where afterwards was the site of St. Edmund's Hospital.* 4. THE NUNNERY OF EBCHESTER The nunnery at Ebchester was founded in or before the year 660 by St. Ebba.10 She was the daughter of Ethclfrid, king of Northumbria, and was dedicated as a virgin by Finan, formerly bishop of Lindisfarne.11 With the help of her brother, King Oswi,u she built a monastery on the banks of the River Derwent in the bishopric of Durham,1* at the spot where the little village of Ebchester now stands.14 Ebba did not remain long to preside over her nuns, but was called to be abbess of Colding- ham, where she died in 683." The monastery, however, continued to flourish until the time of the Danish invasion, when it is said to have been utterly destroyed.18 5 AND 6. THE MONASTERIES OF WEARMOUTH AND JARROW The two foundations of Wearmouth and Jarrow were so closely connected in their early history that, to use the expression of Simeon of Durham, they seem to have been one monas- tery built upon two sites. They are several times mentioned in the singular number, as the monastery of St. Peter and St. Paul.1 To deal with them separately would involve so much repetition that it seems better to treat of the two under one heading. In the latter part of the seventh century Benedict Biscop, on arriving in England from 5 Bede, Hist. Eccles. lib. iii, c. 2 1 . 'Wallis, Northumb. ii, 207. ' Ibid, quoting a charter of temp. Hen. II, in which ' duos solidos de Gateshead ' are mentioned as part of the dues of St. Bartholomew'*. ' Hiit. of Newcastle, 1 66. '//»'». (2nd ed.), vii, 61. 10 Dugdale, Man. Angl. (ed. 1846), vi, 1618. " Cressy, Ch. Hist. lib. xviii, c. 14. 1 ' Vita S. Ebbe,' MS. Cott. Jul. 2. " Ibid. 14 Cressy, ut supra. Surtces, however (Hist. Dur. ii, 300), throws some doubt on the actual existence of the nunnery. " Ibid. '• Tanner, Notit. Mm. 1 See Simeon of Durham, Decem Scriptures (Twysd. col.), 4, &c. his third journey to Rome, went to the court of Egfrid, king of Northumbria. He there ex- hibited the relics and literary treasures he had acquired abroad, and found such favour in the king's eyes that Egfrid forthwith gave him 70 hides of land out of his own estates lying at the mouth of the River Wear. On this site Benedict, at the king's desire, established a monastery in the year 674.' Desiring to have everything of the best, he engaged masons from France to build a stone church, which he dedicated to St. Peter, and glass-workers from the same country to glaze the windows of the church, cloisters, and refectory. Within a year matters had progressed so far that Benedict was able to celebrate mass in the new building ; and, having laid down rules for the government of the monastery, he started on his fourth journey to Rome. On his return he brought back, amongst other treasures, a number of sacred pictures which he hung in the church to teach the truths of the gospel story to those who could not read. With him came John, arch-chanter of St. Peter's at Rome, to instruct the English monks in the Roman method of chanting, singing, and ministering in the church.1 At the request of King Egfrid Pope Agatho granted to Benedict a letter of privilege by which his monastery was for ever secured from all manner of foreign invasion.4 Delighted at the abbot's religious zeal, the king now gave him forty hides of land on the south side of the River Tyne. Here in 68 1 he began to build a monastery of St. Paul at Jarrow.1 While retaining the headship of both his monas- teries, which, in fact, formed but one institution,* Benedict made Ceolfrid abbot of Jarrow under himself, and when he left England on his fifth journey to Rome he placed Easterwin in charge of the house at Wearmouth.7 Ceolfrid arrived at Jarrow in the autumn of 68 1, with a band of twenty-two8 brethren (ten priests and twelve laymen) ; hastily put up the necessary buildings for their shelter, and began to train them in monastic discipline. Three years later he commenced the building of the church, the king himself marking out the site for the altar.9 The monks of Wearmouth and Jarrow took little or no part in political matters ; their history is marked by no very striking incidents ; and at first sight their twin monasteries may appear somewhat insignificant. They formed, never- theless, a very important factor in the history of the time ; and it would probably be difficult to Bede, Pit. Abbatum (ed. Stevenson), § 4. I^d. §§ 5-7. Mbid. §6. Ibid. § 7. Arch. At liana (New Ser.) x, 34. Bede, ut supra. Bede says 'about eighteen.' Canon Savage, in Arch. Aelsana, xxii, 33-4. 8l A HISTORY OF DURHAM over-estimate their influence. They, with one or two kindred institutions, were the chief homes not only of religion but also of civilization in the country.10 Benedict Biscop in effect set the standard of a new type of religious house. The chief monasteries tended now to become more and more self-centred. The pursuit of literature became an end in itself ; ' art and personal culture were developed.12 This could hardly have been the case had Benedict been unaided ; but he was singularly fortunate in his assistants. Easterwin, abbot of Wearmouth, was of noble birth. Although Benedict was his cousin, he neither expected nor received any distinction in the regimen of the monastic life, but underwent with pleasure the usual course of discipline. In 673, when only twenty-four years of age, he had passed from the king's court to the solitude of the recluse's cell. He was an inmate of Wear- mouth monastery almost if not quite from its foundation, taking his share in all domestic work. He was a young man of great strength, pleasant voice, handsome appearance, and kindly disposi- tion. After his promotion to the abbacy he still took his part in the indoor and outdoor labours of his brethren, eating and sleeping with them.13 In Ceolfrid, abbot of Jarrow, Benedict also found a sympathetic and efficient coadjutor. ' He was,' says Bede, ' a man of great perseverance and acute intellect, bold in action, experienced in judgement, and zealous in religion.' lj When Benedict returned from Rome in 685 he found that a terrible blow had fallen upon the twin monasteries. A pestilence had carried off many of the monks of Wearmouth, and with them their beloved abbot. The last five days before his death Easterwin had spent in a private chamber, from which on the last day of his life he came out and sat in the open air. He sent for all the monks and took tender leave of them, giving to each weeping brother the kiss of peace. He died on 7 March, 685." Jarrow had suffered even more severely. All who could read or preach or say the antiphons and responses had been swept away by the pesti- lence, except Ceolfrid himself and one little boy whom the abbot brought up and educated, and who afterwards became a priest in the monastery.16 10 Raine, Hist. Cb. of Turk (Rolls Ser.), i, p. xxix. 11 Arch. AeRana, xxi, 264. " Ibid. To York and Jarrow alone of English monasteries were addressed requests from abroad for books. " Bede, Vlt. Abbatum (ed. Stevenson), § 8. "Ibid. §15. "Ibid. §§ 9, 10. 16 Ibid. pref. pp. xii, xiii. As Bede entered the monastery at the age of seven in or about 6 8 1, and was brought up there [Sim. Dun. Hist. Reg. (Rolls Ser.), 29] he may very probably have been the boy who with Ceolfrid survived this visitation ; Arch. Aeliana xxn, 45. In addition to these disasters King Egfrid, the monks' generous patron and benefactor, was killed in battle, May, 685-17 After Easterwin's death the brethren at Wear- mouth consulted with Ceolfrid as to the choice of a successor, and finally elected the deacon Sigfrid, a man skilled in theology, of courteous manners and temperate life ; he had an incurable disease of the lungs, and his disposition was chastened and sweetened by suffering. When Benedict returned he found Sigfrid duly installed. Benedict brought with him books and pictures ; and also two palls of silk of incomparable work, with which he purchased from King Aldfrid three hides of land on the south bank of the River Wear near its mouth.18 Soon after this Benedict was seized with paralysis of the lower limbs. In the three years during which he lingered in partial helplessness he gave many directions as to the conduct of his monasteries after his death, taking counsel with Abbot Sigfrid, whose end was also approaching, as to their government. He urged the brethren frequently and earnestly in making choice of an abbot to seek rather after probity of life and doctrine than after exalted birth, and desired that their selection should fall upon one of their own number. His wishes were obeyed ; when Sigfrid passed away, 22 August, 688, Ceolfrid was made abbot of both monasteries. Benedict died in the following January, and was buried in St. Peter's, Wearmouth.19 For nearly twenty-seven years Ceolfrid ruled over Wearmouth and Jarrow. During that time he built several oratories, increased the number of the vessels and ornaments of the church, and doubled the number of books in the monastic library. He received from King Aldfrid eight hides of land near the River Fresca, in exchange for a beautiful codex work on cosmo- graphy. Afterwards he paid more and received, instead, twenty hides of land in a village called Sambuce, nearer the monastery.20 He obtained from Pope Sergius a bull of protection for Jarrow.21 His work must have been arduous, for at the time of his resignation there were nearly six hundred brethren in the two monasteries,22 each of which seems to have had two churches.23 In June, 715, finding age and infirmity creep- ing upon him, Ceolfrid announced his intention of going to Rome to die there. The brethren begged him on their knees not to forsake them, "Arch. Aeliana (New Sen), xi, 35. 18 Bede, Vlt. Abbatum (ed. Stevenson), § 9. 19 Ibid. § 14. *° Ibid. §15; both sites are now unknown. 11 Printed in Wilkins' Condi, i, 63. " Bede, ut supra, § 18. 13 Arch. AeRana, xxii, 43. While Ceolfrid was abbot Witmer gave to Wearmouth monastery ten hides of land in the vill of Daldon. [See Feod. Prior. Dunelm. 121.] 82 RELIGIOUS HOUSES but he remained firm in his determination. Early in the morning of Thursday, 4 June, all received the Holy Eucharist in the churches of St. Mary and St. Peter at Wearmouth, and the Abbot prepared for his journey. Having prayed before the altar in St. Peter's, he blessed and censed the assembled brethren. Singing the Litany, their voices choked with tears, they went into the oratory of St. Lawrence, and there Ceolfrid bade them farewell, giving them his pardon for all transgressions, and asking their forgiveness and prayers for himself. Then they all went down to the shore, and the brethren knelt round him weeping, while he prayed and gave them the kiss of peace. The deacons of the church, carrying lighted tapers and a golden cross, entered the vessel with him. He passed over the stream, knelt in adoration before the cross, mounted his horse and rode away.*1 Huetbert was chosen abbot in his place. With some of the brethren he went at once to Ceolfrid, who had not yet embarked, and on Whitsunday, 7 June, received his approval and blessing. Ceol- frid never reached Rome, but died at Langres, 25 September, 715, aged seventy-four." Huetbert had been trained in the monastery from boyhood, and had been to Rome, where he had learned and copied everything which he thought useful or worthy to be brought away.86 He is said to have gained many privileges for the monastery. He took up the bones of Easterwin and Sigfrid and buried them in one coffin, divided by a partition, inside St. Peter's Church, near the grave of Biscop.*7 During his abbacy the arts of writing and illuminating were pursued by the monks, and they began to be noted also for bell-founding and metal-work.18 In 735 Bede died at Jarrow in his sixty-third year, and was buried there.*' His life from early childhood had been passed in the monastery, and the monks were constantly employed in making copies of his writings to be sent to distant lands. In a letter written in 764 to Lul, bishop of Maintz, Cuthbert, then abbot of Wearmouth and Jarrow, acknowledged the receipt of a request from the bishop for copies of Bede's works. He said he was sending the ' Life of St. Cuthbert' in prose and verse ; he and his boys had done their best, but the bitter cold of the winter had so benumbed their hands that they had no more to send at present. He thanked the bishop for the gift of an embroidered rug ; it had been intended for his own use in the cold weather, but he had with great joy devoted it for a covering for the altar in St. Paul's Church, as a thankoffering for his forty-six years in the monastery. " Bede, Vit. Abbatum (ed. Stevenson), §§ 17-18. B Ibid, ft 1 8, 21-3 ; Raine, Hut. Ch. of York (Rolls Ser.), i, 387. * Bede, ut lufra, § 1 8. " Ibid. § 20. " Monumenta Moguntina, Epp. 61-2, 100. * Sim. Hist. Ecclei. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), 41-2. Abbot Cuthbert mentioned twenty knives, a bell, and some books which had been previously sent from Jarrow to the bishop, and asked him to send over a glass-worker, as the monks had forgotten the art taught by Benedict's foreign workmen.30 Amongst the letters of Alcuin " are two congratulating Ethel bald and Fridwin respec- tively on their several elections to the abbacy of the twin monasteries, but there is nothing to indicate the order or exact dates of their succes- sion.3' In another letter Alcuin told the monks of Wearmoutlj that all he saw whilst with them M of their domestic arrangements and manner of life pleased him exceedingly ; ** but on yet another occasion he urged them to pay closer attention to the training of the boys in their charge, to educate them for teachers, and not to let them waste their time in hunting hares and foxes." In 7 94 the house at Jarrow was attacked and pillaged by the Danes, who, however, lost their leader and were defeated." Nearly a hundred years later both monasteries were devastated by the same savage foes,*7 and from that time until the Norman Conquest they were represented by churches, grievously despoiled indeed, but not wholly ruinous nor deserted. The priest Alfred of Westoe had attended the commemoration of Bede's festival at Jarrow regularly for some years before, in 1022, he succeeded in carrying off the saint's bones by stealth to Durham,58 and it is thought that though no restoration of the monas- tery buildings had taken place since the Danish invasion, some part of St. Peter's Church had been so far repaired as to be usable by the inhabitants of the country round." This theory is borne out by the fact that in 1069, when Bishop Ethelwin and his companions fled from Durham to Lindisfarne with the body of St. Cuthbert, they found shelter on the first night of their journey in St. Paul's Church,40 and in 1070 English fugitives took refuge at Wearmouth.41 In the former of these years King William attacked and fired the church at Jarrow ; u and in the latter year Malcolm, king of Scotland, in a raid, burnt down St. Peter's, ' himself looking on.'43 w Monumenta Moguntina, (ed. Jaffe), Ep. 1 34. 11 Lived 735-804. ™ Monumenta Akuiniana, Epp. 272-3. " Probably before 780 ; see Diet. Nat. Biog. i, 239. " Monumenta Akuiniana, Ep. 274. u Ibid. Ep. 27. * Sim. Hist. Ecclet. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), 56 ; AngL- Sax. Chron. (Rolls Ser.), ii, 49 ; see Arch. Aeliana, (New Ser.), x, 203-4. " Matt. Paris, Cbron. Maj. (Rolls Ser.), i, 393. ** Sim. Hut. Ecclei. Dun. c. xlii. " Arch. Aeliana (New Ser.), xi, 43-4. <0 Sim. Hut, Eccles. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), 100. 41 Hovedcn, Cbrmica (Rolls Ser.), i, 121. 0 Sim. Dun. Hist. Cant. (Surt. Soc.), 85. 0 Serif t. Tres. App. ccccxxiv. A HISTORY OF DURHAM Some three or four years later a priest named Aldwin, prior of Winchcombe, conceived a desire to visit the northern monasteries. Coming to the abbey at Evesham he was joined by two companions, Elfwin and Reinfrid. They travelled forward on foot, taking only an ass to carry the books and vestments they needed for the cele- bration of divine service. They settled at New- castle [Monkchester], within the bishopric of Durham, but under the jurisdiction of the earl of Northumberland. Before long Walcher, bishop of Durham, sent to them, asking them to come and live where they would* be under the immediate control of holy church. They acceded to his request, and he received them with great joy, giving them as a place of residence the monastery at Jarrow, of which only the roofless walls were then standing. Roofing it with un- trimmed beams and thatch, the monks began to celebrate divine service there, and built for themselves a little hut. The fame of their as- cetic life soon spread, and many abandoned the world and joined them. Bishop Walcher rejoiced greatly at the revival of monasticism, and to help the monks in the work of restoration and rebuilding gave them the vill of Jarrow with its dependencies, viz. Preston, Monkton, Hedworth, Hebburn, Westoe, and Harton.44 Waltheof, earl of Northumberland, bestowed on them the church of St. Mary at Tynemouth, with the body of St. Oswald which rested therein, and all lands, &c., belonging thereto.4* After a time Aldwin, desiring to revive other monasteries, left Elfwin in charge at Jarrow, went north accompanied by Turgot, and settled at Melrose. The bishop entreated them to return, and finally threatened them with excom- munication if they refused. In the end they obeyed, and Walcher gave them St. Peter's monastery at Wearmouth, which was then totally ruined. Here they erected huts of boughs and taught the people, and here Turgot received the habit. They cleared away the trees and undergrowth from the ruins and rebuilt the church. Others soon joined them, and, inspired by their example, embraced the monastic life with fervour. Bishop Walcher frequently visited them, in- vited them to his councils, and generously assisted them. He intended to have joined their order, and to have established them in a permanent home near St. Cuthbert's tomb. With this object in view he laid the foundations of the monastic buildings at Durham.46 But in May, 1080, he was murdered at Gateshead. The monks of Jarrow sailed up the Tyne and received into their little vessel the mutilated body of their friend and patron. They conveyed his remains 41 Sim. Hist.Eccles, Dun. (Rolls Ser.), 108-10. 43 Script. Tres. App. xviii. 46 Sim. Hist. Eccles. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), 112-13. 84 to their monastery, whence they were afterwards removed to Durham.47 Three years later Bishop William, anxious to find suitable inmates for the house at Durham, selected the brethren of Wearmouth and Jarrow, then twenty-three in number, as being the only regular monks in the diocese,48 and removed them to Durham, where Aldwin became the first prior.49 With them came Simeon the his- torian, who had been for some time at Jarrow,60 but was probably not yet a professed monk.61 In explanation of this transference Bishop William represented to the pope that the size of his diocese did not admit of the existence of three monasteries,62 but this does not seem a very adequate reason. From this time until the dissolution Wear- mouth and Jarrow remained cells under Durham, inhabited only by a few monks, and occasionally used as a retreat by the priors of St. Cuthbert after their resignation.63 The history of Wear- mouth consists chiefly of disputes and litigation with the powerful barons of Hilton, relative to burial rights and to contested claims to tithes and offerings.64 In 1 144 William Cumin the younger attacked the bishop of Durham at Jarrow, but Aldwin's walls proved strong enough to resist his on- slaught.66 A contest took place early in the fourteenth century between the prior of Durham and the archdeacons of Durham and Northumberland, about the jurisdiction of dependent churches belonging to the abbey. Wearmouth and Jarrow were reserved to the prior, who had always exercised archidiaconal control over them.66 In 1394 Jarrow was granted to ex-Prior Robert of Walworth in lieu of Finchale. If he were disturbed by a Scottish invasion he was to have Coldingham instead.67 Both cells were dissolved amongst the smaller monasteries in I536.68 The annual value of Jarrow is given by Dugdale as £38 14*. 4^., and by Speed as £40 Js. %d. ; and that of Wear- mouth by Dugdale as £25 8j. 4^., and by Speed as j£26 9*. <)d. Wearmouth was granted to Thomas Whitehead,68 and Jarrow to William Lord Eure.60 "Ibid. 116-17. 48 Arch. Aeliana, xxii, 51. 49 Sim. Hist. Eccles. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), 122-3. 60 See Sim. Hist. Reg. (Rolls Ser.), 260. 51 See Sim. Hist. Eccles. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), Introd. xii. ™ Arch. Aeliana, xx, 53. " Ibid, x, 208-9. 64 Surt. Hist. Dur. ii, 7, 38. Full details of these quarrels are given in Inventories and Account Rolls of Wearmouth and Jarrow (Surt. Soc.), App. 240-7. 65 Sim. Dun. Hist. Cont. § 6. 66 Graystanes, Historia (Surt. Soc.), 103-10. " Script. Tres. (Surt. Soc.), App. clxxiv-v. M Invent, and Acct. Rolls (Surt. Soc.), xxv. 59 Pat. 1 8 June, 37 Hen. VIII. 60 Dugdale, Man. Angl. (ed. 1846), i, 503. RELIGIOUS HOUSES ABBOTS OF WEARMOUTH AND JARROW n Benedict Biscop, 674 ; d. January, 689—90 Easterwin (Wearmouth), app. 68 1, d. 685 Ceolfrid (Jarrow), app. 68 1 ; (from 689, both houses) ; res. 715 Sigfrid (Wearmouth), app. 685 ; d. 689 Huetbert (both houses), elected 7 1 5 Cuthbert (both houses), occ. 764 Ethelbald, between 764 and 804 Fridwin, between 764 and 804 Aldwin (Jarrow), 1074 ; (Wearmouth), 1075; removed to Durham, 1083 Elfwin, app. c. 1075 ; removed to Durham, 1083 MASTERS OF JARROW " Ralph of Midelham, occ. before 1303 Thomas de Castro, procurator, 1313 William of Harton, 1313 William of Thirsk (Treks), 1313 Geoffrey of Haxeby, 1313 William of Harton, 1314 Robert of Durham, 1321 Emeric de Lumley, 1326 Alexander of Lamesley, 1333 Emeric de Lumley, 1338 John of Beverley, 1340 Thomas de Graystanes, 1344 John of Goldisburgh, 1350 John of Norton, 135 — Richard of Bikerton, 1355 John of Goldisburgh, 1357 John Abell, 1358 John of Elwick, 1363 Richard of Segbroke, John ofTikhill, 1367 John of Bolton, 1369 John de Lumley, 1370 Williar.1 Vavasour, 1373 John Je Lumley, 1376 Thomas Legat, 1381 Wsdter of Teesdale, 1402 Thomas of Lyth, app. 3 October, 1408 Walter of Teesdale, app. 1410 Robert of Masham, 1411 John Moreby, 1415 Robert Masham, 1417 William Graystanes, 1419 John Moreby, 1422 Thomas Moreby, 1424 John Durham the younger, 1431 John Barlay, app. 15 April, 1443 " For references, see above. * Invent, and Acct. Rolls (Surt. Soc.), xiv-xvi. The names are taken in almost every case from the yearly account rolls. John Mody, sacr. pag. prof., app. I Septem- ber, 1446 John Bradebery, app. 2 April, 1452 Thomas Warde, app. 1457 Thomas Hexham, app. 23 July, 1467 Richard Wrake, app. 28 May, 1476 Robert Werdale, app. 10 November, 1477 Robert Knowt, 1479 Robert Billingham, 1480 John Swan, 1489 Robert Billingham, 1493 John Hamsterley, app. 31 May, 1495 Henry Dalton, 1500 John Danby, 1503 William Hawkwell, 1517 John Swalwell, 1531 MASTERS OF WEARMOUTH M Robert of Durham, 1321 Alan of Marlon, 1337 Hugh of Wodeburn, 1343 John of Neuton, 1349 John of Shafto, 1360 Richard of Bekyngham, 1 360 John of Neuton, 1 367 John of Bishopton, 1369 JohnAklyff, 1387 Thomas Launcells, 1388 Thomas Legat, 1395 William of Cawood, 1399 John of Hutton, 1400 John Repon, app. 14 June, 1409 Thomas of Witton, app. 17 June, 1413 Thomas Moreby, 1425 Robert Moreby, 1430 William Lyham, app. 14 June, 1435 Thomas Bradebery, 1446 John Midelham, 1452 Richard Blakburn, 1456 John Bradbery, app. 1458 John Auckland, 1466 Richard Wrake, app. 5 May, 1470 ; recalled, 29 May, 1471 Robert West, app. 29 May, 1471 William Cuthbert, 1482 William Chambre," 1486 William Cauthorne, 1490 William Cuthbert, app. 1491 Richard Evenwood, app. 1497 Henry Dalton, app. 24 May, 1501 Robert Stroder, app. 1506 Richard Evenwood, app. 31 May, 1513 John Swalwell, 1526 Richard Heryngton, 1533 ** Invent, and Acct. Rolls (Surt. Soc.), xviii-iii. Names taken from the account rolls. * The historian. A HISTORY OF DURHAM HOUSES OF BENEDICTINE MONKS 7. THE PRIORY OF ST. CUTHBERT, DURHAM The Benedictine Priory of St. Cuthbert at Durham was founded by Bishop William of St. Carileph in ic^.1 From the time when Bishop Aldwin in 995 brought the body of St. Cuthbert from Chester-le-Street and built ' the White Church on Dunholme ' for its re- ception,2 divine worship had been maintained there, and the church served by a body of secular clergy to whom generous gifts of lands, &c., had been made by Cnut and other benefactors.3 These secular canons, with their wives and children,4 were driven out by Bishop William, and replaced by the monks of the newly restored monasteries of Wearmouth and Jarrow.6 To this course, in which he was supported by both papal and royal authority, the bishop was moved by the appalling state of desolation to which his diocese had been reduced. Three times during the previous fourteen years it had been deluged with blood and fire. The few inhabitants who survived were in a state of penury ; the country lay wild and waste ; and even the church itself was plundered and neglected. The bishop, anxious for the restoration alike of religion and of civilization in his diocese, and finding on inquiry that St. Cuthbert, whether living or dead, had ever been served by monks, determined to found a monastery in the place where the saint's body lay ; and in the end carried out his design, though not without some remonstrance from the ejected canons, only one of whom could be induced to take the monastic vows and remain in his former home. The lands of the church were divided between the bishopric and the monastery. Aldwin, prior of Wearmouth, the restorer of monasticism in northern England, became the first prior of Durham, and on his death in 1087 was suc- ceeded by Turgot.8 In the following year Bishop William was banished by the king, and dwelt for three years in Normandy. During this period the monks lived under the king's protection and went on with the building of their house, completing the refectory. At length the bishop returned, bringing with him numerous gold and silver vessels, and a store of books for the church. Not long afterwards he pulled down the old Saxon church, and on n August, 1093, he and Prior Turgot, in the presence of all the brethren, Sim. Hist. Ecdes. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), 122. Ibid. 78-82. s See ante ' Eccles. Hist.' Arch. Land, xlv, 394-5. See above, Wearmouth and Jarrow. Sim. Hist. Eccles. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), 118-22. laid the foundation stone of the great cathedral.7 The monks then continued the erection of the monastic buildings at their own expense, the bishop taking that of the church entirely upon himself. The work was carried on with great vigour, and when Bishop William died in January, 1096-7, the chapter-house was so far advanced towards completion as to be considered a fitting burial-place for him.8 In 1104 the remains of St. Cuthbert were translated with great state to the shrine prepared for them in the new church.9 Bishop William's successor, Ralph Flambard, though he considered that Prior Turgot usurped too much authority in the diocese,10 proceeded with the building of the church, completed the nave, gave a great number of vestments, and enlarged and improved the monastery.11 The death in 1115 of Turgot,12 who had been promoted to the bishopric of St. Andrews, brought to a close the initial period of the history of the priory. At the risk of anticipating in various details, it is thought that a short account of the way in which the interior life of the convent was carried on from day to day, and the services of the church were conducted, may throw some light upon the events of later years.13 The day's work apparently began at six a.m., when the servant (or scholar) of the sacristan took his post beside the awmry in the Nine Altars, where he remained until the end of high mass to give out the singing-bread and wine to those who assisted the monks to celebrate the divine office. The sacristan himself, part of whose duty it was to lock up every night the awmries belonging to the various altars,14 came into the church at seven o'clock, and proceeded to lay out the keys on the top of the key-cupboard, whence the monks fetched them as they were required. At eight he retired into the chapter- house to pray for the founders and benefactors of the house ; and at nine a bell rang out, sum- moning the brethren to the chapter mass. 7 Ibid. 1 27-9. Hoveden says, Chronica (Rolls Ser.), i, 145, that Malcolm, king of Scots, was also present, and took part in the ceremony. 8 Ibid. 129—34. " Reginald Dun. Libellus (Surt. Soc.), cap. xl-xliii. 10 Will, of Malmesb. Gest.Pont. (Rolls Ser.), 273. 11 Sim. Hist. Eccles. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), 140. " Hoveden, Chron. (Rolls Ser.), i, 1 70. 13 The following account is taken almost entirely from the Rites of Dur. (Surt. Soc.), to which there- fore only this general reference will be made. Many of the details, of course, belong to a period consider- ably later than 1115, but they are placed here for the sake of coherence. 14 Every altar had two chalices, two cruets, and a double set of vestments and ornaments. 86 RELIGIOUS HOUSES During the morning everyone was fully occu- pied. The masters of the novices, of the song- school, and of the farmery u school, were busy with their respective scholars. The bursar was engaged in receiving rents, paying wages, and generally superintending the financial affairs of the house, in his little stone office near the kitchen. All the officers of the house had to account to him for the money entrusted to them for special purposes. The cellarer overlooked the food supplies, regulated the expenses of the kitchen, and arranged for the proper serving of meals. The terrer, whose office, or 'checker,' was near the guest-hall, was responsible for the comfort of all guests. He saw to the ordering of their chamber, the supply of bed and table- linen for their use, and of provender for their horses ; provided wine for strangers, and super- intended the four yeomen told off to attend on them. The keeper of the garners supplied the household with corn. The chamberlain, with the assistance of a tailor who worked in the 'sartry,' or tailor's shop, near the chamberlain's checker, provided clothing for the brethren, i.e. frocks, girdles, and boots, with underclothing, sheets, socks, &c., of linsey-woolsey, no linen being allowed to the monks. The sacristan, whose office was no sinecure, provided bread, wine, wax, and lights for the services ; arranged for necessary repairs to the windows, bells, &c., of the church ; saw to the cleaning of it ; and was also responsible for the convent's lands of Sacristanhaugh and St. Margaret's Wood. His checker, where he carried on business and took his meals, was within the church in the north aisle. The labours of the prior's chaplain were almost entirely confined to the household of the lord prior himself. He controlled the servants, paid them ' their wages, provided all that was wanted for the table, and purchased the prior's apparel. His office was over the stairs of the hall, and he slept in a room next the prior him- self. The deputy-prior kept the keys of the shrines of SS. Cuthbert and Bede, and superin- tended the opening of the former when visitors brought offerings, and also during the Te Deum at mattins and the Magnificat at evensong, and of the latter when St. Bede's bones were to be carried in procession. He was sometimes called the master of the feretory. Perhaps the most congenial employment was that of the master of the common-house. It was his duty to keep a hogshead of wine and a good fire in the common-house for the monks. This was the only fire to which they had access, the officers of the house excepted, and in the bitter northern winters it must have been much appreciated. To the common-house belonged also a garden and a bowling-alley, where the 1 i.e. infirmary. master stood by during games to see good order kept. When Lent drew near he provided figs, walnuts, and 'such spices as should be comfort- able for the monks for their great austerity of prayer and fasting * ; and on ' the day called O Sapientia, between Martinmas and Christmas,' he kept a feast — 'a solemn banquet of figs, raisins, ale, and cakes,' in which the prior and convent shared ; ' and thereof was no superfluity or excess, but a scholastical and moderate con- gratulation amongst themselves.' With these and the like occupations for the officers of the house, and other work for the humbler brethren, the time must have passed quickly till eleven o'clock, when the bell at the conduit-door rang, summoning all to wash and dine. Having washed their hands at the marble laver in the cloister,1* and dried them on clean towels from the awmry by the frater-house door, of which every monk had a key, the brethren filed in to dinner. This meal was an affair of some ceremony. The monks dined in what was called ' the loft,' up some stairs at the wes» end of the frater-house ; they, as also the prior, were served from the great kitchen. The tables were furnished with table-cloths, salt-cellars, and mazers or drinking-bowls. Every monk had his own mazer, edged with silver double-gilt. There were also at the high table a basin and ewer of latten, the ewer shaped like a huntsman on horseback, used by the sub-prior to wash his hands at table. He always dined and supped with the convent, said grace for them, and was responsible for their good behaviour during meals. The novices and their master dined at 'a fair table set up at the east end of the frater-house, with a decent screen of wainscot over it.' One of their number, standing in a window-recess fitted with a desk, read during the meal a chapter of the Bible in Latin, which being ended, the master tolled a gilt bell hanging above his head, on which another novice came to the high table and said grace, and they departed to their books. The 'children of the almonry'17 had their meals in a loft on the north side of the abbey gates, and were supplied with food from the novices' table. The prior who, except on rare occasions, dined in his own house, sent portions from his table to four old women who lived in the farmery outside the south gate of the abbey, each having a separate chamber. The daily allowance of food for a monk of Durham seems to have consisted of a loaf of bread, two justicias 18 of ale, two portions of pulse " See Arck. Lmd. Iviii, 437. 17 Poor children supported by the benevolence of the house. They were taught in the ' farmery- school ' outside the abbey gates, which was founded •nd maintained by the priors at their own cost. " Known as the ' monks' justice.' 87 A HISTORY OF DURHAM or beans, and two commons of flesh or fish.19 In the early fifteenth century 666 red herrings were purchased every week for the convent, besides white herrings, salmon, 'dog-draves,'2< eels, turbot, and many other kinds of fish, some from Iceland, then the great emporium of stock- fish.21 The prior and the more distinguished guests of the house drank wine of various kinds, while a liquor called ' ptisan,' probably equiva- lent to single ale, was brewed in great quanti- ties at festivals for the use of the tenants and populace.22 Dinner over, the monks went out to the cemetery and stood bareheaded amongst the graves of their brethren for a long time, praying for the departed ; they then adjourned to the cloister for study. The windows of the north cloister were glazed, and in each window were three narrow pews or carrells. These carrells, each of which only extended from one stanchion to another, were separated by woodwork screens, and each con- tained a desk. Opposite, against the church wall, were cupboards full of books.23 Each of the elder monks had a carrell to himself, and the library also was used for purposes of study. A porter kept the door of the cloister that none might enter to disturb the workers, who were occupied chiefly in writing or copying the Holy Scriptures, lives of the saints, classical works, the acts of the bishops and priors of Durham, and more general histories. Meanwhile in the west cloister the master of the novices, one of the oldest of the monks, taught his scholars. There were six of them, and they sat in ' a fair stall of wainscot,' while he had ' a pretty seat of wainscot ' opposite. Besides teaching them, it was the master's duty to see that they had a sufficient supply of cowls, frocks, linsey-woolsey (stammyne) for under- clothing, and socks, boots, and bedding. Specially clever and promising pupils he reported to the prior, who sent them to Oxford to study divinity. At the end of their seven years of training the novices were expected ' to understand their Service and the Scriptures.' Then they sang 19 Surt. Hist. Dur. i (z), zii ». *° Probably large salted codfish from the Dogger Bank. The word is peculiar to Durham monastic accounts, where it occurs with great frequency. 81 Gent. Mag. 1857 (2), p. 77 ; Dur. Household Bk. (Surt. Soc.), passim. 11 Ibid. 13 Some of the books belonging to the convent were kept in the spendiment or chancery, and some in the refectory ; Cat. Libror. Eccles. Cath. Dun. (Surt. Soc.), v. At the beginning of some of these volumes may still be seen some such inscription as the follow- ing : — ' This book belongs to the ninth armariolo in the cloister ;' or, ' From the common library of the Durham monks '; (MSS. Eccles. Dun. B. i, 7, 24, &c.), followed by anathemas on any who should steal the books. their first mass, receiving on the occasion a small sum of money — perhaps to enable them to feast their brethren ; 24 and thenceforward they were paid ' wages ' of 2Oi. per annum in lieu of cloth- ing. No monk received more than this unless he held some office in the house. At three o'clock came evensong, followed by supper, which ended at five, when a bell rang to give warning for grace. Then all departed to the chapter-house, where the prior met them, and they remained in prayer and devotion till six. At that hour all the doors were locked and the sub-prior took charge of the keys till seven ' o'clock on the following morning. A bell now summoned all to the Salve. Every night as darkness fell one of the twelve cressets near the choir-door of the lantern was lighted in preparation for the midnight service. The long dormitory was divided by wooden partitions into a double row of narrow cubicles, each lighted by a separate window. Every monk had a cubicle to himself, containing a bed and a desk for books. The novices slept in a row of cubicles at the south end of the dormitory ; these were not so warm as the other chambers, and were boarded in on either side and above, having no light but what came in at the doorway. At each end of the dormitory was a square stone with twelve cressets which served to give light. The sub-prior, whose chamber was close to the entrance, was responsible for the behaviour of the brethren at night. Twice during the night he called to the sleepers, going to every cubicle to make sure that no one was missing ; 26 and when the three bells chimed out from the lantern-tower at midnight he roused them to go down to the church for mattins. The discipline of the monastery does not seem to have been unusually severe, though good order was maintained, and complaints of evil conduct on the part of the Durham monks are few and far between. Offenders, however, there were no doubt from time to time ; and for those who needed more severe punishment than that imposed on Robert Stichill 26 there were two prisons in the convent — one a cell above ground for less guilty persons near the chapter-house, and the other a strong dungeon called the lying-house, beneath the room of the master of the farmery. Monks convicted of felony, immorality, &c., were impri- soned there for a year, in chains, alone except " Dur. Household Bk. (Surt. Soc.), 340. n This precaution was not unnecessary. Robert Stichill (afterwards bishop of Durham), when a young monk, tried to escape from the church in the night, and was only stopped by a heavenly voice which he heard as he passed the cross on the north side of the choir ; Arch. Aeliana (New Ser.), xx, 73. 28 For some minor offence he was sentenced to sit on a stool by himself in the middle of the choir during service ; but losing his temper he seized the stool and flung it full at the startled congregation. 88 RELIGIOUS HOUSES for the few moments each day when the trap- door above was opened and the master let down their food by a cord. 'Temporal men ' belong- ing to the house when guilty of serious offences were punished by the secular power. The monks were not seldom called upon to afford sanctuary to criminals and suspects fleeing from the rough-and-ready justice of mediaeval days. At Durham the privilege of sanctuary extended to the church and churchyard. Persons taking refuge fled to the north door of the cathe- dral and knocked for admittance, using probably the large knocker that is still upon the door. Over this door there were two chambers in which men were lodged at night for the purpose of admitting such fugitives at any hour. When any person was so admitted the Galilee bell was immediately tolled to give notice that some one had taken sanctuary. The offender was required to declare in the presence of witnesses the nature of his offence, and to toll a bell in token of his demanding the privilege. He was then provided with a gown of black cloth, having St. Cuthbert's cross in yellow on the left shoulder. Near the south door of the Galilee was a grate on which these fugitives slept, and they were supplied with provision and bedding at the expense of the house for thirty-seven days.17 Four bell-ringers were kept in the church ; two belonged to the vestry, had charge of the copes and ornaments, and slept in a room above the vestry ; the other two slept in a room over the north aisle, kept the church clean, and locked the doors at night. Very early on Sunday morning they filled the holy-water stoups with clear water, and one of the monks came in and hallowed it. Every Sunday afternoon one of the brethren preached in the Galilee from one o'clock till three. On Fridays the 'Jesus mass' was sung at the Jesus altar in the body of the church, and after evensong in the choir the 'Jesus anthem' was sung by the choristers on their knees while one of the Galilee bells tolled. There appear to have been no less than five organs in the church. Three belonged to the choir, of which one was used only on high festivals, one when the four doctors of the church M were read, and the third at the usual • daily services. The fourth organ was in the Galilee, and was used daily at Our Lady's mass by the master of the song-school ; while the fifth stood in a loft by the Jesus altar, and was used at the Jesus mass on Fridays.8* During Lent the children of the almonry came daily to the north aisle of the choir where, beneath a staircase, was kept the great ornament known as ' the Paschal,' which it was their duty to 'dress, trim, and make bright for Easter.1 " Sanctuarium Dunelm. (Surt. Soc.), xiv-xvi. " viz. St. Augustine, St. Ambrose, St. Gregory, and St. Jerome. " Arch. Journ. xlv, 430, 431. This Paschal, was, in tact, an enormous seven- branched candlestick, much enriched with carving and gilding, and in size, when set up, nearly as wide as the choir, and so high that the topmost candle — the Paschal candle par excellence— could only be lighted by means of 'a fine conveyance through the roof of the Church.' It was set up on Maundy Thursday against the first step of the choir, behind the three silver basins that hung before the high altar, and remained there till the octave of Ascension Day. It was considered to be ' one of the rarest monuments in England.' On the Monday in Holy Week the brethren went in procession to St. Oswald's church ; on Tuesday to St. Margaret's, and on Wednesday to St. Nicholas*. Maundy Thursday was a busy day in the convent. Early in the morning thir- teen w poor old men, ' having their feet clean washed,' " came to the cloister and seated them- selves on a long carved bench brought out of the church for the purpose. To them at nine o'clock came the prior, attended by all his monks. Certain prayers were said, and then the prior washed and kissed their feet ; after which he gave them each thirty pence in money and seven red-herrings, serving them himself with drink, three loaves apiece, and certain wafer- cakes. Meanwhile the monks did the same to a row of children sitting on a stone bench in the south cloister. More prayers followed, and then ' they did all depart in great holiness.' After this there was a great procession round the church, the prior wearing his cope and mitre, and the monks carrying St. Cuthbert's banner and all the relics. At night the prior and con- vent met again, this time in the frater-house, using on this occasion only the large silver-gilt mazer called the Judas cup. On the altar of Our Lady of Bolton stood a hollow image of the Blessed Virgin with double doors which, when opened, revealed the figure of the Saviour, holding in His upraised hands a large crucifix of solid gold. On Good Friday two of the monks removed this crucifix and brought it down to the lowest step of the choir, where they held it while all the brethren, from the prior downwards, barefooted, crept up to it on their knees and kissed it. It was then reverently placed in the sepulchre on the north side of the choir, together with another image of Christ, in the breast of which was inclosed the holy Sacrament of the altar. Long prayers followed, and finally two tapers were lighted and set to burn before the sepulchre till Easter Day. Between three and four o'clock on Easter morning two of the oldest monks, each bearing a silver censer, came to the sepulchre, knelt down w Eighteen in some MSS. of the Rites. 11 By which the feeling* of the prior were saved, and much of the significance and beauty of the ceremony lost. 89 12 A HISTORY OF DURHAM and censed it ; then, rising, took out of it an image of the risen Lord, with the holy Sacra- ment inclosed in crystal in its breast. This they brought and set on the high altar, all the monks singing the anthem of Christus resurgent. Then the image was carried in procession round the church under a canopy of rich purple velvet borne by four ancient gentlemen, and was finally replaced on the altar, to remain there until Ascension Day. Processions were held on most of the principal holy-days ; on Whit Sunday and Trinity Sunday round the church, bearing the banner and relics ; on Corpus Christi round Palace Green with the Corpus Christi shrine ; on St. Mark's Day to Bow Church, where a service was held. In every procession the shrine containing St. Bede's bones was carried by four monks, and afterwards replaced in his tomb. St. Cuthbert's Day was of course a great festival. The cover of his shrine was raised, as on certain other days, that the faithful might behold the jewels and other relics in the feretory ; and the whole convent kept open house in the frater, dining all together on that day alone of all days in the year. Across the church from north to south ran a line of blue marble in the pavement with a cross in it. Beyond this no woman might pass ; 32 and any woman transgressing this rule, or enter- ing the precincts of the abbey, was liable to severe punishment. Early in the twelfth cen- tury Helisend, the queen of Scotland's chamber- maid, disguised herself in a black cope and hood and secretly entered the church ; but she was discovered and forcibly ejected by Bernard the sacristan, whose language on the occasion does him little credit either as a man or a monk.33 Again in 1417 two maidservants from New- castle tried to penetrate to St. Cuthbert's fere- tory, clad in masculine attire. They also were detected, and sentenced to walk in the same dress in procession on various festival days round the churches of St. Nicholas and All Saints, Newcastle.34 There was also a strict rule that all riders approaching the church should dismount at the gate of the churchyard. A certain knight in the time of Henry II essayed to ride up to the door, but judgement descended on him, his horse falling and rolling him in the mud.35 A curious dispute arose in the fourteenth cen- tury between a certain rector of St. Mary's in the South Bailey, and the prior of Durham. The rector asserted that he had a right to enter the prior's hall on festival days, quasi 0 St. Cuthbert, having been in his youth betrayed by a woman, would never willingly allow any female to approach him ; and the monks thought it right to observe the same rule with regard to his remains. 33 Reginald Dun. Ltbellus (Surt. Soc.), c, Ixxiv. 34 Bourne, Hist. Newcastle, 208. 34 Reginald Dun. Libellus (Surt. Soc.), c, cxxvii. propositus, and to celebrate prayers ; and on lesser days to read the Gospel, to sprinkle holy water in the brewhouse, bakehouse, and kitchen ; and there to receive a commons of bread, beer, and flesh or fish. He also said that the tithes of the monastery gardens were his by right. All these claims, which he grounded on the fact that a great portion of his parish lay within the walls of the monastery, the prior utterly denied. The case was submitted to arbitration, and was finally given against the rector ; but the prior of good will granted him parochial dues from the servants of the priory living within his parish, and tithes of the prior's garden after his own table was supplied. In 1388 the then rector urged his right ex officio to eat three days a week at the prior's table; and in 1434 the prior granted to John Burgham, rector of St. Mary's, an annual pension of 135. 4-d. during his incumbency in recompense of the tithes of the gardens ' for- merly within the limits of the said parish, but now within the septa of the monastery,' in lieu of which tithes the rector used on certain days to eat within the abbey. He also granted to the rector a garment de secta clericorum every year for his good service ; and thus for a mark and a customary sable suit at Christmas the rector became a retainer of the house of Durham.38 In early days the church, made doubly safe by its great strength and high degree of sanctity, was sometimes used as a temporary place of deposit for gold or treasure. In 1255 Henry III excited the wrath of the monks by seizing some gold which had been left for safe-keeping at St. Cuthbert's shrine ; 37 and a century and a half later Henry V wrote to a priest of Durham to inquire about some treasure which he had placed in charge of the late prior (John of Heming- brough), two of his monks, and a man called Middleton. The priest at once wrote to the new prior (John Wessington), and told him to allow no chest or other ' instrument ' that might contain gold or gems to be removed from the priory or church without the king's knowledge. 38 Four times a year, at the festivals of the Purification, Easter, the nativity of St. John the Baptist, and All Saints, the prior withdrew from Durham to one of his manor houses, usually to Bearpark [Beaurepaire], Bewley, Pittington, or Wardley, attended by his officers and a con- siderable number of the monks, for the purposes of feasting and relaxation. These periods of recreation were known as the ' Ludi Prioris ' ; and, if we may judge by the provision made for 34 Surt. Hist. Dur. iv ; Addend. 162. 87 Matt. Paris, Chrm. Maj. (Rolls Ser.), v, 507-8. " Cotton MS. Vesp. F. xiii, fol. 30. In 1323 a chest containing some important accounts was deposited by the king's order in the treasury of Durham Cathe- dral, and the monks were made responsible for it ; Close, 17 Edw. II, m. 42. 90 RELIGIOUS HOUSES them, were largely attended by the people of the neighbourhood in which they were held, who in all probability were permitted to witness an exhibition of miracle-plays or mysteries.*' When a prior of Durham resigned his office on account of age or infirmity, provision was usually made for his support in one of the cells of the monastery. Thus on the resignation of Prior William of Tanfield in 1313, the cell of Jarrow and manor of Wardley were assigned to him for his maintenance.40 He lived for nearly thirty years after his retirement, and meanwhile his successor, Prior Geoffrey of Burdon, also resigned (1322). To him was assigned for his support the cell of Wearmouth,41 with the tithes of Wearmouth and Fulwell.4* When a Durham monk fell sick he was carried, with all his belongings, from the dormi- tory to the infirmary, where he could have a fire and other comforts. If he seemed unlikely to recover the prior's chaplain was sent for, and remained with him to the end. After death the convent barber came, and, removing the garments from the corpse, wrapped it in cowl and habit, putting on also the socks and boots. It was then taken to the ' dead man's chamber ' (below the library of later times) and left there till nightfall, when it was removed to St. Andrew's chapel adjoining (which was only used for purposes of solemn devotion), where it lay till eight o'clock on the following morning. Two monks, nearest in kindred or kindness to the dead man, knelt all night at the feet of the corpse, and the children of the almonry knelt on either side, reading over the psalter. In the morning the body was taken to the chapter- house, where it was received by the prior and the whole convent, who said dirges and devo- tions ; after which it was carried through the ' parler ' into the centry-garth, where it was buried, a chalice of wax being laid on the breast. During the funeral four monks held the blue bed The -convent also held the advowsons of the rectories of Dinsdale, Edmondbycrs, Kimblesworth, and Meldon ; and of the vicarages of St. Oswald's, Durham, Aycliffe, Heighington, Merrington, Billingham, Hesleden, Pittington, Dalton-le-Dale, Berwick-on-Tweed, Norham, Brankston, Ed- lingham, Ellingham, Bedlington, By well St. Peter, Fishlake, Brantingham, Northallerton, Bossall, Frampton, and Ruddington ; and nominations to seven chapels and nine chantries.14* In the time of Prior John Fossour (1342— 1374) the church and the monastic buildings had been extensively repaired and beautified ; 144 and this work was carried on by his successor, Robert Benington alias Walworth. This prior much enriched the convent, and was the first to obtain the use of the mitre and pastoral staff.14* John of Washington [Wessington], who became prior in I4i6,14* retained his office for nearly thirty years, during which time he was active in extending and repairing the buildings of the monastery and its dependent cells.147 One of the few priors of Durham addicted to literary pur- suits, he was the author of various historical works,148 and made a collection of documents with a view to writing a history of his own monastery.14* On his resignation in 1446 the chapter, in grateful recognition of his services, made liberal provision for his old age. A pension of £40 was assigned to him, together with a private room in the priory, and the services of five attendants — a chaplain, a squire, a clerk, a valet, and a groom (garcio). Should he wish for change of air, the principal room in the cell at Finchale was reserved for his use.180 Thomas Castell, who was prior from 1494 to 1519, repaired the east gates of the abbey, with the porter's lodge, and built upon the same a stone chapel dedicated to St. Helen, with a priest's room attached.1" To this chapel the laity "' FeoJ. Prior. Dunelm. (Surt. Soc.), 98-* 1 1. lu Hutchinson, Hist. Dur. ii, 100, 101, note. 144 Dugdalc, M on. Angl. (ed. 1 846), i, 2 30. M Ibid. "* In that year the plague raged in and about Dur- ham to such an extent that the bishop was obliged to adjourn the great sessions (No. 1 8, Rot. Langley B. in Cane. Dun.) ; this visitation lasted for five yean. 147 Script. Tres. cclxxt-vii. 141 See Bernard's Cat. MSS. Angliat. M Reg. Palat. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), iv, App. 483. '" Diet. Nat. Biog. Ix, 322. 141 Dugdale, Mm. Angl. (ed. 1846), i, 231. For further particulars of Prior Castcll's architectural works see Arch. Aeliana (New Ser.), vi, 201. were admitted twice a day to the celebration of mass, for which service two priests were assigned by the convent. Prior Castell also restored the great north transept window in the church, and purchased and gave to the convent two mills from thenceforth called 'Jesus' Mills.'1'1 In 1497 Hi-hop Fox made him master of his game, and ordered that he was to have 'a dear of the season ' whenever he required.1" In the year 1540 most of the larger monas- teries were surrendered to the king, among them being Durham Priory, where the prior and monks were replaced by a dean and twelve canons. Hugh Whitehead, the last prior, be- came the first dean.164 He was a man of virtuous and religious life, and had conferred considerable benefits on the convent, having repaired and improved Bearpark, and built a new hall at Pittington called ' the Prior's Hall,' together with other edifices. He was hospitable, liberal, and most exemplary in his private life.1** Taking into consideration the character of this prior, and the general feeling in the north of England on religious matters, it is somewhat surprising that the priory should have been sur- rendered without a struggle, and that the change should, when accomplished, have produced so little apparent effect. As has been already pointed out, the north had remained almost un- affected by the wave of Protestantism which was passing over other parts of the country ; the old religion remained deeply seated in the breasts of the northern people ; and (after the dissolution of the smaller houses) the monastics of both sexes, expelled from their habitations, and seeking food and shelter through the country, were objects well calculated to excite the popular indignation."* In the autumn of 1536 the insurrection known as the * Pilgrimage of Grace ' broke out, and in this the people of the bishopric were seriously involved. In no county did the Reformation make slower progress than in Durham ; yet the dissolution of the priory roused no immediate outburst of popular feeling, nor did the newly constituted body of cathedral clergy meet with any open opposition. The apparent apathy of the people was no doubt partly traceable to the mild and moderate character of Bishop Tunstall. He would have been the natural leader of both monks and lay- men in opposing the mandate of the king ; but he had already bowed to the storm in silence, suffering himself and his successors to be ruth- lessly despoiled of some of the most important rights and privileges pertaining to the Palatinate.1*7 1U Hutchinson, Hist. Dur. ii, 99, 100. 1M Dur. Curs. Rolls, Rot. 2, Fox, m. II. 114 Hutchinson, Hist. Dur. i, 423 ; Dugdale, Man. Angl. (ed. 1846;,!, 231. lu Wharton, Angl. Sacr. 782. '** Surt. Hitt. Dur. i, Ixviii. »' Ibid. Ixix. 101 A HISTORY OF DURHAM Another and perhaps more potent reason why such radical changes passed by seemingly almost unheeded has been pointed out by a modern historian,158 namely, the poverty-stricken and miserable condition of the inhabitants of the bishopric at that period. War, famine, and pestilence had swept over it time after time, leaving the country bare and desolate, and the poorer inhabitants reduced to a condition of almost absolute savagery. A glance at the list of crimes committed by those who took sanctuary at Durham during the early years of the six- teenth century159 reveals the fact that murder, or at least manslaughter, was as common in the county then as petty larceny is in our own time ; every man's hand was against his fellow ; and the better sort must have been largely occupied in defending their lives and property, as well from their more lawless neighbours as from the thieves and robbers from Scotland who infested the borders. Moreover, from 1538 to 1540 the plague was raging so furiously in Durham that the people of the city had fled, and were living on Elvet Moor in tents.160 This being so, perhaps it is not wonderful that but little notice was taken at the time of the ejection of the monks from their ancient home ; the fact that Hugh Whitehead continued to hold office perhaps served to mask the change, and most of the church lands remained church lands still ; so that possibly the poorer folk hardly realized what had been done. But there can be little doubt that much of the intense bitterness which showed itself in the Earls' Rebellion nearly thirty years later may be traced back to this period. The revenues of the convent at its dissolution are rated by Dugdale at £1,366 IDS. $d. ; Speed gives the value as £1,615 J4J- IO^- Out of this property Henry VIII established the present endowment,161 restoring to the new cathe- dral nearly the whole of the ancient possessions of the convent, except those attached to the cells at Finchale, Wearmouth, Jarrow, Stamford, and Lytham.162 After the dissolution some of the monks, following the example of their prior, remained to form part of the staff of the new cathedral, and afterwards accepted benefices under Queen Elizabeth. One of these was William Bennett, the last prior of Finchale. When that house was dissolved in 1536 he went back to the con- vent at Durham, and on its dissolution in 1540 1M Rev. Henry Gee, D.D. 159 Surt. Soc. Publ. vol. 5, pp. 1—90. 160 Dur. Household Bk. (Surt. Soc.), 337. 61 Dugdale, Mm. Angl. (ed. 1846), i, 231. 16> Surt. Hist. Dur. \, Ixix, note. An inven- tory of the plate and ornaments in the vestry of the cathedral, taken apparently at, or soon after, the time of the dissolution, is printed in Arch. Lmd. xliii, 247. he became prebendary of the fourth stall. In 1571 he was vicar of Kelloe.163 He had a brother, Robert Bennett, who was also in his younger days a Durham monk.164 He became the first prebendary of the eleventh stall, and afterwards vicar of Gainford.165 Another monk of Durham was George Cliffe, who in 1562 was rector of Elswick, and in 1571 became rector also of Brancepeth.168 PRIORS OF DURHAM Aldwin, app. 1083, d« 1087 167 Turgot, app. 1087, res. iiog168 Algar, app. 1109, d. II37169 Roger, app. 1137, d. H49170 Laurence, app. 1149, d. H54171 Absolon, app. 1154, d. H5&172 Thomas, app. 1156, res. 1162, d.173 n63174 German, app. 1162, d. n86175 Bertram, app. 1188, d. I2I2176 William de Durham, app. 12 1 2, d. I2I4177 Ralph Kernech, app. 1214, d. I233178 Thomas Melsanby alias Welscome, elected 1233, res. 1244 m Bertram de Middleton, app. 1244, res. I258180 Hugh de Darlington, app. 16 August, 1258, res. 8 January, 1272-3 181 Richard de Claxton, app. 26 January, I272-3,188 res. 27 December, 1285 183 163 In his will, dated 1583, he calls his wife, who was still living, 'Ann Bennett alias Thomsoun.' Other instances have occurred of persons, who before the dissolution were vowed to celibacy, speaking in this way of the wives they had subsequently married. (See below, Finchale Priory.) M Robert was bursar of Durham at the time of the dissolution. See his accounts (Dur. Household Bk., Surt. Soc.), 1530-5. 184 Injunctions of Bp. Barnes (Surt. Soc.), 48. 166 Ibid. 54. 167 Dugdale, Man. Angl. (ed. 1846), i, 229. In the following list where other authorities differ from Dugdale a note has been made. 168 Ibid. 230. 169 Ibid. Sim. says, ' d. 1127' (Hist. Eccles. Dun. [Rolls Ser.], i, xlviii). 170 Dugdale, ut supra. (Sim. 'd. 1146.') 171 Hutchinson, Hist. Dur. ii, 69. (Dugdale, 'd. 1157.') " Dugdale, ut supra. (Sim. 'd. 1158'; Hutchin- son, 'd. 1162.') 173 Ibid. (Hutchinson, 'app. 1162, d. 1163.') 174 Sim., ut supra. 175 Dugdale, ut supra. (Sim. ' d. 1 1 88.') 176 Ibid. (Sim. 'd. 17 July, 1199'; Hutchinson, 'd. 1209.') 177 Ibid. (Hutchinson, 'app. 1209.') 178 Ibid. 179 Ibid. 230. 180 Ibid. ISI Ibid. 1811 Sim., Hist. Eccles Dun. (Rolls Ser.), I, xlix. (Dugdale and Hutchinson, ' 1273-4.') la Dugdale, ut supra. 102 DURHAM CATHIDHAL DURHAM CATHEDRAL (Rrvfnt) RICHARD ui CLAXTON, P>io> or DURHAM, 1171-85 HOSPITAL OF Kini.n DURHAM MONASTIC SEALS RELIGIOUS HOUSES Hugh de Darlington, app. 1 1 January, 1 285-6, res. ii March, 1289-90 "* Richard de Hoton, elected 24 March, 1 289-90; ejected by Bishop Bek, and replaced by Henry de Luceby; but re-instated 29 No- vember, 1 30 118*; d. January, 1307-8™* William de Tanfield, app. 24 February, I3o8~9,187 res. 1313*** Geoffrey de Burdon, app. June, 1313, res. January, 1 322-3 "* William de Conton, or Couton, app. 1323, d. February, 1 342—3 19° John Fossour, or Forcer, app. March, 1342-3, d. November, 1374 m Robert Benington, alias Walworth, app. December, 1374, d. 1391 lw John de Hemingbrough, app. 1391, d. I4i6ws John de Washington (Wessington), app. 1416, d. i446m William Ebchester, app. June, 1446, res. i456»« John Burnby, alias Burnley, app. 1456, d. I4641M Richard Bell, app. 1464, res. March, 1478-9 w Robert Ebchester, app. November, 1479, d. 1484 m John Auckland, app. July, 1484, d. 1494 w Thomas Castell, app. May, 1494, d. 1519*°° Hugh Whitehead, app. 3 January, 151 9-20 ; *01 first dean of Durham, 1540 ; d. 1548*°* The seal used by the convent from its founda- tion to its dissolution was one of the greatest simplicity : a circle containing a cross surrounded by a legend in letters almost Saxon, and evidently not later than the foundation. Legend — + SIGILLVM . CVDBERHTI . PR^SVLIS . SCTI. The cross is closely similar in form to that found on the body of the saint.*08 The arms of the monastery, as given in the Heralds' Visitation of 1530, were, 'Azure, a cross flory Or between four lions rampant Argent.' The lions have in modern times been altered from silver to gold.*04 "* Dugdale, ut supra. "» Ibid. '* Sim. ut supra. (Dugdale, incorrectly, ' 1 309-10.') 187 Hutchinson, Hist. Dur. ii, 86. (Dugdale, ' 1309-10.') '* Dugdale, ut supra. m Ibid. 90 Ibid. (Sim. 'd. 26 Feb. 1340-1.') 191 Dugdale, */ supra. (Sim. 'app. Mar. 1340-1.') '» Ibid. '" Ibid. IN Ibid. » Ibid. '" Ibid. '" Ibid. "• Ibid. '* Ibid. "• Ibid. "'Ibid. (Hutchinson, 'app. 1524.*) *" Ibid. *• Arch. Aeliana (New Ser.), ii, 55-6 ; engraving to face p. 56. m Ibid. 53. 8. THE PRIORY OF ST. JOHN THE BAPTIST AND ST. GODRIC, F1NCHALE Early in the twelfth century the hermit Godric settled at Finchale under the auspices of Bishop Flambard. The place was then exceed- ingly wild, overrun with snakes, and used by the bishop merely as a hunting-ground.1 Here St. Godric lived for half a century, accompanied at first by a poor sister, but after her death en- tirely alone ; and here he cultivated the ground and erected a chapel which he dedicated to St. John the Baptist, an oratory of St. Mary, and other buildings,1 and when this had been done Bishop Flambard granted the reversion of the hermitage, its fishery, and its possessions to the prior and convent of Durham.1 Godric died in 1 1 70,* and soon afterwards Bishop Pudsey con- firmed to the monks the gift of his predecessor,' and conferred upon Reginald * and Henry, the two Durham monks in possession, and their successors, the tract of land near the hermit- age which now chiefly constitutes the Finchale farm.' Such was the state of Finchale when in 1 196 Henry Pudsey, son of the bishop, was compelled by the jealous monks to transfer to it the posses- sions of the New Place at Baxterwood.8 There was a small church, a salmon fishery in the Wear, dwelling-rooms for two monks and their atten- dants, and nearly the whole of the present Finchale farm, 3 acres of land at Bradley,' and 2 bovates at Sadberge,10 for their maintenance.11 Henry Pudsey reserved to himself and his heirs the privilege of appointing the prior, and chose Thomas, sacrist of Durham, to be the first to hold that office ; u but he afterwards con- ceded the right to the prior and convent of Durham.11 Bishop Kellaw conferred upon the house land on Finchale Moor.14 Other donations included the advowson and impropriation of the churches of Wicton [? Wigton] andGiggleswick,1* and land at Yokefleet le and Helton17 (Heppcdun), I Vita Sti. GoJrici (Surt. Soc.), 62-7. ' Ibid. 126, 152. •MS. Treas. Dur. Cart, iii, 274; Orig. 2, i; Pont, i, l. 4 ntaSti. GoJrici (Surt. Soc.), 326, 330. * Priory of Finchale (Surt. Soc.), 21. * Probably Reginald the historian. ' MS. Treas. Dur. Cart. 3, 7-, H. I. • Wharton, Angl. Sacr. i, 727. See below, Baxter- wood. • MS. Treas. Dur. I', I", T. 10 Collect. Topograph. pp. xiii, 79. " Priory of Finchale (Surt. Soc.), pref. p. xiv. " Angl. Sacr. i, 727. II MS. Treas. Dur. 3', 6M, Spec. M.I. 14 Reg. Palat. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), ii, 1 144. " Priory of Finchale (Surt. Soc.), 61. " MS. Treas. Dur. 2', 2*% 1 6. l; Priory of Finchale (Surt. Soc.), 54. I03 A HISTORY OF DURHAM all given by Henry Pudsey ; land at Bradley,18 Woodsend,19 Brandon,20 Hutton,21 Softley,22Spirls- wood,23 Lumley,24 Ferimanside,28 Newton,26 Amerston,27 Castle Eden,28 Thorpe Thewles,29 Hollinside,30 Iveston,31 Yupeton,32 Smallees,33 and Little Stainton; 34 a fishery in the Tyne at Crook ;36 land and a fishery at Cocken ; 38 land and a mill at Coxhoe ; 37 common of pasture at Baxter- wood ; 38 a house in the North Bailey at Durham; 39 rents inSunderland, Hartlepool, and other places,40 and the church of Bishop Middleham granted by Bishop Robert Stichill in ia68.41 Most of these endowments were conferred within the first fifty years after Henry Pudsey established the monks at Finchale. As the revenues of the house increased, the monks, no longer content with St. Godric's chapel, resolved in 1241 to build a new church, and the arch- bishop of York granted an indulgence of thirty days to all who should contribute to this work.42 In the following year the church was begun,43 and it appears to have been completed in or about 1 264." In 1266 the monks added a chapel dedicated to the honour of St. Godric, in the south transept.46 About the year 1350 the prior of Durham severely reproved the Finchale monks for keeping a pack of hounds,46 but they did not waste all their time in sport. In 1381, Uthred of Boldon, prior of Finchale, himself the most learned man of his day, brought to his church a foreigner, one William du Stiphel, of Brittany, and employed him in transcribing Jerome's Eusebius and Bede's Ecclesiastical History.41 There is also a record of 18 MS. Treas. Dur. Cart, i1, ia% T. This gift appears to have been made to the monks at Finchale before Pudsey's foundation, and to have been lost be- fore the dissolution ; Priory of Finchale, pref. p. xv. 19 MS. Treas. Dur. 4% 3", 4. 20 Priory of Finchale (Surt. Soc.), 79. 81 Ibid. 101. " Ibid. 107. 13 MS. Treas. Dur. Cart, ii, 1 08. 24 Priory of Finchale (Surt. Soc.), 111-16. 16 Ibid. 1 1 7. 86 MS. Treas. Dur. 3% 7", Spec. 3% IM, 28. 87 Ibid. 3, 6, Spec. K. i. 88 Ibid. 3% iae, 2. See 3, 8, Spec. 89 Priory of Finchale (Surt. Soc.), 137-47. 30 Ibid. 151-2. S1 Ibid. 154. "Ibid. 155. "Ibid. 157. 34 MS. Treas. Dur. 2% 3", 4. 35 Priory of Finchale (Surt. Soc.), 82. See Raine, North Durham, App. No. ex. 36 Ibid. 86-96. 37 MS. Treas. Dur. 3, 6, Spec. O. i, &c. 3S Ibid. 3, 6, Spec. 39 Ibid. 3% 2", 26. 40 Priory of Finchale (Surt. Soc.), 127-31, &c. 41 Reg. i, fol. 28^. 4' MS. Treas. Dur. 3", la% 32. "Ibid. 3% iae, 38. 41 Ibid. 3% i'% 47. 45 Ibid. 3% ia% 46. 45 B. M. Cott. MS. Faust. A. vi, fol. 8. " B. M. Burney MS. 310, p. 178. at least one boy lodged, boarded, and clothed! at Finchale, and sent to Durham Grammar School for six or ten years as his case might require.48 Two aged bedesmen were also main- tained.49 There were usually eight monks at Finchale besides the prior, of whom (by an ordinance made by the prior of Durham in 1408) four were constant residents, and the other four visitors from the convent. The natural beauties of the- place made it very suitable as a sort of holiday home for the Durham monks. Each set of four were allowed three weeks' furlough, and their time was divided by the following rules : — Two were every day to be present at mattins, mass, vespers, and the other services in the choir, while- the other two had liberty to ramble in the fields ' religiously and honestly,' provided that they were present at mass and vespers. All four visitors were to sleep in the dormitory with the four resident monks, but they were allowed a special chamber with a fire and other comforts, to which they might resort when they pleased, and the prior assigned a servant to wait on-, them. Each of the visitors was to celebrate high mass at least once a week, and on Sunday all were to be present in the chapter and at the Lady-mass.50 There was in the priory a room known as the ' player chamber,' which is supposed to have been appropriated to dramatic representations, such as mysteries or miracle plays, and to such amuse- ments as listening to the minstrels and gleemen who visited the house.61 In 1453 the prior of Durham again found cause of complaint in the laxity of the brethren at Finchale. They had taken to wearing linen shirts, instead of the linsey-woolsey injoined by their rule. The prior sternly forbade the- practice.62 Finchale Abbey was so completely under the control of the prior and convent of Dur- ham that it has practically no independent history. ^n '535 'ts revenues were valued at £122 15*. 3^.53 At its suppression, nearly all its lands, except the site of the priory and a por- tion reserved for the seventh stall in Durham Cathedral, reverted to lay hands. The site formed part of the endowment of the new cathedral.64 48 A.D. 1387, Reg. ii, fol. 272. 49 Priory of Finchale (Surt. Soc.), p. ccccxv. 60 Reg. ii, parv. fol. 8£. " Priory of Finchale (Surt. Soc.), p. ccccxli. 58 Reg. iii, parv. 60. 63 Valor Eccl. Hen. VIII; Priory of Finchale (Surt, Soc.), p. ccccxvi. Speed says, .£146 iqs. 20"., taking the gross sum. Stevens (vol. i, 26) gives the clear value at .£120 15*. 33Ibid. 330^. "Transcript of Return, 26 Hen. VIII, First Fruits Office. !SSurt. Hist. Dur. iii, 259. K Rud's MSS. 106 RELIGIOUS HOUSES bishop of Durham that the prioress appealed in case of any difficulty, and two at least of the bishops were among the benefactors of the house.17 In 1311 Agnes dc Campioun, a nun of Neasham, was expelled from the convent, and refused re-admission, though promising all due obedience. Her offence is not stated, but the bishop on inquiry deemed it insufficient to justify such severity, and directed the dean of Darlington to re-instate her, unless the prioress and nuns could show good cause to the con- trary, in which case they were to appear before the bishop in the Galilee at Durham and tell their side of the story.18 In July, 1319, the king granted a protection for one year to the prioress of Neasham,19 presum- ably in order that she might travel. Here and there the episcopal registers of Durham contain brief references to the convent, but nothing of importance occurs till 29 Novem- ber, 1428, when the nuns, assembled in their chapter-house, wrote to the bishop,30 asking his consent to the election of Margaret of Danby, professed nun of the House of Nuns at New- castle, to succeed Jane Egleston, the late prioress, who had resigned. The names of the nuns are given : — Jane Egleston, Jane Tympson, Alice Bewlof, Margaret Hawyk, Margaret of Witton, Agnes of Tudowe, Beatrix of Kyllom, and Jane of Blakiston. The bishop at once gave his consent, and wrote to Dionysia Aslakby, prioress of St. Bartho- lomew's, Newcastle, asking her to send Margaret of Danby to Neasham.*1 Her reply is worth quoting, if only as a testimony to the character of the prioress-elect ; she acknowledges the receipt of the bishop's letter about the postulation of our Bister Dame Margaret Danby, whilk postulacion I graunte fully with assent of my chapiter atte Rev erence of God and in plesing of yor gracious lord- ship ; notwythstondyng yat she is fill nece.-sarye and profitable to us both in spirituell governance and tcmporell.n On 15 December, the prioress of St. Bartho- lomew's appeared before the bishop and con- firmed this assent;** and five days later the bishop wrote to Dame Margaret appointing her prioress of Neasham, and at the same time sent letters to the convent to admit her, and to the archdeacon of Durham to induct her.*4 Her reign was a short one. On 26 January, 1429-30, the nuns** wrote again to the bishop, telling him of her death.** Two days later they " See above. * Reg. Palat. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), i, 33. * Pat. 13 Edw. II, m. 43. "Dur. Epis. Reg. Langley, fol. 147. 11 Ibid. » Ibid. » Ibid. " Ibid. 14 The list of names corresponds to the one given above, omitting Jane Egleston. * Dur. Epis. Reg. Langley, fol. 164. elected Margaret Hawyk, who was duly installed. There is some reason to fear that during her rule the manners and morals of the house deteriorated. In June, 1436, the bishop commissioned the abbot of Bellalanda and the rector of Houghton to visit the convent, and to inquire into the rule, life, and conversation of its inmates, whether nuns, priests, or seculars.*7 The result of this investigation was not altogether satisfactory ; for the bishop cited the prioress and nuns to appear before him on 4 October, 1436,** and gave them strict injunctions as to their behaviour. He laid special stress upon the observance of the canonical hours, the rule of silence, and the daily meeting of the sisters in the chapter-house. The nuns when not engaged in divine service, or at refection, were to be occupied in reading, prayer, or meditation. The defects in the conventual church, cloisters, and other buildings were to be made good before the following midsummer, and the chalices, jewels, and ornaments, then in the hands of sundry creditors, were to be redeemed. No secular person was to pass the night in the house, nor were the nuns, unless indisposed, to sleep elsewhere than in the dormitory ; doors were to be shut at a certain hour ; and the sisters were to hold no intercourse with secular persons, except for the service of the house and with the permission of the prioress." Notwithstanding the bishop's orders, the nuns proved disobedient, and in July, 1437, their time of grace having expired, the bishop again sent commissioners ; this time to inquire into defects and excesses committed contrary to his injunctions and to punish the offenders.40 This resulted in the resignation of Margaret Hawyk, on 10 August, I437,41 and the nuns received licence to choose a new prioress.** They elected Agnes Tudowe, one of their number,4* but the manner of their choice displeased the bishop, and they were obliged to renounce the postulation and humbly to submit to him in the matter before he would be appeased.44 This done, however, he appointed the said Agnes, ' by his authority,' 46 issuing a mandate for her installation and a dispensation for her ' super defectu natalium.' ** He then extended the time for the completion of the repairs, and recovery of the ornaments, and gave orders with regard to the ex-prioress. She was to have her keep and all necessaries from the goods of the house, and to have the use of her private room, so long as her conduct was satisfactory and her religious duties regularly performed.47 v Ibid. fol. 231. " Ibid. fol. 256. « Ibid. fol. 248 d. 0 Ibid. fol. 249. "Ibid. fol. 252^. 44 Ibid. fols. 254, 254 Wills and Invent, ut supra. 0 Dur. Curs. Rolls, Rot. A. Hatfield. 64 Dur. Epis. Reg. Hatfield, fol. 139. 64 Dur. Epis. Reg. Langley, fol. 147. 66 Ibid. fols. 147, 164. "Ibid. fols. 164, 248 J< SIGILL . ECCLIE . SCE . MARIE . DE . NOVO LOCO . SUPER . BRUN." FRIARIES ii. THE FRANCISCAN FRIARS OF HARTLEPOOL In a letter written by Master Layton, one of the visitors of the northern abbeys before the dis- solution,1 it is stated that the ' Friarage of Hartle- pool was founded by the same Robert de Brus ' [sc. 1 MS. Treas. Dur. 3, 6, Spec. G. 2. 1 Ibid. 2", 2", 1 6. * Ibid. Cart, ii, fol. 107*. 4 Ibid. i% 2", et 3, 6, Spec. ' Priory of Finchale (Surt. Soc.), x. • MS. Treas. Dur. ia, 2". ' Priory of Finchale (Surt. Soc.), x. I Surt. Hist. Dur. iv, (2), 105. • MSS. Treas. Dur. Orig. 3', I"; Pont, i, I ; 3, 6, Spec, x, 3 ; 4', I", 91 ; Cart, ii, fol. " Priory of Finchale (Surt. Soc.), xi. II MS. Treas. Dur. 4% i", 91. " Ibid. Orig. 3% IM, Pont, i, i. u See MS. Trea». Dnr. Cart, iii, 88. founder of Gisburn]. ' This is manifestly im- possible, because the Brus who founded Gisburn died long before the birth of St. Francis ; but the house at Hartlepool may have owed its origin to another Brus, possibly to Robert, the sixth of that 14 So Priory of Finchale (Surt. Soc.), xi, note ; and Boyle's Guide to Co. Dur. (ed. 1892), 403. But Surtees says [Hist. Dur. iv (2), 105], 'Half a mile down the stream [of the Browney, from Aldin Grange] are the evident vestiges of Henry Pudsey's foundation at Bacstaneford.' " MS. Treas. Dur. Orig. 3% I1*, Pont, i, 1. 14 Wharton, Angl. Sacr. \, 726. ir Ibid. " MS. Treas. Dur. Cart, iii, 88, 883. " Ibid. 2, 6, Spec. N. 3. " Ibid. 3, Sextae Specialium, c. 2. " Wharton, ut sufra. * Engraved, Priory of Finchale (Surt. Soc.), 1 5. 1 Surt. Hist. Dur. iii, 1 1 9. ' Cott. MS. Jul. c. 2, 318. 109 A HISTORY OF DURHAM name.8 In an order of 10 February, 1344-5, relating to a rent claimed by the friars, it is stated that they had the said rent ' of the grant of one Robert de Brus, of whom there is no memory,' * and this may possibly be the founder. The first mention of the house occurs in 1 240, when Henry III granted to each of the friars (out of the issues of the bishopric of Durham, then vacant) ' a tunic, namely, four ells to make a tunic, of the price of twelve pence, of our gift.' 6 In an Assize Roll of 1243 we read °* a robber fleeing for sanctuary to the church of the Friars Minor of Hartlepool, and there abjuring the kingdom.8 At a general chapter of the order held at Narbonne in 1258, a list of the Franciscan establishments in England was drawn up. The country was divided into seven custodies : the custody of Newcastle contained nine friaries, and of these Hartlepool was one.7 A year later Martin of St. Cross, master of Sherburn, left half a mark to the Friars Minors at Hartlepool.8 Very little is known about the establishment. At the dissolution it consisted of a warden and eighteen brothers, who appear to have been strict followers of St. Francis so far as poverty was concerned.9 In 1335 they had a chapel with two bells,10 in which was held an ordination service (first tonsure only).11 In 1358 the king granted a licence to John, son of Elias of Brance- peth, to bestow upon the warden and brethren three acres of land adjoining their house for the enlargement thereof; and at the same time Roger de Clifford granted them an annual rent of 5*. 8d. in Hartlepool.12 Besides these somewhat unusual grants — for Friars Minors were not supposed to hold lands or rents — we find occasional small bequests of money left to the brethren ; e.g. ten marks by Walter de Mertonin 1275 ;13 a small legacy by William de Menneville in 1371-2 u ; five marks by John Oggill in I372.15 The last-mentioned benefactor desired to be buried in the friars' cemetery, as did John Trollop of Thornley in I476.16 In Trollop's will the names of two of the friars occur : John Fery and William Durham. Amongst other small legacies of the fifteenth century are ' I quarterium frumenti,' 17 and ' one towel.' 18 * Sharpe, Hist. Hartlepool, 134-5. 4 Close, 19 Edw. Ill, pt. i, m. 24. 6 Liberate Roll, 25 Hen. Ill, m. 23. 6 P.R.O. Assize R. 223, m. 2. I Bourne, Hist. Newcastle, 83. 8 Wills and Invent. (Surt. Soc.), i, 8. 9 Surt. Hiit. Dur. iii, 119. w Ibid. II Reg. Pa/at. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), iii, 167. " Pat. 30 Edw. Ill, pt. i, m. 9. 13 Dugdale, Man. Angl. (ed. 1846), vi, 1511. 14 Dur. Epis. Reg. Hatfield, fol. 115. 16 Hunter's MSS. 16 Wills and Invent. (Surt. Soc.), i, 97-9. 17 Ibid. 64. I8 Dur. Epis. Reg. Langley, fol. 238. In February, 1344-5, the friars appealed to the king that they might be allowed to have yearly the sum of ^5 41. of the issues of the town oven, granted to them by the forgotten Brus. This rent had been taken into the king's hands with the other possessions of the late Robert de Clifford, during the minority of the heir ; but the friars' claim was proved to be good, and their request granted.19 In 1479 William, warden of the house, granted a letter of spiritual confraternity to Sir Robert and Lady Anne Claxton ; on the back is the usual form of absolution.20 The friary was dissolved in 1547, wn^en the clear value of its possessions, over and above annual reprises, was given as £4. 51. Sd. and the clear money remaining after paying the brothers' pensions was 45. 8d. The house was granted to John D'Oyley and John Scudamore.21 WARDENS OF HARTLEPOOL FRIARY William, occurs 5 July, 1479 22 Thomas Trewhit, occurs 4 June, 1507 23 Richard Threlkeld, last warden, occurs 1547 M The seal of the house had for inscription : GARDIANI FRATRUM HERT 26 MINORUM . DE 12. THE FRANCISCAN FRIARS OF DURHAM In the thirteenth century there was for a short time a Franciscan Friary at Durham. In November, 1239, the king directed the custo- dian of the bishopric to make a grant to the friars of food and clothing.86 13. THE FRIARS PREACHERS OF HARTLEPOOL In 1259 Martin of St. Cross, master of Sher- burn Hospital, in his will left half a mark to the Friars Preachers of Hartlepool.27 14. THE FRIARS PREACHERS OF JARROW Edward III, on 16 June, 1329, pardoned the Friars Preachers at Jarrow (sic) and at Newcastle- 19 Close, 19 Edw. Ill, pt. i, m. 24. 80 Surt. Hist. Dur. i (2), 27. 81 Ibid, iii, 1 1 9. » Ibid, i (z), 27. 83 Arch. Aeliana. 84 Harl. MS. Printed by Surt. Hist. Dur. iii, 1 19. 15 Dugdale, Mon. Angl. (ed. 1846), vi, 1511. 86 Liberate Roll, 24 Hen. Ill, m. 25. 87 Wills and Invent. (Surt. Soc.), i, 8. IIO RELIGIOUS HOUSES on-Tyne the respective sums of 12 marks and £6 due for certain victuals sold to them by the late king.18 15. THE AUSTIN FRIARS OF BARNARD CASTLE It is thought that there was at one time a house of Friars Hermits of St. Austin at Barnard Castle. The provincial of that order obtained leave of Archbishop Neville in 1381, the see of Durham being vacant, to build a friary and chapel upon ground given by Thomas Beau- champ, earl of Warwick, in his lordship of Barnard Castle,19 but it is not known whether this took effect.30 There was, however, until lately an old building on the east side of Thorn- gate which had the appearance of a religious house, and which was not otherwise accounted for, and this may possibly have been the friary. Round a bow window was cut in the square character, ' Soli Deo honor et gloria,' the letter- ing corresponding with the above date. The back part of the building formed a square." HOSPITALS 1 6. THE HOSPITAL OF ST. GILES, KEPIER The hospital at Kepier, near Durham, was founded in 1112 by Bishop Flambard, who dedicated it to God and St. Giles, and endowed it with his vill of Caldecotes l with its appurten- ances ; the mill of Milneburn ; and two sheaves of corn from every carucate of his demesnes of Newbottle, Houghton, Wearmouth, Ryhope, Easington, Sedgefield, Sherburn, Quarrington, Newton, Chester, Washington, Boldon, Cleadon, Whickham, and Ryton.1 When Cumin contended with Bishop William de St. Barbara for the possession of the bishopric of Durham, the bishop with Conyers and his men took refuge for a time in St. Giles' Church, which they fortified. Failing to obtain an en- trance into Durham they retired (1144) to Bishopton, and Cumin ravaged the country and burnt down the church and hospital of St. Giles.* It is evident from Simeon's account of these events that the hospital then stood on the hill, close to the church ; when Bishop Pudsey re- built it some years later,4 he chose a lower site on the right bank of the Wear at some distance from the church,' for the sake, probably, of shelter and a good water-supply. Bishop Pudsey ordained that the fraternity should consist of a master and thirteen brethren under the usual monastic vows. Six of them were to be chaplains, one acting as confessor, " Pat. 3 Edw. Ill, pt. I, m. 14. This appears to be the only evidence of this house, unless the ' House of the Friars Preachers of Jarue,' which is mentioned in a document dated c. 1283, be the same. (Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. iv, 444.) Mr. Riley in the report says that this is Jarrow ; but whenever ' Jarue ' occurs elsewhere it means Yarm in Yorkshire. In the will of William le Vavasour, amongst a number of bequests to religious houses in co. York, occurs one to the ' Friars Preachers of Jar',' presumably Yarm. 19 See Hutton's extracts from Neville's Register. 10 Tanner, Notit. Manas. Dur. iii. " Hutchinson, Hist. Dur. iii, 250. 1 Feod. Prior. Dun. (Surt. Soc.), 77. while the remaining seven were to under- take the respective duties of steward, keeper of the tanyard, baker, miller, granger, keeper of the stock, and receiver or attorney-general of the house. Provision was made for an infirmary, a common dormitory, and a common hall ; also for an annual supply of decent clothing to all the brethren, with boots twice a year for the chaplains ; and for the others, who had more active employments, footgear of a more service- able kind ('socularibus cum coreis ligatis') as often as might be required.* Bishop Pudsey confirmed Flambard's founda- tion and endowment, and added the vill of Clifton. He exempted St. Giles' Church, which had been originally built to serve as a chapel to the hospital, from archidiaconal control, and confirmed the possessions of the house in Weardale, viz. a lead mine, an iron mine, a toft, certain tithes, and pasture for all the cattle.7 During his episcopate Gilbert the chamberlain gave the brethren leave to make their mill-dam and mill-pool on his land near the new site ; 8 Gilbert Hansard gave the vill of Amerston [Aymundeston] and 5 oxgangs in Hurworth for the support of a chaplain to pray for his soul and the souls of his kindred ; * and Stephen the chaplain gave all his land at Southcroft in Giles- gate.10 By a charter, the date of which is not known, Guy of Hutton granted lands in Hutton to the hospital, but these were subsequently transferred to Finchale Priory.11 By various 1 Found. Chart, printed, Mem. of St. Giles' (Surt. Soc.). 1 Sim. Dun. Hist. Coat. (Rolls Ser.), 151-9. 4 After 1153. ' See chart, printed, Mem. of St. Gilet (Surt. Soc.), '95- * ' Ordinatio Hospitalis de Kepicr," printed by Hutchinson, ///V/. Dur. ii, 301. ' Pudsey's Charters II, iii, Mem. of St. Giles" (Surt. Soc.), 196, 199. • Ibid. 202. * Ibid. 198. w Ibid. 206. " Chart, printed, Priory of Finchale (Surt. Soc.), 100. Ill A HISTORY OF DURHAM later grants the hospital became possessed of small parcels of land, &c., in Medomsley,12 Frosterley,13 Claxton,14 Amerston,15 Eppleton [Epplingden], Barnes, Estwell, Crawcrook, Derncrook,16 and Holmersk,17 and of the vills of Hunstan- worth18 and Iveston.19 In 1332 the master of Kepier was accused of having acquired, without licence, a plot of pasture called ' Le Tung' and 'Enelishop' in Styford, co. Northumberland. The king took the land into his own hands, but on learning that Ralph, a former master,20 had acquired it long before the Statute of Mortmain from Hugh de Bolbek, then lord of the said pasture, he at once restored it.31 This pasture was held of John of Lancaster in frankalmoign ; he remitted the rent of 5 marks, 4 July, 131 5. 22 At some time during the fourteenth century the advowson of Hunstanworth was transferred from Durham priory to the hospital, and in 1445 Bishop Neville appropriated to it the rectory of St. Nicholas, Durham, with its glebe in Old Durham.23 In 1371 the master held a tene- ment in Newcastle.24 In 1306 the Scots, raiding under the com- mand of Brus, set fire to the hospital and amongst other damage burnt down the muni- ment-room, thereby destroying all the ancient charters and other records of the house.26 To remedy this disaster Bishop Kellaw issued a commission to inquire what lands the hospital held, and by what rents and services. Counter- parts of some of the charters were in existence, and others were verified on oath.26 Five years later Peter of Thoresby, master of Kepier, was summoned to appear before the bishop to answer a charge of misappropriating the goods of the house,27 and in the autumn of the same year (1311) the bishop ordered a visi- tation of the hospital, with a view to the refor- mation of certain defects and excesses.28 In April, 1312, Queen Isabel, wife of Ed- ward II, lodged at Kepier, apparently for one night, and the sum of £ 1 8 ijs. yd. was paid to the master, Hugh de Montalto, for her expenses.29 Probably the money was not unwelcome, for the house had been in a very depressed state " Charter, Mem. of St. Giles" (Surt. Soc.), 203. 13 Ibid. 198. " Ibid. zoo. 15 Ibid. 125. 16 Ibid. App. A. " Reg. Palat. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), ii, 1287. 18 To hold of the bishop, by the twelfth part of a knight's fee ; see Half. Surv. (Surt. Soc.), 109. 19 Mem. of St. Cues'1 (Surt. Soc.), App. A. 10 Ralph was master temp. Bp. le Poor (1228-37). " Close, 6 Edw. Ill, m. 23. 22 Pat. 8 Edw. II, pt. 2, m. 3. 23 Mem. of St. Giles' (Surt. Soc.), pp. xxvii, xxviii. " Bourne, Hist. Newcastle, 202. 25 Mickleton MSS. No. 32. 26 Surt. Hist. Dur. iv (2), 63. '" Reg. Palat. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), i, 34. 28 Ibid. 92. 29 Script. Tres. (Surt. Soc!), App. Ixxxvii, pp. cv, cvi. since the Scottish invasion,30 on which account Bishop Kellaw, in July, 1312, granted to it the tithes of all the recently reclaimed wastes near Gateshead and at 'Brounsyde' in the parish of Auckland.31 At the bishop's request the brethren, possibly glad to gratify their patron, granted to William of Pencher for his good service a livery in their house, i.e. while in good health to serve in the hall and eat with the brethren at table ; when sick, to have a fit place in the house, and a sufficient supply of bread, ale, &c., and when disabled, to have a robe and 6s. 8d. a year.32 Three years later (1315) the bishop conferred a still more substantial benefit upon the hospital. He founded the prebend of Kepier in the colle- giate church of Auckland, endowing it with the tithes of certain lands newly brought into culti- vation, and appropriating it in perpetuity to the master of Kepier for the time being, who was to have a stall in the choir and all the rights of a prebendary. In return the master was to pro- vide a sub-deacon at a salary of £1 10s. per annum for Auckland church ; two additional chaplains (making eight in all) were to be main- tained in the hospital to celebrate mass for the souls of the bishops of Durham, past, present, and to come ; ten additional paupers were to be relieved at the hospital in the daily evening distribution ; and the bishop's anniversary was to be kept, masses being said for him, and a special allowance of food given to thirteen poor persons. The master was exempted from attend- ance at synods,83 chapters, visitations, &c., and was to reside in the hospital unless in personal attendance on the bishop.34 In October, 1316, the see of Durham being vacant, the king displaced Hugh de Montalto, and made Simon of Eycote master in his stead. The mandate on this appointment is directed to the ' brethren and sisters ' of the hospital ;36 and the 'sisters' are again mentioned by Bishop Tunstall in 1532 ;38 but there is no account of any provision for women at Kepier. Possibly the words are merely formal. Simon of Eycote ruled over the house for four years, at the end of which time the king, for some reason which is not stated, withdrew the appointment and restored Hugh de Montalto to- his former dignity.37 Hugh, perhaps by way of compensation, promised, so soon as he had full 30 Reg. Palat. Dun. ii, 1 1 64. 31 Ibid, i, 190 ; ii, 1164. " Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. iv, 391 ; Reg. Palat. Dun, iv, 411. 35 The master, however, was summoned to attend a synod held in the Galilee of the cathedral, 4 Oct. 1507 ; Script. Tres. (Surt. Soc.), App. cccxvi. 34 Reg. Palat. Dun. ii, 1272. 55 Pat 10 Edw. II, pt. i, m. ii ; see also Pat. 14 Edw. II, pt. i, m. 4. 36 Dur. Epis. Reg. Tunstall, fol. 5. " Pat. 14 Edw. II, pt. i, m. 4. 1 12 RELIGIOUS HOUSES possession of the hospital, to enfeoff Simon of j£iO worth of land in Amerston, Hurworth, and elsewhere.*8 The tenants of the hospital suffered severely in the Black Death ; and as this scourge was accompanied by a failure in the crops and mur- rain amongst the cattle, the house was reduced to great poverty, and Bishop Hat field in 1351 granted an indulgence of 300 days to all who contributed to its relief.*9 The prior and convent of Durham granted to the hospital in the follow- ing year the advowson and glebe of Hunstan- worth church, in exchange for an annual out- rent of 1 31. \d* This, however, can have been of little benefit to the hospital, for some time at least, as the necessary expenses in repairing the chancel and manse were so great as to render the pre- sentation of a rector impossible, so that a stipen- diary chaplain had to be appointed.41 In 1378 the priors of Durham and Finchale were commissioned by the bishop to visit St. Giles', but there is no record of their pro- ceedings.41 Some sixty years later (1437), un<^er Bishop Langley, another visitation took place.48 Richard Bukley, the master, had apparently been accused of maladministration of the goods of the house, and a searching inquiry took place, which resulted in his full acquittal.44 When Bishop Neville succeeded Langley he granted Bukley (1439) a similar acquittance4*; and upon the master's retiring on account of age he bestowed on him a pension of 40 marks per annum.4* Another charge of waste and misappropriation of funds was made in Bishop Tunstall's time (1532), and he announced his intention of inquiring into the matter 47 ; but there are no returns of his visitation. In the returns of 1535-6 the clear value of Kepier Hospital is given as ^167 2s. lid. per annum.48 The house was surrendered to the king 14 January, 1545-6, and was granted in the same year to Sir W. Paget, who afterwards reconveyed it to the king in exchange for the college and manor of Burton-on-Trent and other lands.4' Edward VI granted it to John Cockburn, lord of Ormiston,*0 who, seventeen * Close, 14 Edjv. II, m. 14 d. " Dur. "Epis. Reg. Hatficld, fol. 20. 40 Reg. Eccle . Dun. iv, fol. 1 08. 41 Dur. Epis. Reg. Hatficld, fol. 28. "Ibid. fol. noJ. " Ibid. Langley, fol. 248. 44 Ibid. fol. 249 d. 44 Dur. Treas. Reg. iii, fol. 242. 44 Ibid. fol. 241 d. 41 Dur. Epis. Reg. Tunstall, fol: 5. " Dugdale, Mm. Angl. (ed. 1846), vi, 731. In a list of hospitals in the bishop's gift in the beginning of Bishop Tunstall's Epis. Reg. 1530, the value of Kepier is stated to be £100. " Repert. Orig. MS. B.M. iv, 200 ; see the Par- ticular for the Grant, MS. Harl. 7389, p. 3. "Pat. 23 May, 6 Edw. VI. years later, sold it with all its dependencies to John Heath, warden of the Fleet." MASTERS OF KEPIER HOSPITAL Adam, occ. 1189 ** Ralph, occ. between 1228 and 1237 ** De Argentine, occ. between 1241 and 1249 M John de London, occ. 1254, 1258" Peter de Tylynsby, occ. 1 300 ** Peter de Thoresby, occ. 1306-15 " Hugh de Montalto, occ. 1311-17 *8 Simon, de Eycote, app. 17 October, 1316 " Hugh de Montalto, restored 22 November, 1320* Edmund Howard, occ. 1341-45 M William Legat, occ. 1348 '* Richard Rotere, app. 14 January, 1362-3** Hugh Herle, or Neile, occ. 1388 *4 Robert Wycliff, occ. before 1405 ; d. 1423 * Richard Bukley, app. 1423 ; res. 1439 ** John Lound, app. 1439 " ; occ. 1455 *8 Henry Gillowe, res. I479(?) w Ralph Booth, app. 1479 p.r. Gillowe70 Thomas Colston, app. 1497 P>m' Booth T1 Roger Layborn, 1501—3 71 Thomas Wytton 7* John Boer 74 William Franklyn, occ. 1520 ; res. 14 Janu- ary, '545-6" Two illustrations of the seal of St. Giles* Hos- pital are given in jfrchaelogia A e liana ; each is in shape a pointed oval : the first (? thirteenth " Suit. Hist. Dur. iv (2), 65. " Mickleton MS. No. 32 ; Suit. Hist. Dur. iv (0, 65- ** Mickleton MS. No. 32 ; see Close, 6 Edw. Ill, m. 23. M Mickleton MS. No. 32. 44 Hunter's MSS. and Script. Tret. c. vi, 43. 44 Reg. iii, P. and C. Dunelm. fol. 83*. " Rtg. Pa/at. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), i, 34; ii, 1097, 1 1 76, &c. " Serif t. Tret. App. Ixixvi, pp. cv, cvi ; Dur. Treas. Reg. ii, fol. 67^. 48 Pat. 10 Edw. II, pt. I, m. 1 1. * Pat. 14 Edw. II, pt. I, m. 4. 41 Mickleton MS. No. 32. " Close, 22 Edw. Ill, pt. 2, m. 5 d. * Dur. Epis. Reg. Hatfield, fol. 1 30. 41 Hunter's MSS. ; Surt. Hist. Dur. iv (2), 6f. 41 Dur. Wills (Surt. Soc), 66 ». ; Hunter's MSS. 44 Mickleton MS. No. 32. " Dur. Treas. Reg. iii, fol. 241. " Serif t. Tret. (Surt. Soc.), App. ccxlviii. " Hunter's MSS. 70 Mickleton MS. No. 32. " Dur. Epis. Reg. Foi, fol. 13. " Surt. Hist. Dur. iv (2), 65. " Hunter's MS. 74 Ibid. " Mickleton MS. No. 31. A HISTORY OF DURHAM century) bears the cross of St. Cuthbert, with the legend — SIGILLU • SANCTI ' EGIDII ' DUNELMIE ; the other a cross with two arms, and the words — SIGILLUM ' SANCTI ' EGIDII.76 17. THE HOSPITAL OF ST. MARY MAGDALEN, WITTON GILBERT This hospital was founded by Gilbert de la Ley, lord of Witton (c. 1 1 54-80), who granted to the almoner of Durham 60 acres of arable land in Witton field, a rent of 301., free mul- ture, and common of pasture for the support of five lepers therein. On the death of any inmate the almoner was to appoint another sufferer to fill the vacant place.77 This grant was subse- quently confirmed by Philip son of Gilbert, and in 1351 by Philip's granddaughter (sic) and her husband.78 There exists an undated list of the names of the brethren and sisters of the house at Witton, with particulars of their allowances. The names are as follows : — John Stele ; John Binchester, chaplain ; John Marshall ; John Short ; Jane Partrike ; Jane Wharram ; Alice Waynfleet, and Margaret Lesshmaker. The brothers had for their corrodies one bushel of wheat every three weeks ; 4;., pro namiis suis, at Christmas ; and for 'soul silver' 8s. 8d. per annum. Those brethren who lived in the house had two chalders of coal for fuel. The sisters had a similar supply of wheat and coal, and in addition four oxen were divided amongst them, and they each had 200 red herrings.79 They also received is. for ' egg silver ' ; and two whole loaves ' at the cove ' every week.80 Apparently the hospital was no longer in existence at the time of the dissolution.81 1 8. THE HOSPITAL OF BATHEL The first mention of this hospital occurs in the life of St. Godric.1 A certain widow had a daughter who was a leper, and in her distress she appealed to the priest of their town, Halie- 78 Arch. AeRana (New Ser.), ii, 56. 77 Chart, ex Orig. zb, Spec. 78 Chart. Snrt. Hist. Dur. ii, 370. 78 Surtees thought there must have been some clerical error here, as it was unlikely that the provision for the women should exceed in quantity that for the men. 80 Surt. Hist. Dur. ii, 370. 81 In Hunter's MSS. No. 37, occurs the following list : ' Fratres et Sorores Hospitalis Sti. Petri juxta Witton, 1532-' The names of 1 3 men and 1 2 women are given. Some are described as ' de Maison Dieu,' and some as being in the infirmary. The above dedi- cation is probably a mistake, as there is apparently no mention elsewhere of a hospital of St. Peter. 1 Vita Sti. Godrici (Surt. Soc.), 456-7. tune [? = Haughton-le-Skerne], for advice and help. He procured the admission of the daugh- ter into a hospital at Darlington, which was scarcely three miles away, and was called ' Badele.' The treatment there, if any were tried, does not seem to have been successful, for the sufferer remained for three years in the in- firmary, growing steadily worse, and was finally cured by a miracle.2 For nearly two hundred years there is no further mention of the hospital, though the names 'Bathela,'3 « Bathelgate,' 4 ' Bathley,'6 and ' Bathel,'6 occur under Blackwell near Darlington in Boldan Book in 1 1 83, and Hatfield's Survey, c. 1377. In these entries there is no mention of any building, but only of land, herbage, and pasture. In February, 1340—1, we find the collation of . Hugh de Picton, chaplain, to the chantry of Bathelspital, near Darlington, vacant by the death of William de Haltwhistle, and in the bishop's collation.7 In July, 1362, William of Brantingham was collated to the hospital of Bathel, vacant by the death of 'Dominus Wade,' the late priest.8 Then follows another long gap in the history, but in 1418-19 begins the series of appoint- ments given below : — John Ukerby, chantry priest of Darlington manor, master and warden of the hospital of Bathel, d. 141 8 (?)9 Roger Wakerlein, collated 6 January, 1418-19, p.m. J. Ukerby 10 ' Richard [Gardener], rector of Dinsdale, ex- changed with R.Wakerlein, 24 December,! 41 9 u Bernard Warde, vicar of Coniscliffe, exchanged with R. Gardener, 18 March, 1420-1 12 Robert Bett, al. Grissemere, priest, collated 16 May, 1422, p.m. B. Warde.13 Resigned 9 September, 1422 14 Stephen Austell, resigned 15 April, 1433 16 William Blomeley, collated 4 October, 1437, p.r. S. Austell 16 After this all trace of the hospital seems lost, unless it be the house of which Leland speaks as ' a priory not far from Darlington, as I remem- ber about Tees River.' 17 Bathel appears to have ' Ibid. The editor of this volume says [p. 45 6, note] ' that of this Hospital no other notice exists ' ; but there seems no reason to doubt that the hospital men- tioned so frequently in the Episcopal Registers is the same. (See below.) 3 BoldonBk. (Surt. Soc.), 17. 4 Hatf. Surv. (Surt. Soc.), 3. 'Ibid. ii. 6Ibid. 13. 7 Reg. Pa/af. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), iii, 378. 8 Dur. Epis. Reg. Hatfield, fol. 128. • Ibid. Langley, fol. 104. 10 Ibid. " Ibid. fols. 105, 272. 11 Ibid. fol. 107. " Ibid. fol. 112. 14 Ibid. fol. 113. 15 Ibid. fol. 204. 16 Ibid. fol. 252. " Ititt. (2nd ed.), vii, 50. RELIGIOUS HOUSES been situated somewhere between Darlington and the Tees, but it seems unlikely that it should be styled a priory. 19. THE HOSPITAL OF SS. LAZARUS, MARTHA, AND MARY, SHERBURN Sherburn Hospital was founded in or about 1181 by Bishop Pudsey, who dedicated it to Christ, the Blessed Virgin, Lazarus, Martha, and Mary.1 It was built for the reception and entertainment of sixty-five poor lepers, men and women, with a master and three priests. Of these priests two were to officiate at the altar of St. Mary Magdalen, and the third to sing mass in the chapel of St. Nicholas, which adjoined the building occupied by the sisters on the south side. The original endowment comprised the vill, mill, and pasture of Sherburn ; Ebchester, ' the place of anchorets upon the Derwent,' for feed- ing animals for the use of sick brethren, and I carucate of land there for their shepherds ; 9 oxgangs in Witton ; the vill of Garmonds- way ; I carucate called Raceby ; a carucate and an oxgang in Sheraton ; and the churches of Kelloe, Grindon, Sockburn, Ebchester, and Bishopton.* Subsequent grants included lands in South Sherburn,1 a messuage in Ebchester,4 free warren in Sherburn, Whitwell, Garmonds- way, and Ebchester,5 and other small holdings. Little is known of the hospital during the thirteenth century. About the middle of that period died Martin of St. Cross, master of Sher- burn, a wealthy and important personage. In his will he provided for his burial at Sherburn, should his death take place there ; and in that case he bequeathed some vestments to the hos- pital. He also left to it some books, including his Argenteus Textus (i.e. probably a copy of the New Testament written in silver characters), and a pittance of los. each to the inmates of any religious house where he might die.* Pre- sumably his death occurred at Sherburn, as the brethren and sisters received an annual pittance on Holy Cross Day in memory of him, though the amount was reduced by Bishop Kellaw to 5*. $d. Bishop Kellaw (c. 1316) confirmed and 1 After the Reformation it was always called 'Christ's Hospital, Sherburn,' or simply 'Sherburn House.' In Reg. Pa/at. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), ii, 1224, Pat. 10 Edw. II, pt. i, and elsewhere, it is spoken of as the ' Hospital of S. Mary Magdalene of Sherburn ' ; the mistake may have arisen from a confusion between Mary Magdalen and Mary of Bethany, or from the fact that there was an altar of St. Mary Magdalen in the hospital. Allan, Collections relating to Sherburn. Ibid. Reg. Palat. Dun. ii, 1289. Allan, Coll. Willi and Invent. (Surt. Soc.), i, 8. enlarged the original constitutions of Bishop Pudsey. He built a new chapel, dedicated to the Blessed Virgin, on the north of the old chapel, and added a fourth priest, who sang mass daily, somewhat later than the usual service, for those brethren who were too infirm to rise and hear mattins. On Sundays and festivals high mass was cele- brated in the principal chapel for the lepers of both sexes, who entered at their respective sides of the chapel in procession, preceded by their prior and prioress, and after service departed again within the veil of separation.7 The lepers were liberally supplied with food, clothing, and firing; but, considering that the inmates were all more or less afflicted, the dis- cipline of the house was somewhat severe. In case of disobedience the prior was to chastise the offender with a rod ; should that prove ineffectual, he was to be kept on bread and water ; and if still contumacious to be expelled from the com- munity.8 During Advent and Lent all the brethren were required to receive corporal dis- cipline in the chapel three days in the week ; and the sisters in like manner in the presence of their prioress donee omnes vapulent? A place in the hospital was nevertheless regarded as a thing to be coveted ; Edward II asked the bishop as a favour to admit Joan widow of John Chamber, by way of showing his gratitude for the good service of her late husband against the Scots.10 In 1378 Bishop Hatfield issued a commission to the priors of Durham and Finchale to visit the hospital,11 but no returns of this visitation exist. Apparently at this time the house was falling into decay, for in September, 1429, when Bishop Langley's chancellor visited it, it was in such a destitute and miserable condition that the bishop applied to Pope Eugene IV for help.1* The pope readily granted him a faculty to make new rules and ordinances, which he accord- ingly issued on 22 July, 1434. He appointed a priest as master, to have under him four chap- lains, four clerks or singing-men, and two boy- choristers. Two lepers, if to many could be found, were to be maintained apart by themselves, and thirteen poor men were to be fed and clothed, to mess and lodge in the same house, and to attend mass daily. On the death of any brother the master was to choose a successor within fifteen days or forfeit a mark to the fabric of Durham Cathedral. A sober woman-servant was to attend on the brethren at the master's expense to wash their linen and do other offices. The master was made responsible for the goods and 7 Surt. Hist. Dur. i (2), 128. 1 Reg. ii, Eccles. Dun. fol. 3*4. ' Surt. Hiit. Dur. i (2), 128. "Close, 12 Edw. II, m. 27 J. " Dur. Epis. Reg. Hatfield, fol. 140 d. u Allan, Coll. A HISTORY OF DURHAM buildings of the hospital, and was bound by an oath to perform all his duties.13 In 1501 Mr. Dykar was appointed master H on the resignation of Alexander Lee, who, owing to paralysis and other troubles, had for some months been so infirm as to require the services of a coadjutor.16 Mr. Dykar was a most un- scrupulous person. He expelled from the hos- pital all the poor inmates for whose benefit it primarily existed, and in their place added to the staff two priests, two deacons, and four boy- choristers. The change considerably increased the master's income, which was still further augmented by the reduction of the clerical staff in the course of the reign of Henry VIII to two priests, two deacons, and two children.16 In the Valor of 1535 the annual value of Sherburn Hospital is given as £142 os. 4<£lr As a secular foundation it was not dissolved with the religious houses, but continued to exist in a more or less impoverished and disorganized state, the subject of many broils, till in 1585 it was incorporated anew under the name of Christ's Hospital, Sherburn. The number of brethren was raised to thirty, under a master who was to be a preacher holding no other cure ; and the bishop was empowered to make rules for its good government.18 The well-known Valentine Dale was the first master under the new regime.19 From time to time the bishops of Durham have issued fresh ordinances for the house ; those made by Bishop Butler in I73520 holding good till the hospital was reconstituted by the Charity Com- missioners in i857.21 MASTERS OF SHERBURN HOSPITAL Arnold of Auckland, occ. Ralph the Monk23 Warren of Godet24 Martin of St. Cross, app. I245,26 occ. I25926 Roger of Seyton, occ. c. 1269 27 William of the Island, occ. I30228 Lambert of Trikingham, occ. 1 3 1 3 29 13 Dur. Epis. Reg. Langley, fol. 244. 14 Ibid. Fox, fol. 46. 15 Ibid. fol. 39 d. l6 Allan, Coll. 17 In the list of hospitals in Bishop Tunstall's Epis. Reg. I 530, the value is given as £100. 18 Surt. Hist. Dur. i (2), 132. 19 Dur. Epis. Reg. Barnes, fol. 19. n Printed in extenso, Surt. Hut. Dur. i (2), 135. 11 Account of Chris fs Hospital, Sherburn, by H. A. Mitton, M.A., p. ii. " Allan, Coll. K G. S. Faber, Master of Sherburn, 1850. MS. note in the margin of Mr. LongstafFe's copy of Sur- tees' Hist, i (2), 127, &c. Now in the library of the Dean and Chapter of Durham. " Ibid. >5 Allan, Coll. K Wills and Invent. (Surt. Soc.), i, 6. " Allan, Coll. 88 Ibid. 19 Reg. Pa/at. Dun. ii, 1224. Thomas of Haswell, occ. before I33O30 Thomas de Nevill, presented 1340" John of Westwitton, occ. I34332 Alan of Shuttlington, coll. 15 August, 1362 33 Thomas of Bernolby, coll. I3&784 John of Waltham, occ. 8 May, I384,35 res. I38836 Thomas Haxeye, app. by the king, 13 Sep- tember, 1388" Henry Godebarne, estate ratified, 28 Septem- ber, I38938 John Stacy, app. by king, 26 September, I39039 John Burgess, app. by king, 1 7 August, 1391 40 John Wendelyngburgh, died before 22 Sep- tember, 1395" Nicholas Slake, app. 22 September, 1395, p.m. John Wendelyngburgh 42 Alan of Newark, occ. 3 January, I4O3-4,43 res. 1409,** died 1411 46 John Newton, inducted 1 4 June, 141 1,46 occ. January, 141 5-6 47 Nicholas Dixon, coll. 28 November, 1427, p.m. J. Newton48 John Marshall, coll. July, 1433, p.r. N.Dixon49 Alexander Lee, coll. c. 1490 w Robert Dykar, coll. 1501, p.r. A. Lee61 Roderick Gundisalve, app. 1 1 May, 1507 M Geoffrey Wren, occ. 1524, d. 4 April, I52763 Edward Fox, app. 1527 64 Sir Thomas Leigh, kt., coll. 14 September, 1535, d. 1545" Anthony Bellasis, app. 1545, d. I55266 Sir Richard Read, kt. occ. 1552 " Anthony Sal v in, app. 13 August, I552,68 de- prived for Romanism I55969 Ralph Skinner, occ. 1559 w Thomas Lever, app. 28 January, 1 562-3 61 Ralph Lever, coll. 16 July, 1577, p.m. T. Lever68 Valentine Dale, pres. 17 April, I58563 80 Dugdale, Man. Angl. (ed. 1846), vi, 668. 11 Reg. Pa/at. Dun. iii, 275. " Dur. Epis. Reg. Bury (in Reg. Hatfield), fol. 5. 83 Ibid. Hatfield, fol. 129. * Ibid. fol. 142. " Dugdale, Mm. Angl. (ed. 1846), vi, 668. 86 Ibid. " Pat. 12 Ric. II, pt. I, m. 21. "Ibid. m. 12. " Ibid. m. 22. 40 Ibid. m. 24. "Ibid. m. 1 8. "Ibid. 48 Wills and Invent. (Surt. Soc.), i, 5 1 n. " Ibid. 46 Ibid. ; Dur. Epis. Reg. Langley, fol. 41. 46 Dur. Epis. Reg. Langley, fol. 41 d. " Ibid. fol. 79 d. 48 Ibid. fol. 134. " Ibid. fol. 204 «/. M Allan, Coll. 81 Dur. Epis. Reg. Fox, fol. 48. 61 Dugdale, Men. Angl. (ed. 1846), vi, 668. 68 Ibid. " Allan, Coll. 65 Dugdale, Man. Angl. (ed. 1846), vi, 668. M Ibid. " Ibid. M Ibid. 69 Surt. Hist. Dur. i (2), 131. M Allan, Coll. 81 Dugdale, Mon. Angl. (ed. 1846), vi, 668. 68 Dur. Epis. Reg. Barnes, fol. I d. 68 Ibid. fol. 19. 116 RELIGIOUS HOUSES Robert Bellamy, occ. 1589** Thomas Murray, app. 1608 ** William Shawe, coll. II July, 1623** David Miles, 'curate in Sherburn Hospital,' occ. 1 626" John M action, occ. 24 September, 1636, ejected i642w John Fenwick, sen. occ. l643}usurpers«9 John Fenwick, jun. occ. 1654} John Machon, restored 12 March, 1660— I *° John Montague, occ. i68o71 Thomas Rundle, D.D., occ. 1727 7> Wadham Chandler, occ. I August, I73571 Robert Stillingfleet, occ. June, 1738 74 David Gregory, D.D., occ. 15 September, 1759"; d. 1767." Mark Hildesley, D.D., occ. 21 September, 1767" Thomas Dampier, D.D., occ. 1773, res. 1774™ Thomas Dampier, D.D., coll. June, 1774 n Andrew Bell, D.D., occ. iSog80 George S. Faber, app. 1832, d. i85481 Edward Prest, app. 1857 James Carr, app. 1861 Henry A. Mitton, app. 1874, pres. master The seal of Sherburn House bears a full-length figure of our Lord, clad in a long robe, holding in His left hand a crown, and in His right a scroll with the words ' Dato et retribuam.' In the dis- tance a lame man is represented, approaching the door of the hospital. Legend — SIGILLUM'HOSPITALIS'CHRISTI ' IN1 SHEREBURNE.81 20. THE HOSPITAL OF THE HOLY TRINITY, GATESHEAD The origin of this hospital is unknown. It was in existence about the year 1200 (and possibly long before), as a foundation for the support of a chaplain and three poor brethren. To it, at about that period, Osmund son of Hamo gave four acres of land in ' Harlei,' close to Benchelm Wood.83 In 1226 Henry of Ferlington, constable of Durham, bestowed on the hospital his vill of Kyo in frankalmoign to provide a chaplain to 44 Allan, Coll. 44 S.P. Dom. Addend. Jas. I, mix, No. 50. 44 Dur. Epis. Reg. Neile, fol. 54. 47 Ibid. fol. 92. * Dugdale, Man. Angl. (ed. 1 846), vi, 668. * Allan, Coll. ' n Ibid. " Ibid. 71 Dugdale, Man. Angl. (ed. 1846), vi, 668. n Ibid. " Ibid. n Ibid. 74 H. A. Mitton, Account of Christ* s Hospital, p. 10. 77 Dugdale, Man. Angl. (ed. 1846), vi, 668. " Ibid. " Ibid. •» Ibid. 41 H. A. Mitton, ut supra, p. 1 8. * Engraved on title-page of Allan's Coll. " Orig. Chart, in the vestry at Gateshead. celebrate and to maintain three poor men to pray for the soul of the donor ;M and by an un- dated charter Baldwin-with-the-head gave to Gerard son of Geve, steward of the hospital, seventeen acres in the south part of his Held called Alrisburne, reserving a rent of 8d. towards the repair of Tyne Bridge.8* The house seems to have been poor and un- important, and in 1248 it had sunk so low that the inmates could afford to live neither a religious nor a secular life. Bishop Farnham in conse- quence of this united it with his new hospital of St. Edmund the Confessor.8* 21. THE HOSPITAL OF ST. JOHN THE BAPTIST, BARNARD CASTLE This hospital is said to have been founded in or about the year 1230 by the elder John Baliol, but the evidence is imperfect.1 It was dedicated to the honour of St. John the Baptist, and was occupied by three poor women who received a pension in money and coals to pray for the soul of the founder.3 Surtees describes the house as ' a low thatched building, containing one room only, called the bedehouse.' * In the fifteenth century, however, it possessed a church of its own, for in 1497 the pope granted an indulgence of a hundred days to all who attended ' the church of the said hospital ' on the feasts of the nativity and beheading of its patron saint. This was done to aid the funds of the house, which were low at the time.4 The Valor Ecclesiasticus of 1536 gives the clear value of the hospital as £$ 91. ^d. The list of its possessions at that time includes the site and house ; land called Septem (or Sewinge) Flatts and a cottage ; lands, pasture, &c. in Selby [Seleby] ; rents in Hullerbush [Hullerbuske] and Ovington ; a pension of ^i 6s. 8d. from Rievaulx Abbey ; and tithes from the mills of Barnard Castle, Gainford, and Bywell. The particulars given in the Commissioners' Report in 1594 agree in the main with the above, the pension of £ I 6s. 8d. being then paid from the revenues of the dissolved abbey of Rievaulx. The sole event in the pre-Re formation history of the hospital is a robbery of certain of its goods which took place in 1355, and was punished * Madox, Formul. Angl. 58. * Brand, Hist. Newcastle, \, 464-5. ** Orig. Chart, in Aug. Off., printed by Brand, Hiit. Newcastle. 1 Surt. Hiit. Dur. iv (i), 80 ; see Hutchinson, Hist. Dur. iii, 137. ' Surt. ut supra ; see Arch. Atliana (New Scr.), vi, 45- 1 Hill. Dur. iv (i), 80. 4 Indulgence, printed by Surt. Hist. Dur. iv (i), 121 ; possibly this church may be identified with the ' Bedelcirk,' an old deserted chapel which stands at the head of Gallowgate, and the history of which is unknown. 7 A HISTORY OF DURHAM by the excommunication of the unknown marauders." Being a lay foundation (though the master was always supposed to be in holy orders),6 the hospital continued to exist after the dissolution, and the patronage fell into the hands of the sovereign, as appendent to the manor of Barnard Castle.7 In 1866 the property was put into the hands of trustees, and the hospital is now incor- porated with the North Eastern County School.8 MASTERS OF BARNARD CASTLE HOSPITAL John de Mortham, d. or res. 1304' John de Horton, app. 1304 John de Harewood, occ. April, 1355 10 Christopher Hilton, occ. 1497 u Richard Leigh, occ. I536,12 21 March, 1557-8 ;13 d. c. 1562" Edmund Treasurer, c. 1562 15 Christopher Jackson, app. by the Lord Chan- cellor, 17 December, I59616 John Chapman, occ. icSg17 Peter Ferron, occ. 1 705 18 Rev. E. Browell, D.D., occ. 15 July, 1756" Rev. A. Wood, M.A., app. 3 August, I76320 Rev. W. Lipscomb, app. 1783, d. i84221 Rev. J. Davidson, app. 1842, d. 1847 Rev. G. Dugard, app. 1847, d 22. THE HOSPITAL OF ST. EDMUND, BISHOP AND CONFESSOR, GATES- HEAD This chapel or hospital was founded by Bishop Farnham in or about 1248, and was dedicated to the honour of St. Edmund, bishop and con- fessor, and St. Cuthbert. The establishment consisted of a master and three other priests, whose duties were simply to celebrate the divine offices and to pray for the soul of the founder, his predecessors, and his successors. Each of the subordinate chaplains was to receive from the master the sum of 2ds. yearly. The bishop en- dowed his new foundation, which was almost invariably called the chapel of St. Edmund, with the vill of Ulkistan, the old lordship of Gates- 6 Dur. Epis. Reg. Hatfield, fol. 62. 6 Arch. Aeliana (New Ser.), vi, 45. ' Ibid. ' Char. Com. Rep. 1902. 9 This and the following name are given from in- formation kindly supplied by E. Wells, esq. 10 Dur. Epis. Reg. Hatfield, fol. 62. 11 Surt. Hist. Dur. iv (i), 121. 11 Valor Eccl. (Rec. Com.) " Wills and Invent. (Surt. Soc.), i, 160. " Arch. Aeliana (New Ser.), vi, 46. 16 Ibid. 16 Dugdale, Man. Angl. (ed. 1846), vi, 760. " Char. Com. Rep. 1902, p. 2. 18 Ibid. 19 MS. Allan, 6, 2. " Ibid. " Char. Com. Rep. ut supra. M Ibid. " Ibid. head, Benchelm Wood which contained 43 acres,, and 29 acres of land in ' Alluresacyres ' ; in lieu of all which he granted certain other lands tO' the church of Durham.1 He also united with it the chapel or hospital of the Holy Trinity, Gateshead, which had fallen into great poverty.2 The bishop of Durham for the time being was to be patron of St. Edmund's.3 By an undated charter, probably of the early fourteenth century, John of the Kitchen [de Coquina], burgess of Gateshead, gave land to the hospital ;* and in 1316 was proved the will of John of the Kitchen, chaplain (possibly the same person), by which he left an annual rent of half-a-mark to ' the house of the Holy Trinity and St. Edmund the Confessor." In the Nova Taxatio of the temporal and spiritual goods of the Durham clergy in the four- teenth century the temporalities of the ' Hospital of St. Edmund the Archbishop ' were valued at 5 marks.6 Martin of St. Cross, master of Sherburn, whose will is dated November, 1259, bequeathed some vestments to St. Edmund's Chapel ; 7 and other benefactors must have followed his example, for in February, 1325-6, the hospital possessed two- gold chalices and a goodly store of vestments and books, some of the best of which were gifts from John of Denton, late master. The inventory which was taken after his death shows that the buildings of the hospital included a chapel, hall,, kitchen, &c., and that the brethren owned oxen' and other live stock, and had, besides a good supply of corn in the granary, 72 acres of land sown with wheat. There is no hint of any accommodation for poor or sick persons.8 In addition to the goods of the house the late master's executors delivered up to his successor,. Roland de Jorz, bishop of Armagh, 'a certain writing of the ordination of the chapel of St. Edmund.' • There was in the hospital as early as 1382 10' a chantry of the Holy Trinity, which was still in existence in 1430." It may have been a relic of the incorporated hospital of the Holy Trinity. I Found. Chart. Bourne, Hist. Newcastle, 1 69 ;. Ordinatio, ibid. 170. ' See above, Hosp. Holy Trinity. 3 Ordinatio, Bourne, Hist. Newcastle, 1 70. 4 Chart, printed, Brand, Hist. Newcastle, i, 469 n. 6 Ibid. 470 ». From an old deed, then in Brand's- possession. 6 Ibid. 469 ». From an MS. in the Exchequer. Brand says that in the Taxatio of 1292 the temporali- ties of ' the Hospital of Gateshead ' were valued at j£i8 ; but this may possibly refer to the Hospital of St. Edmund the King, q.v. 7 Wills and Invent. (Surt. Soc), i, 7. 8 Amongst other household stores are mentioned two 'nappae' [? tablecloths] for the boys. 8 Reg. Palat. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), iii, 83. 10 Half. Burv. (Surt. Soc.), 88. II Randall's MSS. Brand, Hist. Newcastle, i, 471 »- 118 RELIGIOUS HOUSES In May, 1378, Bishop Hatfield issued to the priors of Durham and Finchale a commission to visit the hospital of St. Edmund the Archbishop;11 but no returns of this visitation exist, nor of another which took place in 1421." Ten years later the bishop, dissatisfied with the conduct of John Walkington, master, again ordered that the hospital should be visited, and in consequence of the state of things which was discovered, seques- trated the goods alike of the house and of its master (n May, I43i).14 It seems probable that Walkington was removed as untrustworthy, since the collation of George Radcliffe occurs in January, 1431-2." In 1436 the hospital was robbed: chalices, books, vestments, &c., being stolen from the chapel by some persons unknown.1* Two years later the nuns of St. Bartholomew, Newcastle, who had sustained severe losses by fire and by the non-payment of certain pensions, appealed to the bishop for assistance. He re- sponded (7 October, 1448) by appropriating to them and incorporating with their house the hospital of St. Edmund with all its possessions. The nuns in return engaged to provide two chaplains to celebrate in St. Edmund's chapel ; to keep the chapel and the buildings belonging to it in repair ; and to pay out of the issues or the hospital two pensions : — one of 6s. 8 Ibid. 4690. " Ibid. 470 ». " Wills and Invent. (Surt. Soc.), i, *2. " Ibid. 17 Pat. 7 Edw. III.pt. 2, m. 17. " Reg. Pa/at. Dun. iii, 380. " Dur. Epis. Reg. Hatfield, fol. 74. "Ibid. fol. 141. "Ibid. fol. 195. "Ibid. * Pat. 5 Ric. II, pt. i, m. 23. 14 Pat. 6 Ric. II, pt. 2, m. 2. " Pat. 12 Ric. II, pt. i, m. 10. • Dur. Epis. Reg. Langley, fol. 1 76. " Surt. Hist. Dur. ii, 127. " Dur. Epis. Reg. Langley, fol. 225 , 473- * Surt. Hist. Dur. ii, 1 27. * Dur. Epis. Reg. Barnes, foL 5 d. diminished, as well by the pestilence (the Black Death) which was rife among the people as by other misfortunes and accidents, in consequence of which the name of vicar was no longer so much honoured among the people. The bishop accordingly (8 November, 1439) ordained that the vicar should thenceforth be called dean ; and for the support of that dignity he erected one additional prebend to be held with the deanery, to consist of the oblations, mortuaries, viltaragc, and offerings which the vicar then held, together with his ancient manse. He also made an arrangement by which the dean was to receive the tithes of each of the other prebends in succession for three years.' In addition the bishop ordained (1443) that every prebendary should provide one officiating " Royal Com. Rep. 1594. " Dur. Epis. Reg. Barnes. " Close, 1 1 Edw. II, m. 24. M Hunter's MSS. No. 37. Surtees gives the names of Richard and John de Lynce in his list of the masters of St. Edmund's Hospital, Gateshead (Hist. Dur. ii, 127), but mentions no authority for doing so. The above appears to be the only reference to the hospital of Werhale, which may possibly be identical with one of the hospitals at Gateshead. (?) 1 Leland, Coll. i, 385. * Angl. Sacr. i, 724. •Suit. Hist. Dur. iii, 361. * Reg. Palat. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), i, 101, 245. ' They were great pluralists. William of Kildesby, prebendary in 1343, held at one and the same time seven prebends, a church, a chapel, and a hospital. Pat. 17 Edw. Ill, pt. I, m. 31. ' Reg. Ecclcs. Dun. iii, fol. 244. This plan was found to be inconvenient, so in 1451 it was ordered that the dean was to keep the prebend of Darlington permanently. Ibid, iv, 77-8. A HISTORY OF DURHAM clerk, or in default forfeit five marks to the dean.7 In J5358 ancl I548,9 the revenues of the college were valued at £53 6s. \\d. It was dissolved in 1550, and the whole of the lands and tithes vested in the cr§>wn, except a small stipend reserved for an officiating minister.10 VICARS OF DARLINGTON" Robert de Royston, occ. 1309 Richard de Hadington, occ. 1344 William de Welton, coll. 1354, p.m. Had- ington Robert de Hunmanby, occ. 1361 William Hoton, occ. 1398 William Hesel, occ. 1411 Stephen Austell, occ. 27 March, 1416 Richard Wytton, coll. 1428, p.r. Austell Richard Bicheburn, occ. 1436 Richard Wytton, first dean DEANS OF DARLINGTON Richard Wytton, nominated 1439 Roland Hardgyll, occ. 1451 Robert Symeson, occ. 14 August, 1466 Ralph Lepton, coll. 9 November, 1497, p. m. R. Symeson ls Cuthbert Marshall, occ. I548,13 dean at the dissolution 32. THE COLLEGE OF AUCKLAND ST. ANDREW It is not known who founded the Collegiate Church of Auckland, but it was in existence as early as 1226, when the king presented Alan Poynnant to a prebend therein.1 Having fallen somewhat into decay, it was reconstituted and endowed in 1292 by Bishop Bek, who erected a new chapel and other buildings for the canons,3 and bestowed tithes to the amount of £ I O per annum for a new prebend. He provided for the constant residence of the dean, and ordained that the prebendaries should provide vicars ; priests in the case of the five senior canons, deacons for the next four, and sub-deacons for the remaining two or three.3 Divine service was to be celebrated 7 Surt. Hist. Dur. iii, 362. 8 Ibid. ' Chant. Cert. Surt. Soc. Publ.vo\. 22, App. vi, p. Ixx. 10 Surt. Hist. Dur. iii, 362. 11 The following list is taken from Surt. Hut. Dur. iii, 362, except where otherwise stated. 11 Dur. Kpis. Reg. Fox, fol. 1 5 d. 13 Chant. Cert. Surt. Soc. Publ. vol. 22, App. vi, p. Ixx. 1 Pat. 10 Hen. Ill, m. I. Bishop William is said to have placed at Auckland some of the ejected seculars from Durham. 1 Leland, I tin. (2nd ed.), i, 71. 3 There appear to have been eleven or twelve pre- bendaries besides the dean ; Arch. Aeliana (New Ser.), xx, 131. after the use of York or of Sarum, with high mass daily, and daily mattins for the benefit of the parishioners.4 In 1 3 14 the then dean obtained a licence of non- residence on account of the disturbed state of the country, owing to the war with Scotland.6 In 1428 the values of the prebends having altered considerably, and the vicars' stipends being in- sufficient, Bishop Langley re-arranged the prebends, dividing some and uniting others in order to equalize their values ; provided for the necessary increase in the salaries ; and issued a fresh set of rules for the conduct of the canons and their vicars.6 He also (1431—2) ordered that the houses, cloisters, &c., of the college should be repaired.7 There is in existence a curious inventory, made in 1499, of the household goods belonging to the deanery of Auckland, which were handed on from one dean to another ; the list includes a considerable collection of books.8 In 1500 or 1501 the dean had licence for himself and his successors to acquire lands of the value of j£2O per annum in augmentation of the sustenance of the choristers.9 In the Taxation of 1291, the revenues of the college were given as ^249 13*. 4^. ; in 1534 as j£i79 13*. 8J. ;10 and in 1548 35^171 los. 4^." The chantry certificate (1548) states that the establishment then consisted of a dean and ten prebendaries, and that the dean had the cure of souls in the parish as vicar.12 When the college was dissolved, the church was left as a mere curacy, very meanly provided for. The last dean had a pension granted him of £50, which was paid in 15 53." DEANS OF AUCKLAND Robert de Alberwyk, occ. 5 March, 1293-4^ Thomas de Clifford, occ. 131 4,15 1 3 1 6 16 John de Insula 17 Hamon de Belers, occ. I34O18 John de Houton, coll. 1340, p.r. H. de Belers ls John Mauduyt, coll. 1343, by exch. with J. Houton » William Westlee, occ. 1350 sl John Kingston, occ. I3&222 * Hutchinson, Hist. Dur. iii, 332—3. 6 Reg. Palat. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), i, 619. 8 Dur. Epis. Reg. Langley, fol. 148. ' Ibid. fol. 1 86 d. ' Ibid. Fox, fol. 26 d. 9 Rot. 2 Fox, A. m. 28. 10 Tanner, Notit. Mm. " Chant. Cert. Surt. Soc. Publ.\o\. 22, App. vi,p. Ixv. lf Ibid. " Hutchinson, Hist. Dur. iii, 335. 14 Pat. 10 Edw. II, pt. i, m. 10. 15 Reg. Palat. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), i, 619. 16 Pat. 10 Edw. II, pt. i, m. 10. 17 Hutchinson, Hist. Dur. iii, 334. 18 Reg. Palat. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), iii, 3 20. 19 Ibid. 321. >0Ibid. 463. 81 Hutchinson, Hist. Dur. iii, 334. " Ibid. 126 RELIGIOUS HOUSES Richard de Barnard Castle, occ. 1369 a John de Newthorpe of Pontefract, occ. 1377** William de Walworth, coll. 3 September, 1377, p. r. J. Newthorpe1* Hugh de Westwick, occ. 1388" John Burgess, occ. 1395," H'S** Thomas Lyes, coll. 17 May, 1415, p.m. Burgess " Thomas Hebbedon, coll. 29 December, 1431*° William Doncaster, coll. 30 June, 1435, p.m. T. Hebbedon " Robert Thwaites * Bartholomew Radcliffe, occ. 1 466 M John Kelyng, occ. 1476 ** John Newcourt M William Sherwall, or Sherwood, occ. 1485,** 1498" William Thomeson, coll. 21 July, 1498, p. m. Sherwall*8 Thomas Patenson, coll. 1 5 1 1 , p. m. Thomeson" William Strangeways, coll. December, 1520, p. m. Patenson *° Robert Hyndmer, coll. 1541, p.m. Strange- ways ; 4l dean at the dissolution 41 33. THE COLLEGE OF NORTON The date of the foundation of the college at Norton is unknown.1 The earliest authentic mention of it occurs in the Patent Rolls of 1227, when, the see of Durham being vacant, the king presented to prebends in Norton Col- legiate Church.* At and after that date it con- sisted of eight prebends, and so continued until the dissolution. In 1291 these prebends were valued at ^6 per annum, but the total value in 1534 was £4 6s. Sd. each, or ^34 13*. 4^. the whole;' and in 1548 the total yearly value is given as £48.* The stipends arose from part of the tithe corn of Norton parish.* The succes- sive vicars of Norton appear to have acted as heads of the college, but did not bear the title of dean. " Hutchinson, Hut. Dur. iii, 334. "Dur. Epis. Reg. Hatfield, fol. 188. * Ibid. * Hutchinson, Hilt. Dur. iii, 334. * Ibid. " Dur. Epis. Reg. Langley, fol. 70 J. » Ibid. " Ibid. fol. 1 82 d. " Ibid. fol. 2 1 9 William Pelleson 21 William Brown, coll. 1417, by exch. with W. Pelleson 22 William Aslakby, coll. 21 September, 1424, by exch. with W. Brown33 Stephen Austell, d. 27 February, 1461 24 John Rudd, d. 29 September, I49O25 Thomas Thomyoo, D.D., coll. 1490, p.m. J. Rudd 26 Laurence Claxton, coll. 7. April, 1496 87 Robert Hyndmer, coll. 2 April, 1532, p.m. Claxton ;28 dean at the dissolution 29 35. THE COLLEGE OF CHESTER- LE-STREET The church of Chester-le-Street has passed through four stages of existence. First the seat of the northern bishopric was established there ; then the church became rectorial, and so con- tinued till Bishop Bek, in 1286, terminated a lawsuit between two claimants of the rectory by turning them both out, and erecting the church into a collegiate establishment, consisting of a dean and seven prebendaries. To the dean, who was bound to repair the chancel of Chester church, and to provide ministers for the chapels of Tanfield and Lamesley, were assigned the altarage of the mother church and chapels, the fishery on the Wear, the rents and services of the tenants holding of the church within Chester and Waldridge, and the whole demesne land of Harraton. He was also to have the buildings attached to the chapelries, only allowing the prebendaries room to stack their grain. To each of the prebendaries was allotted a share of the tithes ; and the remainder of the church property was to be divided amongst those of the prebendaries who kept their three months' residence. 13 Dur. Epis. Reg. Hatfield, fol. 148. 14 Surt. ut supra. 15 Pat. II Ric. II, pt. 2, m. 10. 16 Surt. ut supra. " Dur. Epis. Reg. Langley, fol. 15. 18 Ibid. fol. 80. " Ibid. fol. 83. M Ibid. " Ibid. fol. 285. » Ibid. 13 Pat. 3 Hen. VI, pt. I, m. 27. 14 Surt. Hist. Dur. ii, 311. 16 Ibid. * Ibid. 17 Ibid. * Ibid. 19 Chant. Cert. Surt. Soc. Publ. vol. 22, App. vi, p. Ixxiii. The first three prebendaries, who seem to have been considered the wealthiest, were bound to maintain three vicars in orders (vicarios capellanos) ; and the remaining four to provide four vicars-deacons in due canonical habit. The service was to be performed according to the ritual of either York or Sarum.1 In April, 1415, a monition was directed to the canons of Chester for neglect of their duties. They .had failed in the due performance of divine service, in the care of their church and its ornaments, &c.2 Later in the same year, the repairs ordered not having been executed, and the chancel and guest house (hospice) being in a ruinous state, the bishop sequestrated the fruits of the prebends.3 The canons, indeed, appear to have had but little sense of their duty, for three times after this during Langley's episco- pate, in 1418,* 1431," and 1434,° the bishop was obliged to remonstrate with them for neglect. In the Taxation of Pope Nicholas (1291) the deanery and prebends were rated at £ 1 46 1 3*. 4^. ; in 1534 they were valued at £77 12s. 8d.-J and in 1548 at £27 2s. 8%d. only.8 The possessions of the church become vested in the crown in 1547, by the Act for the Dis- solution of Collegiate Churches and Chantries. A small pension only was reserved for a stipendiary curate.9 DEANS OF CHESTER-LE-STREET William de Marclan, occ. 1311 10 Robert de Kygheley, coll. May, 1316" Roger de Gilling, occ. 30 June, 1345 12 John de Sculthorp 13 John de Kingston, coll. October, 1354, by exch. with John de Sculthorp M Richard de Wellington, coll. 21 March, 1362-3, p.r. John de Kingston (Kymbsten)1* Hugh de Arlam, coll. 13 March, 1364-5, p.r. R. Wellington16 Thomas Cupper, coll. 7 May, I37817 Henry de Hedlam (Hedelham), occ. 26 April,. 1382 18 John de Derby, occ. 4 June, 1390 19 Thomas de Hexham, occ. 1407 20 1 Found. Chart, printed Dugdale, Man. AngL (ed. 1846), vi, 1338. 1 Dur. Epis. Reg. Langley, fol. 70. I Ibid. fol. 72 d. 'Ibid. fol. 270. " Ibid. fol. 181. "Ibid. fol. 211. ' Surt. Hist. Dur. ii, 143. 8 Chant. Cert. Surt. Soc. Publ. vol. 22, App. vi, p. Ixiv. 9 Surt. Hitt. Dur. ii, 143. 10 Ibid. , II Reg. Pa/at. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), ii, 806. 11 Surt. Hist. Dur. ii, 144. 13 Dur. Epis. Reg. Hatfield, fol. 86. "Ibid. "Ibid. fol. 131. 16 Ibid. fol. 137. » Ibid. fol. 18 Pat. 5 Ric. II, pt. 2, m. 19. 19 Surt. ut supra. K Ibid. 128 RELIGIOUS HOUSES John Thoralby coll. 6 April, 1408" John Dalton, coll. 7 April, 1408, by exch. with Thoralby w W. Bosum, coll. 1 6 April, 1408, p.r. J. Dalton" Robert Ashburn, or Ashbury, coll. I May, 1408, by exch. with Bosum;14 occ. 28 January, 141 1-12** Nicholas Hulme, coll. 10 February, 1412-13, p.m. R. Ashburn ** John Akum, occ. October, 1417" Richard Diggle (Digyll), coll. October, 1417, by exch. with Akum " John of Newton, occ. I4545* John Baldwin (Bawdwyn), coll. 1491 w John Balswell, occ. 1501 " Robert Chamber, occ. 13 June, 1505" Thomas Keye, occ. 14 May, I53233 Richard Layton, coll. I September, 1533, p.r. T. Keye14 William Wawin, or Warren, coll. 1544, p.m. Layton ; M dean at the dissolution M 36. THE COLLEGE OF STAINDROP The college of Staindrop was founded in 1 408 by Ralph earl of Westmorland. The establish- ment was to consist of a master or warden and certain other resident chaplains and clerks, with a number of poor and decayed gentlemen or other poor persons.1 It seems probable that the earl intended the house to serve as a place of retirement for his retainers and servants when they grew old or infirm. In 1544 six of the inmates were ' gentlemen sometime in the ser- vice ' of the then earl.* Four years later the household consisted of the master, four priests, brethren of the house, two choristers, two lay clerks, five poor gentlemen, six poor yeomen, and two poor grooms, all ' brethren.' * The college, which really partook more of the nature of a mediaeval hospital, was built near Langley Beck, to the north of the church. Apparently Joan Beaufort, countess of West- morland, carried out or completed her husband's design, for Leland states that ' Johan ercctid the very house self of the college.'4 The original endowment consisted of two messuages and 12 acres of land in Staindrop, with the advowson of the church there.6 Later the churches of Lytham,* co. Lancaster, and Brigham,7 co. Cumberland, were appropriated to the college in augmentation of its revenues. The clear value at the dissolution amounted to In 1412 Bishop Langley confirmed the appro- priation of Staindrop church to the college, and ordained that, lest the cure of souls should suffer neglect, a perpetual vicarage should be instituted, the vicar to be appointed by the warden and chaplains of the college. The house was to pay 401. per annum to the bishop, and 201. to the convent of Durham, as an indemnity for any loss which the church might suffer by this arrangement.' This vicarage lasted until the dissolution, when all the possessions of the college were surrendered to the crown, a small stipend only being reserved for the officiating mnster.10 MASTERS OF STAINDROP Robert Knayton, clerk, occ. 1432 u John Norman, occ. 1438 la William Lambert, occ. 1457, '477 '* Thomas Nevill 14 William Pollard, app. 20 July, 1498, p.m. Nevill M John Claymond, M.A., app. 19 October, 1500 M William Mawdesley, app. 1501, p.r. Clay- mond 17 Edmund Nattres, occ. 1537" William Garnett, occ. 15 48" 37. THE COLLEGE OF BARNARD CASTLE In February, 1477-8 Edward IV granted permission to his brother Richard, duke of Gloucester, to found and endow a college at Barnard Castle, within the castle there. The establishment was to consist of a dean, twelve chaplains, ten clerks, six choristers, and one clerk (sic), to celebrate divine offices in the castle chapel. It was to be dedicated to Christ, the Blessed Virgin, St. Margaret, and St. Ninian, " Dur. Epis. Reg. Langley, fol. 144*. "Ibid. "Ibid. fol. 15. "Ibid. "Ibid. fol. 53. i '• Ibid. fol. 65 d. " Ibid. fol. 287 d. " Ibid. " Surt. Hut. Dur. ii, 1 44. " Ibid. " Ibid. » Ibid. » Ibid. " Ibid. » Ibid. * Chant. Cert. Surt. Soc. Publ. vol. 22, App. vi, p. Ixiv. 1 Surt. Hut. Dur. iv (2), 134. ' Ibid. 135. 1 Chant. Cert. Surt. Soc. Publ. vol. 22, App. vi, p. Ixxiv. * I tin. (2nd ed.), i, 85. p, 2 I2Q 6 Surt. Hiit. Dur. iv (2), 1 34. ' Pat. 2 Hen. IV. ' Pat. 16 Hen. VI. 8 Surt. ut supra. The value in the Chant. Cert, of f8 is £144 8/. 6d. " Reg. Eccles. Dun. iii, 37. 10 Surt. Hist. Dur. iv (2), 137. " Madox, Formul. Angl. 143. " Rot. Neville, B. No. 1 5 in dors. 11 Surt. Hist. Dur. iv (2), 135. 14 Ibid. » Ibid. " Rot. 2 Fox, m. 1 1. " Ibid, m, 17. " Surt. ut supra ; Leland, Itin. i, 92. " Chant. Cert. Surt. Soc. Publ. vol. 22, App. vi, Ixxiv. A HISTORY OF DURHAM and was to have land purchased for it not exceeding the yearly value of 400 marks. Whether or not this project was ever executed is not known ; but as the licence of foundation appears to be the only document in existence relating to the college, it seems probable that in the increasing pressure of public business the duke forgot or omitted to carry out his pious intention. 38. HERMITAGES The county of Durham was unusually rich in hermitages. From very early days, owing per- haps to the example set by St. Cuthbert,1 religious persons of both sexes frequently chose the solitary life, and established themselves in some more or less retired spot where they lived either quite alone or with one or more attendants. At the beginning of the twelfth century there dwelt at Wolsingham a well-known hermit named Elric (or Ethelric) with whom St. Godric lived for about two years, practising the ascetic life.2 After Elric's death Godric settled at Finchale under the auspices of Bishop Flambard.3 There he lived for many years, and built an oratory and a little house. He cultivated the ground and fished in the river, supporting him- self by his own labour.4 For a time his sister Burcwen joined him, and lived in a little cell which he built for her near his own ; but she fell sick and died in a hospital in Durham.6 After a time St. Godric placed himself under the control of the prior of Durham,6 who at every festival used to send one of his monks to Finchale, there to celebrate Mass for the hermit.7 Many legends are told of St. Godric, and he was regarded with great awe by the country people. He built a chapel, which he dedicated to the honour of St. John the Baptist, in which he often slept,8 and where he ultimately died and was buried.9 In his old age he was attended by servants,10 and for the last eight years of his life was confined entirely to his bed.11 There existed in St. Godric's time, and pos- sibly long before, a hermitage called Yareshale (or Yarehaulgh) on the River Derwent near Ebchester, which was granted by the bishop to a religious who came to ask St. Godric's advice on the matter. It was probably built on the site of St. Ebba's monastery, which was well adapted for such a retreat.12 Its history is rather 10 Pat. 17 Edw. IV, pt. 2, m. 16. 1 In 676 St. Cuthbert retired to Fame Island and built himself a hermitage there, in which he lived for eight years ; Bede, Vita Sti. Cuthberti, cap. xvii. 1 Vita Sti. Godrici (Surt. Soc.), 45, &c. " Ibid. 66. 4 Priory of Finchale (Surt. Soc.), pref. xiii, &c. 6 Vita Sti. Godrici (Surt. Soc.), 139-43. 6 Ibid. 135. ' Ibid. 202. 6 Ibid. 187. 9 Ibid. 326, 330. 10 Ibid. 195. " Ibid. 311. " Ibid. 192 n. difficult to follow. Bishop Pudsey, between 1163 and 1188, granted to Sherburn Hospital, as part of its endowment, ' the place of anchorets ' on the Derwent near Ebchester,13 and in 1183 Robert of Yolton held 'the land on the Der- went, which was the hermit's,' and paid a rent of 2s. for it,14 but soon afterwards 16 Geoffrey son of Richard (the second lord of Horden) granted to St. Mary and the House of Yareshale (Yare- haluh) two oxgangs of land in his vill of Horden, with common of pasture and 1 3 ' weihts ' l of corn of Durham measure.17 This grant was confirmed by his son Geoffrey (between 1212 and 1214) to ' Brother John and his successors ' in ' the House of the Blessed Mary of Yareshale (Jharhale).' 18 In ' le convenit ' (1231) Bishop le Poor stipulates that, in return for certain con- cessions he has made to the Durham monks, ' the place which is called Yareshale (Yreshale), with all its appurtenances,' shall remain for ever in the ordination of the bishops of Durham, ' ita quod providebimus qualiter elemosina futuris temporibus durabit.'19 St. Mary's of Yareshale is mentioned as being, in the time of Bishop Langley (1406-37), the private chapel of one of that bishop's suffragans, in which ordinations were occasionally held.20 At the end of the north alley of the choir in Durham Cathedral was a porch called the ' Anchorage,' containing a rood and an altar for a monk to say daily mass. In ancient times it was inhabited by an anchoret. The entrance was up a stair adjoining the north door of St. Cuthbert's feretory.21 Mr. John Cade, the well-known antiquary, writing in 1789, says that there was at that time ' a plat called the Anchorage,' near the church- yard of St. Oswald's, Durham, which appears to have been the cell of some anchoret or recluse even prior to the foundation of St. Oswald's church.22 On 28 September, 1312, the bishop of Dur- ham collated 'John, called Godesman,' to the hermitage of St. Cuthbert on the Tyne, near the bishop's park.23 Writing of Heighley Hall, Winston, Surtees says — A chapel or hermitage, which is mentioned in some early inquest, stood low down in the holme, shaded by a thick overhanging wood. . . . The last remains of the hermitage were lately removed in forming a new hedge ; the masonry was " Surt. Hitt. Dur. i (2), 283 ;' Ordinatio ' of Sher- burn Hospital. 14 Boldon Bk. (Surt. Soc.), 68. " Temp. Prior Bertram, 1189-99. 16 Measures. " Dur. Cart, ii, fol. 99. w Ibid, " Script. Tres. (Surt. Soc.), App. p. Ixxi. 10 Dur. Epis. Reg. Langley, passim. " Rites of Dur. (Surt. Soc.), 15. " Arch. Lond. x, 6 1 . " Reg. Palat. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), i, 197. 130 RELIGIOUS HOUSES excellent and the windows ornamented. The piscina is preserved in Mr. Deighton's garden wall at Winston.14 This is a remarkable statement, because in 1315 Bishop Kellaw, when granting a quitclaim for the rent of this ground, speaks of it as ' certain waste lands and wood in Heighley (Hegheley) in Winston called Hermitage ' as if the cell or chapel was even then nothing more than a memory.*1 In 1340 Bishop Bury granted a licence to select a site in Gateshead churchyard for an anchoress' cell ; ** and in 1373 Bishop Hatfield granted to William Shepherd, a hermit, a piece of waste land, 80 ft. by 40 ft., for a messuage. William in return was to pay id. a year for life.17 A few years later (20 May, 1387) a similar grant was made to a hermit of the name of Robert Lambe. Bishop Fordham gave him an acre of waste land in Eighton for the building of a hermitage and a chapel in honour of the Holy Trinity, on condition of his offering prayers for the bishop, his predecessors, and successors.*8 There was an anchorage near Pounteys Bridge, as well as the chapel there. In December, 1426, 14 Hut. Dur. iv (i), 38. * Reg. Pa/at. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), ii, 1280. * Ibid, iii, 300. In 1 366 Bishop Hatficld collated Richard de Cavill to the hermitage of Rynstanhirst (Dur. Epis. Reg. Hatfield, fol. 141). I have not been able to locate this hermitage. " Rot. Hatfield, 2, m. 4^. " Rot. Fordham, m. 9. John, prior of Durham, collated William Byndc- lawesof Burdon in Lonsdale, hermit, to this her- mitage, then vacant and in his collation.** In the fifteenth century the notices of hermits are not so frequent, but they still continued to exist. In February, 1434-5, Robert Perules, ' hermit of the chapel of St. Mary Magdalen of Barmore,' in the parish of Gainford, lost his chapel, his house which stood by it, and all their contents, by fire, everything being totally de- stroyed. Bishop Langley granted an indulgence of forty days to all contributing to the repair of the chapel and the support of the hermit.10 In '493 Jonn Auckland, prior of Durham, by means of a very curious document ' created ' a hermit ; i.e. conferred the rank or degree of hermit upon one John Man, a Yorkshireman, who desired to escape from the world and to assume the profession of an anchoret." It seems probable that there was at one time an anchoret, male or female, at Chester-le- Street. In the Chantry Certificate of 1548" there is a mention of 'the Anker's House.' There was then no ' incumbent,' and from the quantity of lead on the roof the building would appear to have been but small. In 1627 an almshouse at Chester-lc-Street in which dwelt certain poor widows, was known as 'the Anchorage.' M " Surt. Hist. Dur. iii, 228. 30 Dur. Epis. Reg. Langley, fol. 217. " Reg. Parv. iv, fol. *6b. " Surt. Soc. Publ. vol. 22, App. vi, p. Ixiv. • Parish Books of Chestcr-le-Street, A.D. 1627. POLITICAL HISTORY area now known as the county of Durham was formerly part of the Bernician Province of the kingdom of Northumbria, and was described as having been in the seventh century ' a waste wilder- ness, the habitation of animals, and therefore subject to no man's sway.' * Of its early history whilst part of Northumbria but little is known. Whilst the evidence of place names indicates but slight traces of Danish settlement in Durham and Northumberland,' the invasion of Halfdene in 875 has left a permanent mark — the transfer of the seat of the great northern diocese from Lindisfarne to the district south of the Tyne. In 883, after several years of wandering, Bishop Eardulf and the congregation of St. Cuth- bert settled at Chester-le-Street, under the youthful King Guthred, a converted Dane, who had succeeded the pagan Halfdene as king of Northumbria. Guthred gave to St. Cuthbert (and the grant is said to have been confirmed by King Alfred) the whole of the district lying between the rivers Wear and Tyne, with sac and soc and infangthief. Thus was laid the foundation of the franchise which ultimately developed into the Palatinate of Durham.8 During the period (883-995) that the seat of the bishopric was settled at Chester-le-Street the power of Northumbria declined. In the seventh century, after Oswy's victory over Penda, the Northumbrian kingdom, stretching possibly from Aberdeen to near the Wash, was the predominant state in Britain, and Bamburgh seemed destined to become the capital of England. By the end of the ninth century it had sunk to the level of an earldom. The earls, however, enjoyed an independence and exercised powers almost as extensive as the Danish kings, whose rule ceased on Eric's death in 954. In the year 995 the seat of the ancient see of Lindisfarne was trans- ferred to Durham. According to Simeon the reason for this transfer was the fear of a Danish raid. In the spring of 995 Bishop Aldhun, warned, Simeon informs us, of the irruption about to be made by some pirates (piratarum), fled with the congregation of St. Cuthbert to Ripon. After three or four months, peace being restored, they started on their return journey, but, when near the site of the present city, it was revealed to one of their number that Durham should become the resting-place of St. Cuthbert. The work of preparing the site of the future city was performed by the inhabitants of the district between the rivers Coquet and Tees, under the supervision of Uchtred the son of Waltheof, the earl of Northumbria.* It is possible that the Scots were responsible for the transfer of the see from Chester-le-Street to Durham. For over a century there had been a fierce struggle for the possession of the 1 Simeon, Hist. Eccl. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), i, 339. * Hodgkin, PoMcal Hiit. of Engl. to 1066, p. 316. * Simeon, op. cit. i, 70. For early grants of land to St. Cuthbert, see ' Historia de Sancto Cuthbcrto,' best studied for the purpose in Hodgson Hindc's edition of Simeon, Hist. Eccl. Dun. (Surtees Soc.), 138 et seq.; also Hardy's preface to Kellavfi Regtster (Rolls Ser.), i, p. be. 4 For a fuller description of the foundation of Durham see 'Eccl. Hist.' ante, 7. '33 A HISTORY OF DURHAM Lothians — a struggle in which the Northumbrian position was materially weakened by the cession in 945 of Cumbria to the Scots.6 Before this cession Bamburgh could be regarded as a suitable fortified centre from which to govern a territory which extended to the Forth, but with Cumberland in the hands of the Scots the earl may well have felt the want of some more southern fortress to check their inroads by the Pennine Passes. Strong in itself, Durham, situated at the junction of the valleys of the Wear, Dearness, and Browney, was admirably placed to watch the western marches and to protect the more populous and cultivated eastern districts. As the direction of the flight from Chester-le-Street suggests that the danger lay to the north, so Uchtred's activity and the employment of the entire population of the district between the Coquet and Tees indicate that the foundation of the city of Durham was due, not to a supernatural cause, but to the military requirements of the Northumbrian earldom. However this may be, the transfer of the see provided the earl with a new fortress and a garrison to man it.6 Durham soon attracted the attention of the Scots, and in 1006 King Malcolm, with the entire military force of Scotland, after devastating the province of the Northumbrians, laid siege to Durham. Waltheof, the earl, too old for active service, shut himself up in Bamburgh. His want of energy was amply compensated for by that of his son Uchtred, the bishop's son-in-law, who, with the men of Northumbria and Yorkshire, raised the siege and decisively defeated the Scottish forces.7 Malcolm and a few others escaped with difficulty. From the numerous slain Uchtred selected some of the best-looking heads to decorate the city walls, and a cow apiece was given to the four women who washed the heads. For his initiative and gallantry on this occasion Uchtred superseded his father as earl. Twelve years' peace ensued, but in 1018 the Northumbrian forces suffered a disastrous defeat at Carham, whereby the Lothians were added to the kingdom of the Scots, and the boundary of Northumbria was permanently forced back to the Tweed. Nearly the whole population, Simeon states,8 from the Tyne to the Tees, were cut off in the conflict, and Bishop Aldhun survived but a few days the news of the slaughter of his people — ' the first, but not the last, bishop of Durham to have his life made burdensome by the incursions of the Scots.' A few years later (1039)' the Northumbrians had their revenge. Duncan the First, who had succeeded his grandfather Malcolm in 1034, with a large force of cavalry and foot invaded the earldom and laid siege to Durham. On this occasion the besieging force was defeated with heavy loss by the unaided efforts of the inhabitants of the city. Again the heads of the slain were collected to decorate the town. Before this siege took place Cnut, probably in 1031 when on his way to Scotland,10 visited Durham and made certain grants of land to St. Cuthbert.11 * As to the effect and extent of this cession see V.C.H, Cumb. ii, 228. 6 The tract on the siege of Durham, Simeon, op. cit. (Rolls Ser.), i, 216, proves the existence of walls round Durham, but whether of earth or stone is uncertain. 7 Simeon, op. cit. i, 216 ; as to the date see Annals of Ulster sub anno 1006, and Skene's Celtic Scotland, 1,385. "Ibid, i, 84. 9 The date 1035 given by Simeon, op. cit. (Rolls Ser.), i, 90, is wrong. He states that the invasion took place in the 2Oth year of the pontificate of Bishop Eadmund, who was enthroned in 1021. The correct date appears from the ' Annales Dunelmenses ' in Pertz, Monumenta Germ. Hist. Scriptures, xix, 506. 10 Angl.-Sax. Chron. sub anno 1031. " Simeon, op. cit. (Rolls Ser.), i, 90. '34 POLITICAL HISTORY For the wretched inhabitants of Northumbria (which then included the present county of Durham), the period of Norman Conquest, with its repeated invasions by the Scots" and still worse devastations of the Conqueror, was indeed a time of trial. The opportunities presented to Malcolm Canmore, first by the Anglo-Danish struggle, and later by the Northumbrian insurrections, were not allowed to pass. In 1018 his father had added all Lothian to the Scotch dominion, and his son, kinsman to the leading Northumbrians and brother-in-law to Edgar Atheling, might reasonably hope during these commotions to round off his southern boundary by the addition of the country north of the Tees to Cumbria, then a part of the Scottish kingdom. Taking advantage of Earl Tosti's absence in 1 06 1 on a pilgrimage to Rome, Malcolm furiously 'ravaged the earldom of his sworn brother Tosti and violated the peace of St. Cuthbert in the Island of Lindisfarne.' Malcolm's second invasion did not take place till after the first Northumbrian insurrection against the Conqueror's rule. During the first two years after the battle of Hastings the Conqueror did not attempt to exercise direct control over the country to the north of the Tees. At the beginning of 1069 the Conqueror appointed Robert Cumin earl of Northumberland. With a small force, only some 700 strong," Cumin marched north, his men acting with that licence which was customary when the Conqueror's strong hand was not there to restrain them. On hearing of his approach the Northumbrians at first decided to fly, but being prevented by a sudden snowstorm, they determined to await and attack the earl. The latter, disregarding Bishop ^thelwin's warning, entered the city of Durham on 30 January, 1069. Very early the next morning the Northumbrians assembled outside the town and rushed the gates. Most of the earl's men scattered throughout the town fell an easy prey, but the bishop's house, defended by the earl himself, offered an effective resistance until it was set on fire, and its defenders either burnt to death or massacred as they attempted to escape. Of the whole force one man alone escaped. The revolt thus begun spread rapidly, and it was some time before the Conqueror found time to visit and punish the district responsible for the death of the first Norman earl of Northumberland. The first punitive expedition retired after reaching Northallerton, the retirement being due to St. Cuthbert's intervention according to Simeon,14 but the Danish invasion of Yorkshire is a more probable cause. At the end of 1069 the Conqueror himself came north and personally commanded the force which took such a terrible revenge for the massacre of their fellow countrymen. The loss of property must have been great; but the people, accustomed as they were to Scottish raids, appear to have escaped, for we are told that although the king's army spread over the whole of the area between the Tyne and the Tees, they found the dwellings every- where deserted, the inhabitants having sought safety in flight or by lying hid in the woods or in the fastnesses of the mountains.1' No sooner had the Conqueror retired south than Malcolm, with a countless multitude of Scots, made his second raid. Marching through Cumberland he turned east and devastated " As to these see Hodgson Hinde's note in Simeon, op. cit. (Surtccs Soc.), p. xxviii. 11 This is the figure given by Simeon, op. cit. (Rolls Ser.), i, 98, the only author who gives details of this affair. In the Angl.-Sax. Chron. sub anno 1068, the figure is 900, and in Ordericus Vitalis, Hist. Eccl. (Migne's edition, 316), 500. 14 Simeon, op. cit. (Rolls Ser.), i, 99. " Ibid, ii, 189. '35 A HISTORY OF DURHAM the valley of the Tees. Then dividing his forces, he ordered part to retire the way they came. Hearing of this retirement the inhabitants left their hiding places and were surprised by the remainder of the Scottish army.16 The flight of Bishop ^Ethelwin, 1070, gave the Conqueror an opportunity by the appointment of Bishop Walcher of introducing a foreign influence less likely to irritate the Northumbrians than Cumin and his uncontrolled troopers. Walcher's success as an ecclesiastic tempted the Conqueror in 1075 on Waltheof 's execution to appoint the bishop as his successor in the earldom of Northumberland. The selection was an unfortunate one, for the saint-like but irresolute bishop was not the man either to rule the turbulent Northum- brians, or to control the officials whom he appointed. Five years elapsed before he met, with his Norman followers, the same fate as Cumin. This event was brought about by a quarrel between Ligulf an Anglo-Saxon noble, and Leobwin chaplain to the bishop and his councillor in matters secular as well as ecclesiastical. Leobwin resented the influence of Ligulf with the bishop, who consulted him in all secular business. Frequent disputes took place between the two, and at last Leobwin, stung by some retort of Ligulf, determined to be revenged on his opponent. He accordingly called to his aid Gilbert, a relation of the bishop and sheriff of the earldom. Gilbert readily assented, and with his own troops and some of those of the bishop and Leobwin, marched by night to the place were Ligulf resided and murdered him and almost all his family. The crime called for immediate retribu- tion, but the bishop temporized. Instead of punishing he merely threatened punishment, protesting that he was not privy to the murder, and retired to his castle at Durham. He arranged a conference with the relatives of Ligulf at Gateshead. On his arrival there the bishop and the principal members of his party retired to the church whilst the friends of the murdered man remained outside. Several overtures were made, but when it became known that, after the murder, the bishop had amicably received Gilbert and his associates all hopes of a compromise were at an end. First the bishop's retainers outside the church were killed and then the church itself was attacked and set fire to. The bishop vainly attempted to appease the infu- riated mob by sacrificing the guilty Gilbert, but was himself slain as he attempted to leave the burning church. Immediately after the bishop's murder the insurgents attempted to seize the newly founded castle at Durham, but the garrison defended it with such success that after four days' siege the assailants withdrew, but not without loss.17 This second revolt was speedily and terribly punished. Odo, bishop of Bayeux, at the head of a large force, devasted the whole district, both innocent and guilty suffering alike; ' they reduced nearly the whole land into a wilderness. The miserable inhabitants, who trusting in their innocence had remained in their homes, were either beheaded as criminals or mutilated by the loss of some of their members.' 18 The attempt to combine the ecclesiastical and civil control of the country to the north of the Tees in the person of the bishop was not repeated in the case of Walcher's successor, William of St. Carileph, a man of very different character from his saintly but weak pre- 16 Simeon, op. cit. (Rolls Ser.), ii, 90. " Ibid, i, 1 1 6, 208 ; Arch. del. xx, 48. ls Simeon, op. cit. (Rolls Ser.), i, 1187. I36 POLITICAL HISTORY decessor. Clever, selfish, and unscrupulous, William of St. Carileph was a wise and sagacious administrator, and under his rule Durham soon recovered from the ruin wrought by the two Norman punitive expeditions. For over seven years the county benefited by the bishop's strong rule, but being implicated in the rebellion against William Rufus he was deprived, and after a siege the castle of Durham was surrendered to Ivo Taillebois and Erneis of Burun, the king's representatives, on 14 November, 1088." Three years elapsed before the bishop was restored. Towards the end of that period, in May, 1091, King Malcolm, taking advantage of William Rufus's absence in Normandy, again invaded Northumbria and penetrated as far as Chester-le-Street.20 Rufus hastened back to repel the invasion, and on his march to the frontier restored the bishop to his see on 14 September, 1091." About this period, 1091-2, was executed the charter to which, it is submitted, the Palatinate rights of the bishops of Durham may be traced. This document purports to record the sale by Robert Mowbray, earl of Northumberland (with the king's sanction), to the bishop of Durham and his successors (i) of the earl's right to half of certain fines within lands mostly in the parish of Aycliffe ; (2) thepassagium outside the city of Durham ; and (3) ' quicquid praedictus Comes calumnia- batur Super omnes terras et consuetudines et homines Sancti Cuthberti.'s It is to this third clause that attention is directed. At that period the whole of the country between the rivers Tyne and Tees did not belong to the see of Durham, for the district known as the wapentake of Sadberge, bordering on the Tees, did not become part of the bishopric till it was purchased by Bishop Pudsey a century later. Over the land, however, then belonging to the see, the earl it appears had certain rights, and by this grant he conveyed to the bishop whatever rights he (the earl) had. It is therefore necessary to try to ascertain what the earl's rights were. We have seen above that until 954 Northumbria was a separate kingdom under, from 829, a more or less ill-defined suzerainty of the English kings. In 954 the kingdom was reduced to an earldom ; but the change was almost nominal, for the earls, mostly of the house of Bamburgh, were virtually independent and exercised regal powers. It does not appear that the Conqueror cut down their privileges.22* The only direct evidence now subsisting of the jura regalia exercised by the earls is a fine taken before Henry of Pudsey, justiciar of Bishop Hugh Pudsey in 1190 when he was earl of Northumberland." If in Pudsey's time the earls of Northumberland still had jura regalia it may be assumed that a century earlier they exercised similar powers, the tendency during that century, and especially during the latter part of it, being to cut down the powers exercised by the holders of great franchises. " Angl.-Sax. Chron. iui> anno 1088. " Simeon, op. cit. (Rolls Ser.), ii, 218, 221 ; Angl.-Sax. Chron. tub anno 1091. " Simeon, op. cit. (Rolls Ser.), ii, 2 1 8. " The charter is printed in Feodarium Prior. Dun. (Surteei Soc.), p. Ixxxii. The original is missing, and only a transcript made early in the twelfth century exists in the Treasury at Durham. The transcript is on a piece of parchment which also contains a transcript of a charter of Hen. I to Bishop Flambard, Feed, p. Ixxx. Canon Grcenwell is of opinion that there is nothing to raise any suspicion as to the authenticity of this charter. "• Davies, England under the Norman and Angevin Kings, 5 1 7. n A copy of the bishop's fine together with a note on its curious history is given in Northumb. County Hist, ix, 73. Canon Greenwell, who saw the document now missing, was satisfied as to its authenticity, Further evidence as to the 'jura regalia ' will be found in Mr. W. Page's article on the Northumbrian Palatinates and Regalities ; jirch. Ii, 143. 2 137 '8 A HISTORY OF DURHAM The existence of jura regalia in the earl of Northumberland at the time of Mowbray's grant being allowed, the creation of such rights in favour of the bishop of Durham must be in derogation of the earl's rights, and the rights themselves obtained by grant from the earl, though it would be ad- visable, as was done in this case, to obtain the king's confirmation of the grant. The amount of the consideration (c. libras denariorum) shows that the earl was parting with rights of no mean value, but as to the extent of the earl's rights within the episcopal territory there is little evidence. Simeon, how- ever, relates that when Walcher was appointed to the see of Durham, Waltheof, then earl of Northumberland, built the castle at Durham.24 At the time of the Conquest, therefore, we have the great earldom of Northumberland, within which the bishops of Durham had been by territorial acquisitions gradually building up a great franchise.26 In Walcher for the first time the powers of bishop and earl were united, and for the first time a bishop of Durham exercised jura regalia, but he did so as earl and not as bishop. Walcher's successor to the bishopric was not the man to allow powers which had been exercised by his predecessor, whether as bishop or as earl, to pass from his hands or to tolerate any interference by the earl. While the incompetent Alberic was earl he would have little to fear, but with the accession of a strong man like Mowbray to the earldom trouble ensued.26 To settle these disputes the king intervened, and the charter in question was the result of such intervention. Before this charter the earl exercised jura regalia within the territories of the bishop of Durham ; by it the earl quitclaimed all his rights over the episcopal lands to the bishop, who thereby became entitled to exercise within his territories the jura regalia formerly wielded by the earl.27 After his return, Bishop Carileph appears to have concentrated his energies on rebuilding the cathedral. This, however, does not seem to have fully occupied his time, for in 1095 he was again suspected of rebellion ; but, summoned to appear before the king, he died at Windsor on 2 January, IO96.28 Three years elapsed (during which the king drew £300 annually from the bishopric29) ere a successor was appointed, and that successor was " Simeon, op. cit. (Rolls Ser.), ii, 199. Dr. Gee first drew attention to the fact that Waltheof and not the Conqueror was the founder of Durham Castle ; Durham and Northumb. Arch. Soc. Trans, v, p. clxxiv. n The numerous franchises which grew up within the earldom (see Mr. Page's article, Arch. H, 145) seem to indicate a marked tendency to disintegration, probably due to the independent spirit of the people and the frequent changes of ruler. 16 Simeon, op. cit. (Rolls Ser.), i, 125 ; Liber Ruber Script. Trei (Surtees Soc.), p. ccccxxv. " For many centuries the origin and extent of the bishop of Durham's jura regalia have been the subject of inquiry. In the Treasury at Durham there are two notes dealing with the question; one (Loc. 21, No. 1 8) by Prior Wessington (1416—46), who favours the bishop's rights and quotes Simeon, Hoveden, and the forged foundation charters of the convent in support. The other is in the first (fifteenth century) Cartulary (fol. 186^.), where, under the heading 'Evidencia pro curia temporal! Prioris,' the rights of the bishop are belittled for the purpose of exalting those of the convent. In the seventeenth century Miles Stapleton, Bishop •Cosin's secretary, traced their origin to Guthred's charter [Raine, N. Durham, i]. The next writer to deal with the question was Gilbert Spearman, who in 1729 published his Inquiry into the Ancient and Present State of the County Palatine of Durham, in which the rights are particularized and their origin ascribed to prescription. There is an interesting copy of this work, extensively annotated by Thomas Gyll, solicitor-general to Bishop Trevor, in the Dean and Chapter Library at Durham (Allan MSS. A. 17). Sir Thomas DufFus Hardy, in his 'Introduction to Kellaw's Register" (Rolls Ser. 1873), traces their origin partly to prescription and partly to grant. In 1887 Mr. Page, in his 'Paper on Northumbrian Palatinates and Regalities' (Arch, li, 143), traces the origin of the/anz regalia of the bishops of Durham to the regality of the ancient kingdom and earldom of Northumbria. Some of Mr. Page's contentions have since been criticized by Dr. Lapsley in The County Palatine of Durham, 16. *" Simeon, op. cit. (Rolls Ser.), i, 134. " Ibid. 135. 138 POLITICAL HISTORY the redoubtable Ralph Flambard. From a political point of view Durham was fortunate in being ruled by a man whose ability, whatever his other failings may have been, was undoubted. Under his firm rule Durham pros- pered materially, and many public works of importance were carried out, the most notable of which was the castle of Norham guarding one of the principal fords over the Tweed against Scottish aggression."1 Shortly after the accession of Henry I, Flambard was seized at London (15 August, iioo) and com- mitted to the Tower, whence he escaped on 3 February, 1 101, to Normandy.80 He was one of those who obtained an amnesty under the treaty between Duke Robert and the king; but though restored to his see he could not obtain the king's favour, and the inhabitants of Durham suffered much from his exactions for the purpose of buying his way into the king's good graces.81 His attempts were unsuccessful, and Henry is said to have cancelled the charters granted by the Conqueror. At Flambard's death great progress had been made in the reorganization of Durham. Delayed by the incompetency of Walcher, under his two able successors the development of the resources of the county had proceeded rapidly, and at Flambard's death the defensive strength of the northern border had been materially increased by the building of Norham Castle and the strengthening of the defences of Durham. With the accession of Bishop Geoffrey, chancellor to King Henry I, Durham enters on another stage, that of her struggles as a frontier county against the Scots. Till the king's death, 1 135, the bishop had two years of peace, but the unrest which followed Stephen's accession was soon felt in the north. David of Scotland, in support of his niece, the Empress Maud, and mindful of his oath to the late king, invaded England in 1 136, took Norham Castle amongst other strongholds, and overran the county as far as Durham, which he intended to attack. Stephen, however, with a large force, arrived there on 5 February, and David, foiled in his attempt, retired to Newcastle.8' Stephen remained fifteen days at Durham, and during that period came to terms with David, who gave up Norham and the other castles he had taken in Northumberland. Hostilities ceased, but not for long ; the next year David again threatened to invade, but was checked by the rapid concentration of the English forces at Newcastle.88 Early in the following year, 1138, David reached Hexham, and a portion of his army crossing the Tyne, laid waste a great portion of the western part of the county.8* In Lent, however, Stephen's offensive operations against Scotland relieved the county for a short time, but owing to lack of supplies" he had to retire, leaving the county exposed. After Easter (3 April, 1 1 38) the Scottish king again advanced, and ravaged the eastern portion of the county.8* David with his retinue took up his abode near Durham, but being disturbed by a mutiny of Picts and a false report of the approach of a large English force, he retreated and laid siege to Norham. At first the castle, owing to the gallantry of the towns- men, was defended with vigour ; 8T but many having been wounded, and despairing of aid from the bishop, the garrison surrendered, the nine knights and their men who formed the regular garrison being permitted to retire to "•Simeon, op. cit. (Rolls Ser.), 140. " Ibid. 138. " Ibid. 139. * Richard of Hexham, Geita Stephani, iub anno 1 1 36. " Ibid, tub anna 1137. M Ibid, tub anno 1138. " Ibid. " Ibid. " Ibid. 139 A HISTORY OF DURHAM Durham. As a result of this surrender while the defences were unimpaired and supplies abundant, the garrison were censured for their feeble resistance, and the bishop for neglecting properly to garrison so important a point in times so disturbed.88 After capturing the fortress, David offered to restore it to the bishop if he -would desert Stephen ; but Geoffrey, unlike most of the Northumbrian nobles, remained true to his king, and Norham was accordingly dismantled.89 After a vain attempt to capture Wark, David, now openly sup- ported by the powerful help of Eustace Fitzjohn,40 again entered the territory of St. Guthbert. Effecting a junction with some Picts, Cumbrians, and men from Carlisle,41 he passed by Durham, crossed the Tees, and advanced south with a force of 26,000 men,43 until he was defeated at Northallerton by the force raised by the energy of the aged Thurstan archbishop of York.48 During their retreat through the Palatinate, the Scots received as little mercy from the inhabitants as the latter had received from the invaders, who are described as exceeding all others in the commission of cruelties.44 Shortly after the battle Alberic bishop of Ostia reached Durham, and negotiated a truce so far as the Palatinate was concerned, till n November, H38,45 and in 1139 the truce . was converted into a peace, whereby Stephen granted Henry son of King David the earldom of Northumberland, it being, however, specially provided that Henry should claim no rights over the territory of St. Cuthbert.46 The treaty was signed at Durham on 9 April, 1 139, by Henry son of King David in the presence of Queen Maud. By this treaty the Scottish border was advanced to the Tees, for at this time the southern part of Durham known as Sadberge had not been acquired by the bishopric, and still formed part of Northumberland. David had not to wait long for an opportunity of adding St. Cuthbert's territory to that already acquired, for two years later, May, II4-I,47 William Cumin, his chancellor, on his arrival at Durham, found the bishop, Geoffrey Rufus, at the point of death. Cumin hurried off to David for instructions, and on his return, shortly after the bishop's death, seized the temporalities of the bishopric, and obtained possession of Durham Castle from the late bishop's nephew.48 In addition he won over the barons of the bishopric to his cause, a matter apparently of but little difficulty. David arrived at Durham soon after his chancellor, and pressure was brought to bear on the convent to obtain Cumin's election as bishop. The monks proving stubborn, David and Cumin went south to appeal to the Empress Maud, who was then in power. She assented, but his election was opposed by the legate, Henry bishop of Winchester. David and Cumin, who both had been besieged in Winchester and escaped with difficulty, returned to Durham about Michaelmas,49 when Cumin was left in the castle as guardian of the bishopric for the empress, David being surety between the garrison and the prior and convent that neither party would inflict or suffer damage. 3' Richard of Hexham, Gesta Stephani, sub anno 1138. 39 Ibid. 40 Ibid. 41 Ibid. " Ibid. 43 John of Hexham, Hist, sub anno 1138. With the exception of Bruce and Balliol, the names of Durham men do not appear in the list of those engaged. 4< Ric. Hexham, Gesta Stephani (Rolls Ser.), 66. 45 Ibid. 54. K Ibid. 58. 47 The bishop died in 1 141, not 1 140, as it was the year in which the Empress Maud was driven from London and the battle of Lincoln fought ; Simeon, op. cit. (Rolls Ser.), i, 145, 161. 48 Ibid. 164. 49Ibid. 145. 140 POLITICAL HISTORY After David's departure, however, Cumin behaved as though he were bishop, receiving the homage of the barons and disposing of the episcopal domains. For some time Cumin appears to have remained peaceably in possession of the temporalities of the bishopric and strengthened his position by building a castle at Northallerton (part of St. Cuthbert's territory locally situated in the county of York), which he handed over to his nephew William, who had married a niece of the earl of Albemarle. On 14 March, 1 143, William of St. Barbara was elected bishop in spite of Cumin's efforts, and shortly afterwards made his first attempt to oust the intruder. It appears that Roger Conyers, one of the episcopal barons, had refused to do homage to Cumin as his brethren had, and fearful of Cumin's anger, had fortified his house at Bishopton, some fourteen miles south of Durham.10 Thither the new bishop, somewhat unwillingly, proceeded towards the end of August. Many flocked to meet him, and escorted by Conyers and some other barons he proceeded towards the castle of Durham. The bishop's first attempt to oust the intruder was anything but successful. Cumin, disregarding the bishop's attempts to compromise, assumed the offensive, and on their approach drove back the episcopal troops, who retired to St. Giles's Church, situated on a height about a mile to the east of the castle. The next morning Cumin attacked St. Giles's, drove his opponents back, and fortified the church as an advance post from whence the bishop's troops were harried by frequent sallies of the garrison consisting of a company of men-at-arms and archers. The bishop's position was now precarious, as Cumin had entered into arrangement with the earl of Richmond to attack the bishop in rear. He accordingly retreated to Bishopton, the movement being attended with loss owing to the activity of Cumin's troops." Meanwhile the bishop fortified and occupied Thornley, a village commanding the Hartlepool road some eight miles from Durham, but, famine threatening, a truce was arranged on 30 November, 1 143, to last till 13 January, 1 144. Before this truce had expired, and through the mediation of the archbishop of York, it was extended till 24 June, 1 144, the terms being that Cumin was to occupy the castle at Durham and receive a third of the rents of the bishopric lands between the Tyne and Tees." The truce was ill observed, for after the bishop had spent some time in Northumberland he returned to Jarrow, where Cumin — who during the bishop's absence had won over to his cause some of his adherents, including Hugh the son of Pinton his steward — made (6 May, 1 144) a desperate but unsuccessful attempt to capture him." The bishop then retired to Lindisfarne and enlisted the somewhat doubtful assistance of Henry earl of Northumberland, son of King David. He, however, had been induced to make a separate truce with Cumin till 1 5 August, 1 1 44. On 1 4 August Cumin began to fortify the church of Merrington, which stands on a height some nine miles to the south of Durham, possibly enabling him to keep open his communications with the earl of Richmond. Before the work was completed three of the bishopric barons, Roger Conyers, Geoffrey Escolland, and Bertram Bulmer, collecting all their available forces, attacked and carried the church by storm." " Simeon, op. cit. (Roll* Ser.), i, 150. " Ibid. 152. " Ibid. 155. " Ibid. 157. M Ibid. 158. UI A HISTORY OF DURHAM Meanwhile Earl Henry with the bishop crossed the Tyne with his army and approached Durham. After burning those parts of the city which had been spared by Cumin's troops Henry proceeded to the castle of Thornley which, when it surrendered to him, he refused to hand over to the bishop, his troops meanwhile ravaging the bishopric." Cumin's position was now becoming serious, and after an interview with the king of Scotland at Gates- head s6 he entered into negotiations with Roger Conyers, and on 1 8 October, 1 1 44, surrendered the castle, receiving in exchange Conyers's fortress at Bishopton." Thus ended Cumin's attempt to secure the bishopric of Durham for his king, who does not appear to have had any real affection for the cause of the empress or to have been actuated by any higher motive than selfish greed.68 The attempt was daringly made, and the rapidity with which Cumin acted makes it look almost as though the plan was preconcerted. Obtaining possession of the temporalities as custos for the empress during the vacancy, his position was not illegal till the election of William of St. Barbara, and as this was not confirmed by the empress, whom alone Cumin recognized as sovereign, he was fully justified in retaining the temporalities until, with Stephen's growing power, the contest proved hopeless.69 After the stormy beginning of his episcopacy William of St. Barbara passed the remaining years in peace, and on 22 January, 1 153, Hugh Pudsey, a cousin of King Henry II,80 was elected. His long episcopacy, extending over forty years, was marked by steady progress and development, for the strife and turmoil of his life were but slightly reflected in the history of the franchise which he governed. Shortly after his accession Henry II resumed possession of Northumber- land, whereby Durham again became an integral part of the kingdom, and not a mere outlying liberty.81 Pudsey's relationship to the king stood him in good stead and enabled him to evade the centralizing tendencies of the crown and to obtain charters confirming the privileges of his franchise.82 During the first years of his episcopacy Pudsey seems to have spent his time in developing the resources of his territory, though his absences at the king's court appear to have been frequent.83 The castle of Norham, which had lain waste since its surrender to King David, was repaired 84 and the defences of Durham strengthened.86 In 1173 he sided with the young Prince Henry, and though he did not join in the rebellion he informed William the Lion that he wished to remain at peace,88 and gave him permission to pass through his territories.87 Early in 1 1 74 Pudsey had a conference with King William M Simeon, op. cit. (Rolls Ser.), i, 159. " Ibid. " Ibid. 1 66. The authorities for the Cumin episode are the Continuators of Simeon, op. cit. (Rolls Ser.), i, 143-66, and the Poem of Lawrence (Surtees Soc.) ; as they were bitter opponents of Cumin their decidedly unfavourable criticism of his proceedings must be received with caution. 58 Rait, Relations between England and Scotland, 23. ** It should be noted that Cumin's attempt was merely an incident in the Scotch plan to push back the English frontier. See Tail, Medieval Manchester, 168, as to Scottish activity on the Lancashire side at this period. 60 Scriptores Tres (Surtees Soc.), App. p. 1. 61 Stubbs, Constit. Hist, i, 455. M Script. Tres (Surtees Soc.), App. p. 49 et seq. 63 Diet. Nat. Stag, under 'Pudsey.' •* Reginald of Durham, Libellus (Surtees Soc.), in. 65 Script. Tres (Surtees Soc.), 12. M Jordan Fantosme, Chron. (Surtees Soc.), 27. " To reach Alnwick, the Scots' first objective, it would be necessary to pass through those outlying portions of the bishopric which lay close to the Scottish border and were guarded by the castle at Norham. 142 POLITICAL HISTORY and for 300 marks purchased a truce." Meanwhile the bishop strengthened the castle at Northallerton," and on the very day (13 July, 1174) that the king of Scotland was captured at Alnwick, Hugh count of Bar landed at Hartlepool with 40 knights and 500 Flemings for whom the bishop had sent. On hearing of the Scottish king's fate the bishop promptly ordered the Flemings to return to their country, and garrisoned the castle of Northallerton with the knights, over whom he placed his nephew the count of Bar.70 The price Pudsey had to pay for his treachery seems small." Going to Nottingham, he met the king and surrendered the castles of Durham, Norham, and Northallerton. With difficulty he obtained permis- sion for the garrison of the last of these strongholds to return home." The reasons for Pudsey's action in this matter arc difficult to ascertain. By his means, it is true, the bishopric escaped the terrible ravages incidental to Scottish warfare ; possibly he was influenced by his connexion with the French court.78 It was not till 1177 that he was able to purchase peace from the king, and Durham and Norham Castles were not handed over till later, whilst Northallerton was dismantled about this time.7* In 1 1 8 1 Pudsey was again in trouble for refusing to account to the king for 300 marks received from Roger archbishop of York, who died in this year. The king ordered Durham Castle to be seized, but Pudsey was soon pardoned.7' Meanwhile the Palatinate suffered from the bishop's exactions to enable him to fulfil his vow to proceed to the Crusades, but Richard's accession enabled Pudsey to divert the money thus obtained to other uses. Present at the king's coronation, he purchased at the subsequent 7* sale of offices the earldoms of Northumberland and Sadberge. Up to this period the episcopal territories did not comprise all the land between the rivers Tyne and Tees. Along the bank of the latter river (except at Darlington and Stockton) lay a band of territory which still formed part of Northumberland. Originally part of the patrimony of St. Cuthbert, it appears to have been transferred by Bishop Aldhun to the earl of Northumberland.77 The exact boundaries of the wapentake of Sadberge are uncertain,78 but it included the barony of Gainford, which with Barnard Castle as cafut baronae brought the Balliols into direct contact with the bishop, and during the follow- ing century the prestige of the latter was rather eclipsed by the powerful holders of Barnard Castle. To the east, Sadberge included Hart, owned by the Bruce family, whose interests, however, fortunately for the bishops of Durham, " Hoveden, Chron. (Rolls Ser.)f ii, 57. " Ibid. "Ibid, ii, 63. 71 ' Henry doubtless saw that his own policy was to make it the bishop's interest to be faithful and not to risk on the side of Scotland the substitution of a weaker even if more trustworthy champion.' Stubbs in Hoveden, op. cit. iii, Pref. p. xxxvii. 71 Hoveden, op. cit. (Rolls Ser.), ii, 64. n Diet. Nat. Biog. under « Pudscy." " Geit. Hen. (Rolls Ser.), i, 160. '* Giraldus Camb. Oftra (Rolls Ser.), iv, 367. " Though the charter, Serif t. Trts (Surtees Soc.), App. No. xl, it dated 1 8 Dec. the month should be Sept. See H. Hinde, Mitt. ofNorthumb. 230. 77 Simeon, op. cit. i, 82. Raine, N. Durham, I, Purchase of Sadberge ; Authorities : Seriftorei Trei (Surtees Soc.), 1 4 ; Chart. App. No. xl ; Reg. Kellato (Rolls Ser.), i, Pref. 68 ; ibid, iii, Pref. 8. The grant of adberge is in the charter of Richard I stated to be in exchange for certain knights' fees in Lincolnshire, whilst the confirmatory charter of 5 Aug. 1 190, Serif tores Tret No. i, mentions also a sum of 600 marks ; but as to money payment see H. Hinde, Hilt. ofNorthumb. 230, 273. 71 H. Hinde, Hut. ofNortAumb. 274; Surtees, Hilt. o/Dur. iv, 266. '43 A HISTORY OF DURHAM centred more in Yorkshire. In Hart lay the port of Hartlepool, then and till the seventeenth century the great port of the Palatinate.79 Pudsey did not, however, retain Sadberge or the earldom long, for four years later he was deprived on the ground that the loss of the king's first seal, with which the charters had been sealed, invalidated the grants. Pudsey resisted, but when on the point of yielding, he died on 3 March, 1 195. The fifty years of Pudsey's rule form one of the most important periods in the history of Durham. Succeeding in 1153, when the bishopric had hardly recovered from terrible cruelties inflicted by the Conqueror, the effects of which had been intensified by the Scottish raids and disorders following on the Cumin episode, Pudsey's strong but beneficent sway left Durham at his death prosperous and contented. For fifty years the bishopric had enjoyed peace, and in whatever light Pudsey's action in 1 173 may be regarded it had at least spared the Palatinate the ravages which the neighbouring districts suffered at the hands of the Scots. Notwithstanding the centralizing tendencies during the reign of Henry II, he managed not only to preserve but also to develop the Palatinate privileges. He had every opportunity and many qualifications for becoming a very great man, and in spite of his failures, he left a mark upon the north of England which is not yet effaced.80 Philip of Poitou, Pudsey's successor, offered Richard 500 marks for the restoration of Sadberge. The offer was accepted, but Richard died before the transaction was completed, and the bishop had to pay 1,200 marks to King John for confirmation of Sadberge, and for liberty to disforest the woods of Crake and ClifFe, and that he might be quit of the aid the king sought from the whole of England.81 After Bishop Philip's death in 1208 the see remained vacant for nine years, during which period it was entrusted first to Robert Vipont and then to Philip of Ulecote.8' 78 It is somewhat difficult to understand the bishop's position in regard to the Bruce and Balliols' possessions between the Tyne and the Tees. King Richard's Charter, Script. Trfj, App. No. 40, granted the bishop (l) the manor of Sadberge with the wapentake pertaining to that manor, (2) the service (servitium) of Peter Carew of one knight's fee, the service of Thomas of Ammundaville of one knight's fee, and the service of Godfrey Baard of two-thirds of a knight's fee, to hold the same as the bishop holds his other lands and knights' fees in the bishopric. No mention is made of the Balliols' 5^ knights' fees or Bruce's 2, or of the other fees set out in Hinde, op. cit. 275. John's charter dated 4 March, 1200, grants the manor and wapentake of Sadberge without any restriction as to knights' fees, ' Sicut Richardus frater noster in propria manu sua habebat.' Mickle- ton MSS. i, 102 d. Hutchinson, Hist, of Dur. i, 230, gives rather a mutilated transcript of the charter. In the sequel we shall find disputes arising between the bishop and the Balliols and the Bruces as to their respective rights and obligations. In regard to the Bruce fee it should be mentioned that in 1 201 John granted a charter erecting Hartlepool into a borough (Surtees, Hist, of Dur. iv, 386), notwithstanding the bishop's jura regalia. As to the scutage payable after the transfer by the Balliol and Bruce fees (Hinde, op. cit. 278, 281) in 1 2 1 l-l 2 the Red Bk. of Exch. (Rolls Ser.), 608, states that the bishop of Durham had ten knights' fees in the wapentake of Sadberge. *° Stubbs, Pref. to Hoveden, op. cit. iii, p. xxxv. 81 Reg. Kellaw (Rolls Ser.), iii, Introd. 9. There is a transcript of the charter in the Mickleton MSS. i, 102 d. — tthe copy given in Hutchinson, Hist, of Dur. i, 230, is inaccurate, the grant includes 'Manerium de Sadburga cum Wapentagiis et feodis militum . . . sicut Rex Richardus frater nosier in propria manu habebat.' This would appear to vest all the knights' fees in the bishop. For details of the acquisition of Sadberge by the bishops of Durham, see Reg. Kellaw (Rolls Ser.), i, Introd. 68-7 1 ; ibid, iii, Introd. 9 ; Hodgson Hinde, Hist. ofNorthumb. 230, 273. s* It is somewhat difficult accurately to ascertain the relative position of these two. In April, 1208, Vipont was appointed (Rot. Pat. (Rec. Com.), %lb) and appears to have actually taken possession as custos, FeoJ. (Surtees Soc.), 232. He seems, however, to have soon been replaced by Ulecote, for in April, 1209, the king addressed a writ to Aimeric archdeacon of Durham and Ulecote as guardians of the bishopric (Rot. Pat. (Rec. Com.), 91). Thenceforward Ulecote appears to have remained in charge, for though in August, 1215, the castle of Durham had to be handed over to Vipont (Rot. Lit. Pat. (Rec. Com.), 152^), Ulecote is a little later still treated as the king's representative (Rot. Lit. Claus. [Rec. Com.], 247). 144 POLITICAL HISTORY Under the latter's firm rule the bishopric was not only retained for the king, but large sums of money were collected on his behalf.88 Ulecote's position was one of great difficulty, as the north was the stronghold of the baronial discontent, and in addition the Scottish forces maintained a threatening attitude. Fortunately for John he was supported by the Balliol interest, then the most powerful in the bishopric. Settled soon after the Conquest at Gain- ford by the Tees, the Balliol family rapidly increased in power. Bernard Balliol, who died about 1167, built on the Tees the castle which is named after him, and became the head of the extensive lordship which spread over the greater part of the southern and western portion of the present county. As part of Sadberge, Barnard Castle passed, by Richard's grant, under the control of the bishop," though as will be seen later the Balliols did not acquiesce in this transfer without a struggle. At this period Hugh was the head of the house of Balliol, and with his brother Bernard supported John. During the rising after the grant of Magna Charta, Ulecote appears to have taken charge of Northumberland whilst Vipont held the country between the Tyne and Tees for the king." On 5 June, 1216, Hugh Balliol was appointed to succeed Ulecote, who was thought to be dying.88 Ulecote, however, recovered. With the North- umbrian barons in open revolt, and Alexander of Scotland actively support- ing them,87 the situation was so serious that John himself came north and early in 1216 restored order in the district. At the beginning and again at the end of January he was at Durham, where he received the submission of four of the principal men of the bishopric — Gilbert Hansard, Robert of Amundaville, Roger Daudre, and William of Laton,87' and in addition Henry Neville fined to the king for the castle of Brancepeth, which was to remain in the king's hands.88 After John had retired Alexander advanced through Cumberland and approached Barnard Castle about July.8* During a reconnaissance, however, Eustace de Vesci, his brother-in-law, was killed, and Alexander retired. After this stormy period Durham enjoyed peace for nearly a century. Of the series of bishops who occupied the see between Pudsey and Bek there is but little to relate, and during the period in question the Balliols appear to have been the dominant influence, especially in the person of John, who during the barons' war supported the king's party as his father Hugh had supported King John. Of the other great barons Robert Bruce90 stood by Henry III whilst Richard Neville sided with the barons at Lewes. It is in connexion with Montfort's rising that the first conflict took place between the king and the bishop of Durham as to the latter's right to forfeitures of war within the Palatinate. After the battle of Evesham the king seized the manor of Greatham held by Peter de Montfort, and granted it to Thomas of Clare. Bishop Kirkham protested, and the king revoked his grant to Clare and acknowledged the bishop's right to forfeitures in the Palatinate." " Boldon Bk. (Surtees Soc.), App. xiii et seq. " Rot. Lit. Claui. (Rec. Com.), i, 1 29. * Rot. Lit. Pat. (Rec. Com.), 152*. Both Wendover and Matt. Paris, Chnn. Maj. (Rolls Ser.), ii, 641, state that Hugh Balliol and Ulecote were placed in charge of the land between the Tees and Scotland, but the entries on the Close and Patent Rolls do not bear this out. " Rot. Lit. Pat. (Rec. Com.), 186. " He besieged Norham in Oct. 1215 without success. Chron. Melrose, sub anna 1215. "• Rot. Lit. Pat. (Rec. Com.), 163. * Exeerpta I Rot. Fin. (Rec. Com.). w Melrose Chron. tub anno 1216. 10 Dugdale, Baronage, 450. " Lapsley, Co. Pal. of Dur. 42 ; Surtees, /////. Dur. iii, 134. 2 M5 '9 A HISTORY OF DURHAM The main interest, however, during this period is in the struggle between the bishop and his great feudatories — a fitting prelude to the coming conflict between Bek and the crown. During the thirteenth century the bishop was engaged in a contest for supremacy with the prior and convent of Durham and the three principal lay tenants, Balliol, Bruce, and Neville, each of whom attempted to oust or evade the bishop's jurisdiction. Almost from the be- ginning there had been friction between the bishop and the great Benedictine convent which Carileph founded at Durham. During Flambard's episcopacy relations were very strained, due, the convent alleged, to the bishop with- holding part of the conventual estates.92 Towards the end of the twelfth century another difficulty arose — that of jurisdiction. Under Pudsey, who had acted as a royal justice in eyre, the bishop's court was being gradually transformed from a seignorial court into one modelled on the royal courts of Henry II.93 The convent also tried to develop their seignorial court on similar lines, and during the long vacancy after Bishop Poitou's death with some measure of success. With Bishop Richard Marsh's accession a struggle began and con- tinued till 1229, when by an agreement between Bishop le Poor and the convent the attempt of the latter to render their court co-ordinate in juris- diction with that of the bishop was defeated. By this agreement, while the convent obtained a share of the profits of the jurisdiction in matters both civil and criminal affecting their tenants, the bishop's right of jurisdiction was upheld and the powers of the prior's court restricted to seignorial matters.9* The trouble with the Nevilles arose from an attempt to exclude the bishop from the right to primer seisin. Humphrey de Conyers died seised in capite of the bishop of certain lands which the bishop's bailiff seized except the manor of St. Helens, Auckland, part of the Neville fee. Robert Neville seized the manor and refused to give it up. The bishop thereupon appealed to the king, who in 1271 commanded Neville to permit the bishop and his bailiffs to have possession.96 The question of primer seisin was not settled definitely till Bishop Bek's time.96" In the case of the disputes with Bruce and Balliol the question raised was whether the bishop had the same jura regalia within Sadberge as he ™ See Canon Greenwell's pref. to the Feodarium (Surtees Soc.) as to the joint ownership of the bishop and congregation of St. Cuthbert and subsequent partition of the estates. ** Lapsley, op. cit. 161 et seq. M The convenit with 'attestationesde placitis coronae' and ' attestationes testium ' are printed in the end, (Surtees Soc.), 212 seq. The evidence on the bishop's behalf falls into three groups : pp. 221-230, witnesses dealing with North Durham matters; pp. 230-253, witnesses relating to Durham matters ; and pp. 254-261, witnesses dealing with matters relating to Yorkshire. No similar division is noticeable in the case of the convent's witnesses, many of whom speak to matters concerning the then widely separated divisions of the Palatinate. 96 Writ dated 8 Sept. 1271 (55 Hen. III). The writer has had the advantage in this and other instances of using the valuable collection of transcripts made by the late Mr. W. H. D. Longstaffe which are now deposited in the Dean and Chapter Library at Durham. Also Durham Treasury Cart, i, fol. 189, where this and three other cases are referred to. One of these seems to indicate that the bishops in the thirteenth century could not always maintain an effective hold over their tenants : ' Quando Philippus de Chyleforth senior decessit venit Dominus Nigellus de Rungeton tune ballivus Episcopi et misit se in saysinam terrae de Coton prope Elleton quam idem Philippus tenuit de domino Radulpho de Coton patre Radulphi de Coton junioris quod audiens idem dominus Radulphus senior congregatis amicis suis et consanguineis violentissime ejecit dominum Nigellum cum suis. Hoc videns dominus Nigellus congregavit omnes quos potuit de potestate episcopi et euntes ad aratrum ut ipsum ejecerit. Sed dictus Radulphus cum suis defendit domum et earn tenuit contra potestatem episcopi et optinuit custodiam terrae et heredis qui pene erat quatuor annorum usque ad legitimam aetatem et turn tenuit de Episcopo alias terras per servitium militare.' 95a Infra, p. 151. 146 POLITICAL HISTORY had in the remainder of the county. The rights of the bishop in the territory of Hart and town and port of Hartlepool were the subject of dispute with Robert Bruce in 1280. By agreement the difference was referred to the arbitration of the bishop of Norwich and Anthony Bek, then archdeacon of Durham, who whilst allowing Bruce free warren, free borough, free port, free market and fairs, confirmed the bishop's right to wreck. In addition, prisoners charged with offences beyond the jurisdiction of the local courts were to be taken to Sadberge Gaol and tried there.*' The question of homage was the subject in dispute between the bishop and the Balliols. The latter held in chief of the king the barony of Gainford, which was within the wapentake of Sadberge, by service of 5J knights' fees. On the transfer of Sadberge the bishop claimed the homage of 5^ knights' fees from the Balliols. They resisted the claim, but in 1231 an agreement was made between Bishop le Poor and John Balliol, whereby the latter undertook to do his best to persuade the king to allow the bishop to have the homage of the fees within the wapentake. John Balliol did not carry out the agreement, and was in 1234, and again in 1241, ordered by the king to do homage to the bishop. In 1255 the dispute culminated in an attack by John's brothers Eustace and Jocelin de Balliol on the bishop and his retinue, four of the latter being taken as prisoners to Barnard Castle. The king then intervened and John Balliol submitted.*7 Before dealing in detail with the history of the fourteenth century in which the Scottish wars play so large a part, it may be as well shortly to review the general military situation of Durham in the Middle Ages, first considering the routes by which Durham was liable to be invaded, then the invading force, and lastly, the means at the disposal of the bishop to repel the Scottish inroads. Three main routes were available to the Scots. By the first the Tweed was forded, and the whole length of the county of Northumberland traversed ; the valley of the North Tyne formed the second, whilst the third ran from Carlisle to Hexham. Of these the second may be dismissed, for it does not appear that by this route Durham ever suffered serious invasion ; the difficulty of supply may possibly be the reason. By the first route the Tweed had to be forded in face of the resistance offered by the castles of Wark, Norham, and Berwick, and it is of interest to note that on no occasion do these fortifications appear to have offered an effective opposition to an offensive movement by the Scots. To such skilful foragers the march through the county of Northumberland would offer no difficulties in the matter of supply, whilst the castles of Bamburgh, Alnwick, and Wark- worth were merely passively defensive. The passage of the Northumbrian rivers would not be a difficult matter, but the Tyne was a more serious obstacle, and had to be crossed by the fords above Newcastle. The Carlisle route requires but little comment ; no river of importance had to be crossed, though in the mountain section some difficulties may have been experienced in the matter of supply. * Transcrpt of award, Longstaffe MSS. The dispute as to wreck was one of long standing, see Kellate't Reg. (Rolls Ser.), iii, 46, where some of Peter Bruce's men were fined at Sadberge in Bishop le Poor's time. As to the bishop's right to wreck see Lapslcy, op. cit. 3 1 7. " H. Hinde, Hist, of Nortkumb. vi, 41 et scq., where the 1*31 agreement is printed from the copy, Hunter MSS. iv, 289, Durham Cathedral Library. 147 A HISTORY OF DURHAM Of the two routes, that by Carlisle, from a military point of view, was the most desirable. It was some twenty miles the shorter, and the threat of invasion from this direction kept the English troops concentrated by New- castle, and enabled small parties of Scots to overrun the northern part of Northumberland with comparative impunity. In addition, by using this route the forces in Durham were kept in a state of suspense as to the direction from which they would be attacked, whether the Scots would travel by Consett and the valley of the Browney, as they did in the Neville's Cross campaign, or by the valleys of the Wear or the Tees. The fact, however, remains that the Northumbrian route was the one generally adopted. That an army advancing by this direction would protect the fairest part of the lowlands from raiding may account for this, and in addition, the lengthy passage of the Scotch army through their own country, which the Carlisle route involved, must have been very trying to the inhabitants, for even Froissart, a favourable critic, says incidentally of the Scots, 'They are all thieves.'98 The sea route, fortunately for Durham, was closed, as the English always retained the command of the sea, the only effect of the Franco-Scottish alliance being to impede somewhat the passage by sea of supplies to the English garrisons in Scotland. Notwithstanding the English command of the sea, alarms of over-sea raids constantly recur. In 1336 the king sent his mandate to the bishop to cause all the ports and the sea-coast within the liberty of Durham to be safely guarded, and to cause all competent men to be arrayed, as an immediate invasion was expected, particulars of the invading fleet — twenty-six galleys and other ships in great numbers — being given." We now come to the Scotch army, which Froissart, in connexion with the 1327 invasion, describes — The Scots are a bold hardy race and much inured to war. When they invaded England they were all usually on horseback, except the camp followers ; they brought no carriages neither did they encumber themselves with any provisions. Under the flap of his saddle each man had a broad plate of metal ; and behind each saddle a little bag of oatmeal, so that when occasion needed cakes were made of oatmeal and baked upon the plates ; for the most part, however, they ate the half soddened flesh of the cattle they captured and drank water.100 Mobility was the great feature of the Scottish force, which appears to have consisted of feudal levies, though occasionally some Flemish mercenaries were employed to conduct siege operations. It was a force very suitable for raids, but ill adapted to carry out protracted operations, and one of the most marked features of the Scottish invasions is the lack of objective, for they all appear to have been raids for the purpose of plunder and destruction, and not military operations to obtain an effective hold on the country. The difficulties of the Scottish commanders were due partly to the composition of the force under their command — feudal levies liable to service of but short duration, and dependent on plunder for their remuneration — and the want, as a rule, of a regular or mercenary force to direct and undertake the sieges of the important strategic points, the possession of which would have given them a real hold on the country. Probably for this reason the development 98 Froissart, Chronicles sub anno. 99 Kellavfs Reg. (Rolls Ser.), iv, 201. 100 Froissart, Chronicles sub anno. 148 POLITICAL HISTORY of artillery in Scotland was much retarded.101 Supply was another difficulty, which was accentuated by the English command of the sea, which closed the only practical route by which a constant supply of food and stores could be obtained from Scotland, and the Scots in consequence were dependent on the country they passed through. The county of Durham, therefore, was liable to invasion by a force of great mobility without any vulnerable line of communication. This force, although not dangerous to the kingdom at large, was by its method of warfare a most terrible scourge to the unfortunate districts which suffered from its raids. Of the districts lying near the border that of Durham offered in its eastern and southern areas the fairest field for the operations of such a force. The force at the bishop's disposal to deal with these invading hordes has now to be considered. First he had his tenants, who were under feudal obligation to military service. The exact nature of this obligation is a matter of doubt. It is called in Bishop Hatfield's Survey seruitium forinsec um, replacing the older term utware.™ In 1300 Bek, Durham's most warlike bishop, compelled the men of the bishopric to follow him twice into Scotland. On the second occasion they returned without leave. This brought matters to a crisis, for the defaulters were imprisoned. The people of the bishopric appealed to the king against Bek, their complaint being : — Whereas no free man is bound to do service beyond the waters of Tyne and Tees there have come the bailiffs of the Bishop and have distrained them to do service elsewhere at their own proper charge, and those who were not able they took and imprisoned together with those who went into Scotland, and for default of means, having received no money from the Bishop, returned. To this complaint the bishop replied :— That he doth will, that from henceforth they shall not be thereto distrained to go at their own charge, but only at his own expense, and this in great need in defence of the franchise.10* The victory, therefore, lay with the tenants, but it was a hollow one, for whenever it suited them the king or bishop disregarded the above agree- ment, and fortunately so, for had the narrow view of their obligations put forward by the tenants been sustained the plight of the Palatinate would 101 Siege artillery was first introduced into Scotland at the beginning of the fifteenth century by James I. ; Lang, Hilt, of Scotland, i, 315. In 1496, when James IV was meditating an invasion in support of Perkin Warbeck, Ramsay, the spy, gives but a poor account of the Scots' artillery ; ibid. 369. 101 In Hatfielfs Surer. (Surtees Soc.), 140, William Hoton holds in Ryhope a messuage and 32 acres. • per servitium forinsecum.' This is the same holding (see Surtccs, Hitt. Dur. i, 252) as that which it referred to in the inquisition on the death of Philip Ryhope in 1341, where he is stated to hold ' in capite ' of the bishop, ' faciendo utware ' ; Randall MSS. Dur. Cathedral Lib. i, 34. '" KeUato'i Reg. (Rolls Ser.), iii, 45, 555. In 1581 the regulations for border service in Durham were as follows, viz : — -On threat of invasion all men between sixteen and sixty had to assemble at Gates- head Beacon, where the bishop's tenants placed themselves under his officers, and the tenants on the West- morland and Dean and Chapter Estates, and the inhabitants of Barnard Castle, under their respective stewards ; any unattached tenants ranging themselves under the sheriff. After the muster had been taken and the necessary number of men selected, they were then to proceed to the borders and remain there till their period of service had expired. If required to remain after their period of service had expired or to invade Scotland they were to be paid wage*. The period of service seems to have been ten days on the borders in addition to two days for the journey there and two days for the return. After the defeat of Ancrum Moor in February, 154$, the men of Durham received five shillings a head for remaining, at their bishop's request, for an additional four or five days on the border pending the arrival of levies from Yorkshire and elsewhere. Hunter MSS. (Dur. Cathedral Lib.), xxii, No. 5 ; and Allan MSS. vii, 136. 149 A HISTORY OF DURHAM have been bad indeed, for the only hope of protecting it from Scottish in- roads lay in a vigorous offensive. As to numbers it is difficult to give any reliable estimate, but at the battle of Lewes no fewer than eighty-five knights, all dwelling within the Palatinate, took part. As the list 10* of these knights gives their place of residence it is possible to ascertain their distribution throughout the county. They appear to have been principally resident in the southern and eastern districts, whereas Bishop Hatfield's Survey shows that military tenure was most pronounced in the north-west portion of the county — the part which was most exposed to the Scottish inroads. The difference may possibly be accounted for by the desire that the most vulnerable part of the county should not be left defenceless when the main body of knights went south to Lewes, and that some of the knights resident on the frontier were, therefore, left for its protection. In addition to his feudal tenants the bishop could call on (as he did in ijaa)105 all the able bodied men of his liberty between the ages of sixteen and sixty. This was an unusual step apparently, and the more general plan was to call upon each township to provide a certain quota loe or appoint commissioners to raise a certain number of men.107 The numbers raised in this way for service against the Scots were sometimes considerable. In 1313 writs were issued for 1,500 archers,108 and later in the century (1335) the number of archers was reduced to 300, but in addition 200 hobelers had to be raised, the writ requiring each of the latter to be provided with a horse, hand sword, and light armour.10* What the total armed force of the Palatinate amounted to is doubtful. Froissart, not a very reliable authority where numbers are concerned, described the bishop in 1388 as being at the head of 7,000 men, namely, 2,000 mounted and 5,000 foot.110 The nature of the service demanded from the general body of the inhabitants may be seen from a report in 1591 by Sir William Bowes on Barnard Castle, which he describes as being within the wardenry of the East March towards Scotland. 'The inhabitants are all bound to fourteen days' service in their proper persons of their owne charges at the borders uppon an houre's warninge.' m The command of the Palatinate forces was vested in the bishop, and men like Bek assumed the actual command. In 1343, when Bury, certainly not a military character, was bishop, a royal mandate was addressed to the prior of Durham to collect as many men-at-arms as he could and proceed to the Marches to repel an expected invasion.112 In general, however, the bishop entrusted the command and direction of his troops to his principal feudal tenants. Bishop Fordham's roll for 1386 included a payment to Sir William Bowes and three other knights by way of retainer in peace and war.113 They would form the bishop's military staff. Having dealt with what may be called the field army, the castle of Dur- ham and its garrison have to be considered. From its foundation the city of Durham had been a fortress. In addition the castle was a great arsenal, and 104 Hatfielfs Sarp. (Surtees Soc.), xiv. 105 Rymer, FoeJera, v (3), 964, printed Hutchmson, op. cit. i, 328. 106 foliate" s Reg. (Rolls Ser.), i, 17. 107 Lapsley, op. cit. 306. ' m Kellavi"s Reg. (Rolls Ser.), iv, 1 1 2. 108 Ibid. 191-2. no Froissart, op. cit. 453. 111 Surtees, Hist. Dur. iv, 56 ; also supra, p. 149. 111 Kellaw, op. cit. iv, 250. "* HaiJJelfs Survey (Surtees Soc.), 267. ISO POLITICAL HISTORY Lawrence in the twelfth century records the supplies of food and armour m stored there, whilst the Pipe Rolls at the beginning of the thirteenth century indicate the existence of a siege train.115 The same rolls also show that pon- toons, picks, shovels, hatchets, &c., were sent to Ireland and Wales from this county, and doubtless stores of the same nature would be kept at Durham. Further, there are payments to the keeper of the armour in the castle.118 The castle appears to have been garrisoned on feudal principles, no mer- cenaries being employed. The inferior tenants in certain townships in the eastern and southern portions of the county (being those less exposed to in- vasion) were under obligation to furnish men called Castlemen who kept watch and ward at a definite period of the year. These men would form the rank and file of the garrison.117 The superior part of the garrison was supplied by the barons of the bishopric, who in turn were each for a period responsible for the defence of a section of the wall.118 It would appear that these services were never commuted for a money payment, for in 1557 the Venetian Am- bassador in dealing with the border garrisons refers to the city of Durham as a place of very great renown among the English. Though in the city no soldiers are commonly kept and paid yet being very popular it has always been reputed one of the chief bulwarks against the inroads of the Scots.11* In 1284 began the episcopate of Anthony Bek 'of that state and greatness as never any Bishop was, Woolsey excepted.' m The period was a stirring one owing to the outbreak of the Scottish war, which was to last so long and cause so much misery in Durham. Although the bishop of Durham was after Edward I the most notice- able figure of this time, the great events which rendered the period so memorable took place beyond the River Tyne, and do not, therefore, concern us here. Durham, except on the occasion when the Scots crossed the Tyne and burnt Ryton in 1297, did not directly suffer from the war, but the demands for men, money, and carriage brought about in the Palatinate a constitutional crisis, which is the main feature of Bek's episcopate. It was under Bek that the jura regalia of the bishops of Durham reached their fullest development ; a development so great that it became necessary for the crown to limit the powers of a subject so capable of wielding them. During the first years of his episcopate, Bek, a favourite of the king, carried all before him. After the beginning of the fourteenth century, however, he exasperated his subjects by his exactions and arrogant 114 Laurence, Dia/ogi (Surtees Soc.), lines 403-8. "' Bo/Jon Book (Surtees Soc.), App. xvii, xxii. "• HatfieltTt Survey (Surtees Soc.), 271. "' Boldon Book (Surtees Soc.),/W«m. 118 An inquisition post mortem in 1348 states that Jordan de Dalden holds certain houses in the Bailey ot the castle of the bishop, ' in capite videlicet in Baronia sicut cctira de ballio.' Randall MSS, i, 45. A deed about 1 200 by which Reginald Basset conveyed a house in the Bailey contains the following reservation : 'Cum autem contigerit me vel heredes meos stagium facere ad custodiam castelli Dunelm., praefati monachi Dunelm, michi et heredibus meis unam cameram competentem et stabulum ad quatuor equos tantum in eadcm terra pro- videbunt, in quibus propriissumptibui stagium perficcre possimus.' FeoJarium (Surtees Soc.), 196. An Inq. p. m. in Langley's pontificate further indicates that the holders of houses in the Bailey were responsible for the defence of certain sections of the wall. Surtees, Hut. Durham, iv (2), 37. Simeon's continuator's account of the Cumin incident shows that the barons of the bishopric were a somewhat numerous body, and it seems probable that at the beginning of the twelfth century all who held of the bishop by knight service were known as ' Barons of the Bishopric.' It is possible to identify many of the knights whom the bishop in 1 1 66 in his return to the king mentions as being of the old fcoffmcnt, not only as barons but also as owners of houses in the Bailey. "• Calendar of Venetian State Pafert. m Coke, Inititutet, iv, 216. IS' A HISTORY OF DURHAM behaviour, and forfeited his sovereign's goodwill by his tactless, if sincere, remark at the Parliament at Lincoln and the contemptuous manner in which he disregarded the compact which Edward I had arranged between him and the convent of Durham. How great Bek's influence was during the early years of his episcopate may be seen in his collision with the crown over the Quo Warrants pro- ceedings, and his high-handed treatment of the officials of the archbishop of York. The Quo Warranto proceedings (under the Statute of Gloucester) are of interest, as they describe the privileges of the franchise, and were the cause of first seizure of the temporalities of the bishopric by Edward I. In January, 1293, Hugh of Cressingham and his fellow justices itinerant were at Newcastle on Tyne, and the twenty-four jurors m of the county of Northumberland presented in regard to the bishop of Durham : — That by his Bailiffs he was wont to meet the Justices about to go in eyre at Chylewell or at Fourstones or at Quakenbrigg, and afterwards to come before them at Newcastle on the first day of the Eyre and as well at the meeting of the Justices as at Newcastle sue for the Articles of the Crown. This had been done by all Bek's predecessors till Bishop Robert de L'isle allowed the practice of craving Court to drop. That he had his Chancery,122 and by his Writs and by his own Justices he pleaded in his Liberties of Durham, Sadberge, Bedlington, and Norham. That he had his Mint m at Durham and his Coroners m one for Sadberge and three in the other Wards125 of the Liberty of Durham and one at Bedlington and one at Norham. That immediately after the close of the Eyre at Newcastle the Bishop firstly at Durham and then in his other Liberties by his Justices pleaded all pleas of the Crown of the same Liberty and all other pleas by the Law of England and by the Articles delivered to him at Newcastle. That he had gallows at Durham and Norham and used infangenethef and utfangenethef. That he had Market and Fair at Durham, Darlington and Norham. That he pleaded at Norham pleas of the Crown every fortnight or three weeks at his will. That he put men in exigent and caused them to be demanded every six weeks till outlawed. That if outlaws returned he granted them his peace at will. That he had of late raised warren at Tweedmouth where it was never before. That he granted free warren to whomsoever he would. And that his Bailiffs seized at Berwick Bridge all wools, hides, or skins for sale which did not bear the mark called Coket.126 111 Of the twenty-four jurors twelve were drawn from beyond the Coquet and twelve from the district south of the Coquet. The present county of Durham would appear to have once formed part of a district of which the northern boundary was the Coquet. Compare Simeon's account of the foundation of the City of Durham (Rolls Ser. i, 81), when the entire population between the Coquet and the Tees assisted. m This appears to be the earliest mention of the Bishop's Chancery (Lapsley, Palatinate, 1 86), though before the middle of the thirteenth century Walter de Merton held the office of chancellor to the bishop (ibid. 175). It is possible that earlier chancellors may have existed, though the absence of any such official as witness to the numerous deeds of the twelfth century which have survived renders it improbable (ibid. 94). 123 For mint at Durham see Mark Noble's Two Dissertations on the Mint and Coins of the Episcopal Palatines of Durham, and Lapsley, op. cit. 278. Royal coins were struck at Durham from the time of the Conqueror, but the origin of the episcopal as distinguished from the Royal Mint is obscure. It can first be traced with surety during Geoffrey Rufus's episcopate. 124 Coroners are first mentioned in 1279; Lapsley, op. cit. 86. They would appear to have been always appointed by the bishop and not elected as was the case in the kingdom (ibid.). 125 This is the first reference to the division of the bishopric into wards. None are mentioned in Boldon Book. In addition to the three civil wards, Chester, Darlington, and Easington, there were forest wards, viz. Chester, Lanchester, and Roughside in Chester civil ward, and High Forest in Darlington civil ward (Longstaffe Papers, Dean and Chapter Library, Durham, ix). 126 The other holders of franchises in Durham mentioned in the Quo Warranto proceedings are the prior of Durham who had infangenethef, a moiety of the chattels of felons condemned in his court, amendment of assize of bread and ale broken in Elvet, and a moiety of wreck upon his land ; John Balliol, king of Scotland, 152 POLITICAL HISTORY Bek failing to appear before the justices at Newcastle and prove his right to these privileges, the temporalities of the bishopric of Durham were seized into the king's hands. Bek then appealed, and the case was heard before the king and council in Parliament at London, when, on the ground that no proclamation had been made as required by the Statute of Gloucester (the proclamation by the sheriff of Northumberland not affecting the bishop of Durham's liberty), the judgement was revoked and cancelled, and the liberties restored.187 Thus ended Bek's first contest with the crown. At the same period Bek was engaged in a contest with his metropolitan, whose messengers, bearing official letters of citation and canonical mandates, were imprisoned by the bishop's officers.1*8 The archbishop of York promptly excommunicated Bek, who appealed to Parliament, and it is in connexion with this appeal that counsel for the king remarked that ' Episcopus Dunelmensis habet duos status videlicet status episcopi quoad spiritualia et status comitis palatii quoad tenementa sua temporalia.' "* For having excommunicated a lay baron without the king's leave the archbishop was fined 18° 4,000 marks. Some years elapsed ere Bek entered on his great struggle with the convent and the men of the Palatinate, which was only ended by the king's intervention. Meanwhile the Scottish war of independence had broken out, and Balliol's extensive estates were added as forfeitures to swell the episcopal revenue. Though the Palatinate did not suffer invasion during this period — the invading force of 1296 retiring after it had reached Hexham — the demands made for men, money, and carriage caused great distress in the district which had so long enjoyed the benefits of peace. The exaction of a second term of military service in Scotland led to rebellion. When led by the bishop into Scotland the men of the Palatinate returned home, and, as has been before mentioned, were later imprisoned as deserters.181 The bishop was then engaged in a struggle with the prior and convent of Durham, and Ralph Neville and John Marmaduke, two of the principal men in the bishopric, taking advantage of the occasion, induced nearly all the knights and freeholders to revolt, saying that they were Haliwerfolk who held their lands for the defence of St. Cuthbert's body, and were under no obligation to serve beyond the Tyne or Tees either for the king or the bishop.1" The bishop's tenants at Barnard Castle had market, fair, pillory, tumbrel, gallows, infangenethcf, chattels of felons condemned in his court, and free chase and free warren ; Agnc; de Valence, who at Gainford had gallows and infangenethef, chattels of felons condemned in her court and free warren ; Robert Brus, who at Hartlepool had market and fair, amendment of assize of bread and ale broken, all liberties which to a market and fair pertained, and port of sea, keelage, and prises of fish ; John of Greystok, who at Coniscliffe had gallows and infangenethef, chattels of felons condemned in his court, and free warren. In addition the following had free warren : Ralph Neville at Brancepeth, Robert de Hilton, Wychard de Charron, John Marmaduke, Henry de Lisle, Walter de Wissingdon, and John de Gildeford ; Placita Jt Quo H'arranto (Rec. Com.), 604. It is of interest to note that with the exception of the prior and the rights of free warren all these franchises are within the wap.-ntake of Sadberge. " Ryley, Placita Parlamentaria, 1 74. '" Ryley, op. cit. 135 ; Letters from Northern Regiiten (Rolls Ser ), 97. The actual point taken was that the archbishop's officials were imprisoned in the castle at Durham which pertained to the bishop's barony (' castrum quod est pcrtincns ad baroniam ') by the bishop's lay officials, and that therefore the act was done by the bishop in his temporal and not. in his spiritual capacity. " Ibid. '" Ibid. U1 See p. 149. " Graystanes, Serif t. Trei. (Suit. Soc.), 76 ; Lapsley, op. cit. 128 seq. Haliwerfolk originally meant a tract of country lying to the north of the Tees. In the smaller chartulary, thirteenth century, in the treasury at Durham, the rubric ' Ghana de Haliwerfole ' includes territory between the rivers Tyne and Tees, BcJling- 2 153 20 A HISTORY OF DURHAM appealed to the king, and forwarded a petition setting out their various grievances.133 The case was brought before the Parliament at Lincoln in February, 1301, where Bek on being asked by Edward I if he would support the king against the earls, replied that as they laboured for the advancement and honour of the realm and the crown, he stood by them and not by the king against them. By this reply Bek is said to have lost the king's goodwill,13* and that consequently, when at Easter, 1303, Edward in person dealt with the case at Durham, the agreement 135 which resulted was greatly to the benefit of the bishop's subjects. Bek's charter to his subjects has been analysed by Dr. Lapsley (op. cit. 131) as follows : — (a) Correction of abuses in the administration of justice. § I . No freeman to be imprisoned except by inquest of Sakeber (see Pollock and Maitland, Hist, of Eng. Law, ii, 160) or if he be taken with the stolen goods in his possession. § 2. No freeman shall be impleaded in the court Christian except for matters relating to testament and matrimony ; and if any other action be attempted he shall have prohibition and attachment against the official. § 6. No freeman shall be impleaded in a halmote or other villein court, and even if a villein be party to the suit the freeman shall have a writ enabling him to plead in a free court. § 7. For the purposes of arrest and imprisonment, the wapentake of Sadberge is to be regarded as a venue distinct from the rest of the palatinate except in cases of trespass against the bishop. § 9. The bishop shall not seize any lands or goods in the palatinate without a writ, except in the case of the death of a tenant in chief. § 10. Without due recovery in court no officer of the bishop shall levy debt on any freeman except the ascertained debts of the bishop. § 15. In the forest courts procedure by inquest is to be allowed and fines are to be amerced by the suitors of the court and not arbitrarily by the bailiffs. § 1 6. Arbitrary imprisonment and refusal of procedure by inquest for forest offences are not to be tolerated. § 21. Except for distress no issues shall be levied on any freeman until the party has come into court. (b) Suppression of unauthorized exactions from the freemen of the palatinate. § 8. No tolls shall be taken on sales and purchases except in vills merchant, and all transactions in the open country (uppelaunde) shall be free. § ii. Except in time of war no carriage shall be levied of freemen without re- imbursement, unless such carriage is involved in their tenure. § 1 8. Forest officers shall make no unaccustomed exactions of freemen in the way of corn sheaves and the like. § 20. Dues from such of the bishop's wastes as have been put to farm and sub- sequently abandoned by reason of poverty shall not be levied from the neighbours. (f) Restraint of abuse of feudal privileges by the bishop. § 3. The bishop shall have the wardship of only such tenements in drengage as are held of himself and the prior. § 4. Like the king the bishop may have the wardship of all the tenements of his tenants in chief, whether such tenements be held of himself or of a mesne lord. § 5. The freemen of the palatinate may make mills on any of their lands that do not owe suit at the bishop's mill, and they may open and work mines of coal and iron on their own land. ton documents being included under Northumbria. It would appear, however, that the term applied to some parts of the present county of Northumberland, for in some charters in the treasury at Durham relating to Ellingham Church (twelfth century), Ralph de Calgi addresses himself to 'omnibus baronibus et amicis suis et hominibus de Haliwerfolch,' 4**, 2dae, No. I. See Lapsley, op. cit. 28, Reg. Pal. Dunelm. i, 8, for use in time of Hen. II ; Durham Miscellaneous Charters, 420. 133 fallow's Reg. (Rolls Ser.), iii, 41, translation 550. 13< Graystanes, Script. Tres (Surt. Soc.), 78. 135 The agreement is printed in Registrum Pa/at. Dunelm. (Rolls Ser.), iii, 61, 555. 154 POLITICAL HISTORY (tt) Confirmation of sundry special privileges enjoyed by the people. §13. All men of the bishopric may have free entry to the shrine of St. Cuthbert except in time of war. § 14. Hunting is to be free under certain restrictions and in districts not especially privileged such as parks and the like. §17. Persons living in the free chase may, in respect to the use of timber, freedom from pannage and the like, have all privileges that by reason of their tenure belong to them. \ 19. All inclosures made in the free chase by Bishop Bek which in any way infringe on commonable rights shall be removed within the year. (t) General. § 1 2. Only the four chief coroners may be mounted and none of the deputies may go on horseback. § 22. The bishop undertakes to observe and support all of these articles and for the honour of the king, who is concerned in the negotiation, to renounce any rancour or illwill which he may have felt towards his people. They in turn give up any claim for damages or the like that they may have had against the person of the bishop by reason of the abuses mentioned and corrected in this agreement. It will be noticed that the question which brought about the revolt — the obligation to serve beyond the Tyne and Tees — is not dealt with in this charter. It appears, however, in the petition by the men of the Palatinate to the king, the eighteenth article of it reading — Whereas no freeman is bound to do service beyond the waters of the Tyne and of Teise, there have come the bailiffs of the bishop, and have distrained them to do service elsewhere, at their own proper charge, and those were not able, they took and imprisoned, with those who went to Scotland, and for default of means returned, where no money from the bishop they received. The bishop doth will, that from henceforth they shall not be thereto distrained, to go at their own charge, but only at his own expense, and this in great need in defence of the franchise.1" It would appear therefore that the bishop's reply was considered satis- factory by his men, who in any case would not have been likely to have got the king to accede to so dangerous a principle.117 Ere this agreement had been made the temporalities of the see had been seized in July, i3O2.1S8 There were probably other motives actuating the king besides irritation at the bishop's reply at the Lincoln Parliament. In the hands of Bek, whose resources had been largely augmented in 1296 by the forfeiture of the Balliol estates, including the great fortress of Barnard Castle, the privileges of the bishopric had been developed to an unprecedented degree, and unless checked might have become a source of danger to the central power. In addition, Edward at this time was preparing for the conquest of Scotland, and the existence of an almost independent state close to the frontier must have proved a serious hindrance when all orders within that area had to be transmitted indirectly through the bishop. The temporalities were soon restored (July, 1303),"' but Bek was again in trouble in December, I3O5,140 and for the third time they passed into the king's hands, where they remained till after his death. Edward II in Sep- tember, 1307"' restored the temporalities, but they had been materially diminished by the grant of the Balliol forfeitures to the earl of Warwick and the Bruce estates to Clifford.1*1 Bek did not long survive his third '* Kellaefi Reg. (Rollt Ser.), iii, 555. 117 Compare the king's ruling in the case of Wardship, $ 4 of the charter. m Cal. of Pal. 1301-7, p. 43. " Ibid. 149. '" Ibid. 409. 141 Ibid. 1307-13, pp. 2, 17, 50. " Strife. Trtt (Surt. Soc.), 88. '55 A HISTORY OF DURHAM restoration, and died 3 March, 1311, the last years of his life being occupied in renewing his quarrel with the convent. The episcopate of Richard Kellaw, Bek's successor, was one of the most disastrous in the annals of Durham. Owing to the supineness of the central authority, the men of the bishopric were left to a large extent to their own resources in dealing with the Scottish inroads. In August, 1312, the Scots under Robert Bruce, after burning Hexham and Corbridge, marched with such secrecy and rapidity into the bishopric that the city of Durham itself was surprised and burnt, and a large part of the bishopric was ravaged. The prior of Durham (in Kellaw's absence at London) purchased a truce — a practice which became not uncommon — and called forth the king's disap- proval.143 Two years later 800 marks were paid for a similar truce when the Palatinate was invaded after the defeat of Bannockburn.144 The year 1315 witnessed a further raid, in the course of which the prior of Durham, who was residing at his summer residence at Bearpark, was surprised and only just escaped capture. His equipage, horses and furniture, and many of his servants fell into the Scots' hands. On this occasion Hartlepool, then the great seaport of the Palatinate, and the eastern districts, were ravaged by James Douglas, and the usual truce was purchased for 800 marks.145 It is some- what difficult to distinguish the various Scotch raids during Kellaw's episcopate.146 The meek and pious Kellaw was not the man to grapple effectively with the difficulties of the military situation, accentuated as they were by the defeat of Bannockburn, and the condition of the Palatinate at this period, when famine aggravated the evils of war.147 A letter written by Edward II to Lewis Beaumont, Kellaw's successor, gives some idea of the hardly ecclesiastical qualities which a bishop of Durham then required. We bear in mind that during the lifetime of Richard, your predecessor of good memory, it was frequently said of him reproachfully by our beloved and faithful Cousin, Henry of Beaumont, your brother, that it was through the negligence and lukewarmness of your said predecessor that portions of your Bishopric had so often been wasted by the Scots, our enemies and rebels, and that if you or any of your noble kinsmen had had the government of the same church of Durham, you would have safely defended those parts, like a stone wall, against aggression of our said enemies by the power of yourself or others of your noble race. Beaumont however — a cripple, and a man of no ability — proved but a broken reed, for the letter proceeds — But behold ! We now positively know that, through your default, negligence, and lukewarmness, greater damage has happened and still daily happens in parts of your bishopric and the other neighbouring places than in the time of your aforesaid predecessor, notwithstanding the promises of advice and assistance offered by you, your kinsmen and friends.148 Two incidents early in Beaumont's episcopate throw light on the disturbed condition of the Palatinate at this period. Travelling northwards in September, 1317, to Durham, after his confirmation at Westminster, 10 Script. Tret (Surt. Soc.), 94 ; Kellaw's Reg. (Rolls Ser.), i, 204 ; ii, p. xcvi. 144 Script. Tres (Surt. Soc.), App. xciv. '" Script. Tres (Surt. Soc.), 96. 46 Full particulars of the state of the borders at this period will be found in Ridpath, Border Hist. •of Engl. and Scotland, 240-51. 47 See Notices collected in Introd. Kellaw's Reg. iii, p. xcviii. 148 Rymer, Feed, iii, 94 ; Reg. Pa/at. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), i, p. Ixxix. I56 POLITICAL HISTORY accompanied by two cardinals and his brother Henry, the bishop and his party were attacked by Gilbert Middleton at Rushyford, some ten miles south of Durham. The cardinals were robbed of everything they possessed, and Beaumont and his brother were carried captive, the former to Morpeth and the latter to Mitford Castle in the north of Northumberland, and held to ransom.149 So daring were these freebooters that six days later Middleton and some of his men appeared in Durham Cathedral during service, spoke to the earl of Lancaster, and were allowed to return unmolested. In the sequel the bishop and his brother were ransomed and Middleton was captured and executed.1*0 The other incident occurred the following year (1318), when Richard Marmaduke lord of Horden and the most important official in the Palatinate was killed by Ralph Neville, the Peacock of the North, on Framwellgate Bridge right under the castle of Durham, and the murderer was allowed to go unpunished."1 The early years of Beaumont's episcopate were marked by one serious invasion. Early in 1322 the Scots, having overrun the eastern districts, made a feint of crossing the Tees and invading Richmondshire. Deceived by this feint many of the inhabitants who had fled to Cleveland for safety returned home by sea, and were surprised by the Scots who suddenly returned the way they had come.1" The year 1327 witnessed another though a less disastrous invasion by the Scots. In July 4,000 Scottish knights and squires with some 20,000 light horse under Sir Thomas Ranulph earl of Moray and Sir James Douglas crossed the Tyne and started to ravage the rugged western districts of the Palatinate. Edward III, who had reached Durham with a considerable force about the middle of the month, started for Stanhope near the head of Weardale where the Scots were encamped. His spies soon brought word that the enemy were in retreat, and the king made a forced march to Haydon Bridge, on the River Tyne, in the hope of cutting off their retreat. On arriving at the Tyne, however, no signs of the Scots could be found, and some days were spent in futile reconnaissance. The king then offered knight- hood and lands of the value of £100 a year to the man who should bring him intelligence of the whereabouts of the Scottish army. On 3 1 July, whilst the army was advancing down the valley of the Derwent to Blanch- land, a squire, Thomas Rokeby by name, galloped up to the king with the news that the Scots still lay at Stanhope. The English army was immedi- ately halted, and next day marched over the moors of Stanhope Common, down into the narrow .valley of the Wear, where on the southern bank they were confronted by the enemy drawn up in battle array. So strong was the Scotch position that the English dared not attack ; but Douglas, with some two hundred followers, penetrated one night into the English camp up to the king's tent, the cords of which they cut, and retreated with but little loss, after having killed some three hundred of the English. For three days I4t Bates, Northumb. 157. 140 Script. Tret (Surt. Soc.), 100. There appears to have been some undemanding between Middleton and the earl of Lancaster ; Bates, op cit. 157. '" Surtees, //;;/. Durham, i, 26 ; Gfita Edwardi de Carnarvon (Rolls Ser.), ii, 56. Marmaduke was the bishop's steward, then and till the middle of the fifteenth century the most important administrative official of the bishop. Lapslcy, op. cit. 77. IM Serif t. Tret (Surt. Soc.), io». '57 A HISTORY OF DURHAM the armies lay opposite each other, and then the Scots, who were in want of supplies, quietly withdrew in the night. Pursuit of so mobile a force being hopeless, Edward III retired to Durham, and disbanded his forces.153 The pontificate of the celebrated Richard Bury (1333-45), Beaumont's successor, was not marked by any striking event. Owing to the activity of Edward III Durham enjoyed comparative peace for some years, though in 1343 an armistice was purchased from the Scots.1" The main interest of this period is, however, in the various steps by which the Palatinate rights, somewhat overshadowed by the repeated seizures during Bek's pontificate, were reasserted. Bury, shortly after his enthronement — a ceremony graced by the king and queen of England, the king of Scotland, two archbishops, and many other nobles — was made successively Treasurer and Chancellor of England. He was therefore in a position to act with vigour where he considered his jura regalia infringed, and on one occasion outlawed the commissioners appointed by the king to inquire into the obstructions which hindered the navigation of the River Tyne.156 Another instance in which Bury resisted the central authority was when the king tried to enforce the assumption of knighthood on some of the bishop's subjects. Bury protested, and the matter was referred to the Barons of the Exchequer for inquiry.166 A further illustration of the bishop's jura regalia in the matter of taxation is afforded by the case of the wool tax in 1338. In theory the Palatinate was free from ordinary royal taxation, and Edward III, when Parliament had granted him half the wool in the kingdom, addressed a mandate and request to the bishop to convoke a representative assembly of his liberty, explaining the necessities of the king in regard to the defence of the realm, and to obtain a grant of half the wool which was to be carried to Newcastle on Tyne.167 To Bury succeeded Thomas Hatfield (1345-81), whose long episcopate save for the battle of Neville's Cross is singularly devoid of incident. Despite the Black Death, which ravaged the Palatinate168 in 1349 and 1350, the 153 For this invasion the most vivid account will be found in Froissart, Chron. i, cc. 17, 18 ; see also Fordun, Annals (Scotch Historians), i, 140; Ridpath, op. cit. 283 ; Northumb. County Hist, vi, 317; Surtees, Hist. Dur. i, p. xli. 1M Durham Cursitor Rolls, printed Reg, Pa/at. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), iv, 273. The entry is of interest as the truce is stated to have been made ' de communi consilio et unanimi censensu totius communitatis dominii et libertatis nostre regie.' The price paid was £160, which was raised by commissioners appointed for the purpose from various wards into which the bishopric was thus divided, viz. west ward, Sadberge, £16 ; east ward, Sadberge, £16 ; Darlington ward, £42 13*. ^J. ; Stockton ward, £21 6s. %d. ; Chester ward, j£33 izs. ; and Easington ward, ^30 8*. 165 Lapsley, op. cit. 320. The rights of the bishops of Durham over the southern half of the River Tyne were a subject of frequent dispute. It is unfortunately not known what ultimately happened in the above case. The king protested against the outlawry and ordered the bishop to allow the commissioners to proceed with their inquiry ; the bishop in reply issued a commission of his own to inquire as to the persona who had unlawfully interfered with the right of navigation and fishing in the southern half of the waters of the Tyne. Reg. Pa/at. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), iv, 258, 334. 166 The result of the inquiry is unknown, but as no more is heard of the subject after 1346 it may be concluded that the bishop's claim was allowed. Reg. Pa/at. Dun. iv, 211, 265. 157 Reg. Pa/at. Dun. (Rolls Ser.), iv, 225 ; Lapsley, op. cit. 116, 298. It may be mentioned here that the large revenue the bishops of Durham received as landlords of the vast episcopal estates rendered it seldom necessary for them to resort to direct taxation of their subjects, the purchase of truces from the Scots being the principal cause of such action on their part. Dr. Lapsley, op. cit. 273, states that in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries direct taxation was a regular, if infrequent, source of revenue, being reserved to meet extraordinary expenses, and that owing to the disturbed condition of the borders in the fourteenth century it was then more frequently resorted to. 1M For details see ' Soc. and Econ. Hist.' I58 POLITICAL HISTORY period was one of steady progress owing to the immunity from Scottish invasions. Towards the end of 1346 King David of Scotland, urged by his ally the king of France, invaded England. Advancing through Cumberland at the beginning of October, and marching by Hexham, he crossed the Derwent at Ebchester and travelled down the valley of the Browney to Bearpark, a place some three miles west of Durham, where the prior had a summer residence. David had hoped to find the country denuded of troops owing to the invasion of France by Edward III.1" In this he was mistaken, for William de la Zouch, who with Ralph Neville and Henry Percy had been in the previous August appointed to the command of the country north of the Trent, concentrating his forces at Richmond on 14 October, marched that day to Barnard Castle, where he was joined by Lord Percy and Sir Thomas Rokeby the sheriff of Yorkshire. On 16 October the force marched to Bishop Auckland and encamped in the park there. On this day the first collision took place between the opposing forces ; Sir William Douglas, with some cavalry, while making a raid to the south, was surprised near Ferryhill by some English. Douglas beat a rapid retreat, but being overtaken near Croxdale his force was very roughly handled and suffered severe loss, Douglas with difficulty escaping to bear the tidings to his king. David immediately concentrated his army, which had been permitted to raid the neighbouring country and levy a poll-tax from such of the wretched inhabitants as had not fled south. Early on the morning of 17 October the English marched from Bishop Auckland, past the right flank of the Scotch force, and took up a position on the high ridge which lies just to the west of Durham and separates the valley of the Wear from that of the Browney. On the English right were the Northumbrians under Henry Percy; the centre, under the archbishop of York and Ralph Neville, who was in supreme command, was composed of the bishopric troops ; whilst the left, which was the largest division of the three, consisted of levies from the south of the Tees, under Sir Thomas Rokeby sheriff of Yorkshire, and Lord Mowbray. There was in addition a reserve division under Lord William de Roos. The Scottish force was also divided into three divisions. David commanded the centre, Sir William Douglas and the earl of Moray the right, and the High Steward of Scotland and the earl of March the left, which, as in the case of the English force, was the largest of the three divisions. The battle began at nine, and by mid-day all was over. The Scotch right, advancing over difficult ground, were thrown into confusion by the arrows of the English archers. Attacked then by Rokeby 's division, they were unable to withstand the charge, and, broken and disordered, were driven back on the centre, Moray being killed and Douglas taken prisoner. The English left, however, which was opposed to the High Steward, whose division was the largest of the Scotch force,, did not fare so well, being sorely pressed until relieved by the arrival of Roos's reserve division. Thus reinforced the English right pressed the Scotch left with such success that the High Steward determined to retire and leave the centre and the shattered remnants of the Scots' right wing to their fate. Meanwhile a desperate struggle was taking place in the centre between the men of the bishopric and the Scotch king ; but Neville, first reinforced by Rokeby 's victorious left and then by the troops which had '» Hatfield was absent with King Edward III in France ; Diet. Nat. Biog. lub nom. ' Hatfield.' '59 A HISTORY OF DURHAM defeated the High Steward, concentrated such a force on the Scotch centre that David's troops were overwhelmed and he himself was taken prisoner by John Coupland after a desperate struggle.160 The victory of Neville's Cross, coupled with the ravages of the plague in Scotland, helped to secure peace for Durham during the remainder of Hatfield's reign. The bishop's relations with the central government were good. In 1374 the king levied a subsidy in the Palatinate without asking any leave or licence, but he afterwards granted letters patent that the pro- cedure should not be treated as a precedent — a course which the central government generally adopted when it was convenient to ignore the privi- leges of the franchise.161 With the degradation of Bishop Fordham (1382-8), Hatfield's successor and one of the principal advisers of Richard II, from the see of Durham to that of Ely we enter on the great struggle between the houses of York and Lancaster, which was to bring into prominence the Durham family of Neville. The first member of the family to be connected with the Palatinate was Geoffrey Neville, who in the twelfth century married Emma Bulmer the heiress of Brancepeth. Isabel, their daughter and heiress, married Robert the son of Maldred lord of Raby, and the issue of their marriage, who took the name of Neville, became the lords of Raby and Brancepeth. Robert Neville, who died in 1282, was the first member of the family who comes into prominence as a Border soldier. Though possessed of extensive estates both within and without the Palatinate, it was not till the middle of the fourteenth century that they began to occupy the same position in the Palatinate which the Balliol family did in the thirteenth century. In the Quo Warranto proceedings at the end of the latter century the only franchise belonging to the Nevilles was the comparatively unimportant one of free warren, which stands in striking contrast with those claimed by the Balliols and the Bruces, and also with the numerous privileges which later appertained to the earls of Westmorland. In the fourteenth century three men of exceptional ability successively became head of the family, viz. : (i) Ralph (died 1 367), the commander-in-chief at the battle of Neville's Cross ; (2) John his son, who died in 1388, a great soldier and supporter of Edward III ; and (3) Ralph son of John and first earl of Westmorland, the most influential man in the north. At first a supporter of Richard II, who in 1397 created him earl of Westmorland for his assistance when the duke of Gloucester and the other lords appellant were brought to trial, he was one of the first to join Henry IV when he landed in Yorkshire in 1399. Thenceforward he was 160 The two principal authorities for the battle of Neville's Cross are the letter from the prior and con- vent to Bishop Hatfield : Letters from Northern Reg. (Rolls Ser.), 387 ; and Chronicon de Lanercost (ed. Maitland Soc.), 348. The whole of the evidence has been most carefully considered by Canon Brown in his two articles on the battle in the UshawMag. i, 213 ; ii, 35. See also in an article by Robert White, Arch, deliana, i, 271. It is difficult to estimate the numbers engaged, but taking into consideration that the centre was composed of the bishopric men, the right of the Northumbrians, and that the whole force was able to march from Bishop Auckland to Neville's Cross, some eight miles, including the passage of the Wear, before dawn on 1 7 October, the numbers cannot have been large. It is to the capture of the Scottish king that the battle owes its celebrity. In regard to the question whether the High Steward retreated with his division before or after the capture of David, it is submitted that the fact that Coupland, his captor, was a Northumbrian and therefore belonged to Percy's division, or possibly to Roos's division, which were engaged with the High Steward's division till it retired, indicates that the High Steward retreated before his king had been captured. 161 Script. Tres (Surt. Soc.), App. No. cxxv ; Lapsley, op. cit. 298. 160 POLITICAL HISTORY one of the most staunch supporters of the house of Lancaster. He was twice married. The issue of his first marriage, who succeeded to his Durham estates, followed in his footsteps, John the only son of the second earl being killed at the battle of St. Albans in 1451 whilst fighting for Henry VI. The more distinguished children of his second marriage with Joan Beaufort daughter of John of Gaunt as a rule were Yorkists. With the exception of his son Robert, who was bishop of Durham from 1437 to 1457, an(^ does not appear to have shared the ambitious and intriguing spirit of his brothers, the members of this branch ceased to be directly connected with Durham. It is probably greatly due to the influence of the Durham branch of the Neville family — whose extensive territorial possessions extended over the greater part of the western portions of the county, including the castles of Brancepeth and Raby — that the Palatinate was a Lancastrian stronghold.1" Though during the struggle much fighting took place in both Yorkshire and Northumberland, there is no record of any action being fought in Durham. To Fordham succeeded Bishop Skirlaw (1388-1405), who although not a politician is stated to have connived at the Percy Rising in 1403, which the earl of Westmorland refused to join, and by his operations prevented the earl of Northumberland from joining his son Hotspur at Shrews- bury. When therefore two years later the earl of Northumberland again attempted to rebel, he tried to rid himself of the earl of Westmorland, but the attempt to surprise him in Sir Ralph Eure's castle at Witton le Wear failed.1" After this rising several persons were executed at Durham, but none of them appear to have belonged to the county.1** Bishop Langley's long episcopate (1406—37) was a period of peace, save for a slight disturbance at Barnard Castle.1" The principal interest of his episcopate lies in the action he brought to protect the Palatinate rights from infringement. An attempt had been made under a commission from the king's Chancery to take an inquest at Hartlepool, which was within the Palatinate. Langley petitioned, and the matter came before Parliament. At the hearing Sir William Eure, counsel for the king, alleged that the bishop's claim to have jura regalia between the rivers Tyne and Tees by prescription was bad, as Richard I was seised of the manor and wapentake of Sadberge. Still Langley prevailed, and the Palatinate rights were fully acknowledged.1** In 1457 Laurence Booth was appointed bishop in succession to Robert Neville. As a Lancastrian Booth had a difficult part to play when, after the battle of Towton (1461), the Yorkist party became supreme and the north the centre of the struggle. Though Barnard Castle was held by the 10 For the history of the Neville* tee the excellent scries of articles in the Diet. Nat. Biog. on the various members of the family. Also Surtees, //;'//. Dur. iv, 149. It should be mentioned that Richard earl of Warwick, the king-maker, became entitled to Barnard Castle in right of his wife Anne Beauchamp. " Wylie, Hist. tfHtn. 1Y, ii. 178. '" Ramsay, Tork and Lane, i, 92. "* In 1426 Sir John Jonson is pardoned for assembling an armed crowd of malefactors at Barnard Castle. Dur. Cursitor R. E. Langley, m. 15. "* Par/. R. (Rec. Com.), iv, 427. The whole case is most interesting. Eure's allegation would appear to be fatal to the bishop's claim ; but Langley, who had three times been Chancellor, was a man of influence, and under the Lancastrian rule there was no tendency to cut down the Palatinate privileges. Langley also brought a successful action against the mayor and community of Newcastle on Tyne for the southern part of the River Tyne and the bridge over it between Newcastle and Gateshead. Spearman, Inquiry, 10 ; Serif t. Trti (Surt. Soc.), App. No. cboutii. 2 l6l 21 A HISTORY OF DURHAM earl of Warwick, the bishopric was Lancastrian, and we find the prior and convent of Durham advancing money to Queen Margaret and other members of that party.167 There is no trace of any engagement taking place between the Tyne and Tees, though in June, 1461, John Lord Neville and others made a raid from Ryton to Brancepeth ' with standardes and gytons unrolled.' 168 In the consequent act of attainder the rights of the bishop of Durham to forfeitures were set out and allowed. During this period King Edward IV was several times in Durham directing the operations of his troops in Northumberland.169 In 1462 (7 December) he seized the temporalities of the see, and the accounts of this period show that the king had a garrison in the castle of Durham.170 On 17 April, 1464, Booth was restored, and from this date he appears to have gone over to the Yorkist side.171 So much so that he reopened with success the question of the Balliol and Bruce for- feitures, and in 1470 obtained a full acknowledgement of his rights.178 In the case of the Neville rising in 1469 Durham again seems to have been fortunate in being outside the area of operations, which appear to have been south of the Tees. Of Booth's two successors, Dudley (1476-83) and Sherwood (1484-94), but little can be said. The latter, a partisan of Richard III, does not appear to have been regarded with favour by Henry VII, and the circumstances under which he retired to Rome are obscure. In 1477 Richard duke of Gloucester became possessed of Barnard Castle, and in 1480 was appointed commander-in-chief of the northern forces against the Scots. Personally popular, he appears to have been largely instrumental in winning over Lancastrian Durham to the Yorkist side,178 and it was probably due to their loyalty to the memory of Richard III that in 1488 the people of the bishopric rose in rebellion.178* This rising was caused by a tax of a tenth on movables, which the people of the Palatinate refused to pay. When Henry VII declined to remit it * the rude and beastlie people with great violence set upon the Earle ' (of Northumberland), who was en- trusted with the levying of the tax, and ' furiouslie and cruellie murthered both him and diverse of his household servants.' m With the accession of the house of Tudor the existence of the Palatinate of Durham as a virtually separate state was doomed, though in 1492 Henry VII promised to respect the privileges of the franchise,176 and it was not till 1536 that the Act of Resumption was passed. For some time 167 Script. 7V« (Suit. Soc.), App. No. cclviii. 16S Rot. Parl. quoted by Hutchinson, op. cit. i, 423. 169 At the end of 1462 Edward IV, when marching north to support Warwick who was besieging the Northumbrian strongholds, fell ill with measles at Durham ; Ramsay, York and Lane, ii, 293. 70 King's Receiver's Accts. printed in Raine, Auckland Castle, 5 1 . 171 Thomas Lumley also became a supporter of the new regime. Governor of Scarborough Castle for Henry VI, he assisted Edward IV in his operations against the Northumberland garrisons. In the first year of his reign the king restored his peerage on reversal of the attainder of his grandfather, who, being involved in the rising of 1400, had been lynched by the mob at Cirencester and attainted ; Surtees, Hist. Dur. ii, 156 ; Ramsey, op. cit. i, 21. lrt As we have seen above (p. 155), Edward I, notwithstanding the bishop's admitted right to the for- feitures of war, had granted Barnard Castle to the Beauchamp family and Hart to Robert Clifford. Kellaw, Beaumont and Langley had each obtained a bare recognition of their right to those two forfeitures, but failed to obtain possession ; Lapsley, op. cit. 43. 173 Surtees, Hist. Dur. iv (i), 66 ; (2), 114. 17Sa Lapsley, op. cit. 299. 174 Holinshed, Chron. iii, 769. m Materials Illustrative of the Reign of Henry fll (Rolls Ser.), i, 99. 162 POLITICAL HISTORY before that date the disturbed state of the north owing to the Scottish wars had necessitated a special form of government which after the Pilgrimage of Grace developed into the Council of the North. The first seeds of this rival power which was to overshadow the Palatinate were sown in 1522, when a royal lieutenant was sent down to the north. In 1525 Henry duke of Richmond was appointed the king's lieutenant-general north of the Trent, and he and his council governed the northern counties, the council including Sir William Bulmer, the sheriff, and William Franklyn, the chancellor of the Palatinate. Although the council did not hesitate to infringe the privileges of the franchise by sitting as justices of assize and summoning witnesses before them, Ruthall (1509-23) and Wolsey (1523-9), who successively filled the see during this period, were too ardent supporters of the centralizing policy of the Tudors to care much about the curtailment of the rights of the Palatinate, which the latter never visited and from which the former was fre- quently absent.17' In the beginning of 1536 was passed ' an acte for recon- tynuyng ofcertayne liberties and franchises heretofore taken from the Crown.'177 Although not specifically directed against Durham it was the only county palatine left outstanding in the hands of a subject. By this Act all judicial appointments were to be made by the king, who alone would pardon offences. In addition all writs and other legal processes were to run in the name of the king. Shortly it may be stated that by the Act, whilst all the Palatinate privileges were preserved, the sanction proceeds from the king and not from the bishop.178 Firmly wedded as the people of Durham were to the old religion, the changes wrought by the Reformation could not be carried out in the Palatinate without causing grave discontent, even though a man like Tunstall was deputed to carry them out.179 Twice the flame of rebellion burst forth, first in 1536 and again in 1569. It is somewhat difficult to estimate the part played by the men of the bishopric in the Pilgrimage of Grace. The lower classes appear to have enthusiastically supported the rising in October, 1536, but such of the upper classes as joined seem in certain cases, including that of Lord Lumley, to have acted under compulsion.180 Fortunately for the government the earl of Westmorland remained loyal and free ' from the infection of their traitorous poison.' l81 Gathering together at Spennymoor, some seven miles south-west of Durham, the rebels of the Palatinate marched with the banner of St. Cuth- bert south to Pontefract, where they joined the main body.181 Tunstall, alarmed for his safety, fled to Norham, whilst the earl of Westmorland seems to have gone to London, although he is one of the representatives of the "* For the Council of the North, tee Lapslcy, op. cit. 159 ; Coke, lust, iv, 245. '" Stat. 27 Hen. VIII, cap. 19. "' It should be noted that the Act wai passed early in 1 536, and has therefore no connexion with the riling known ai the Pilgrimage of Grace, which did not take place till October in that year ; see Lapslcy, op. cit. 197. "*Of Tunstall Lord Acton wrote (Quarterly Rev. cxliii, 23) : 'He it the only Englishman whose public life extended through all the changes of religion, from the publication of the Theses to the Act of Uniformity. The love and admiration of his greatest contemporaries, the persecution which he endured under Edward, his tolerance under Mary, have preserved his name in honour. Yet we may suspect that a want of generous and definite conviction had something to do with the moderation which is the mark of his career." MDitt. Nat. Biog. sub 'Lumley' ; L. anJ P. Hen. fill, xii (i), 29. mL. and P. Hen. Vlll, xi, 1003. " Ibid, xii (l), 29. A HISTORY OF DURHAM bishopric nominated to take part in the conference at York between the earl of Norfolk and the baronage and commonalty of the northern counties.183 Accepting the pardon of Pomfret at the beginning of December the bishopric forces appear to have dispersed, and Sir Francis Bigod's attempt to stir them up to take part in the attack on Scarborough Castle met with but a meagre response.184 Still a strong undercurrent of suspicion prevailed, and in January the Lancaster Herald was ' ungoodly handled ' at Durham and did not escape with- out danger,186 whilst Sir Ralph Sadler was set on at Darlington and rescued with difficulty.186 He, however, reported the bishopric quiet on the whole. At the beginning of March the duke of Norfolk, despite the fact that the bishopric had been omitted from his commission, tried and executed a batch of prisoners.1868 The period which intervened between the rising of 1536 and the 1569 rebellion is marked by the duke of Northumberland's bold but unsuccessful attempt to possess himself of the Palatinate powers during the brief reign of Edward VI.186b Northumberland's first step was to get rid of Tunstall. Accordingly about July, 1550, he was charged by one Ninian Menville with having con- sented to a conspiracy in the north for raising a rebellion. For some time the charge languished for want of proof, but a so-called incriminating letter being found among the duke of Somerset's papers at the end of 1551 Tunstall was removed to the Tower. In March, 1552, a Bill for his deprivation was, despite Cranmer's opposition, passed by the House of Lords, but fell through in the Commons. The attempt to attaint Tunstall in Parliament having failed, a commission was issued in September, 1552, to the Lord Chief Justice and some others to try him. Being refused both counsel and time to prepare his defence, Tunstall was on 1 1 October deprived of his bishopric. Meanwhile Northumberland had written on 7 April, 1552, to Cecil, desiring the grant of the Palatine jurisdiction of Durham,187 and at the beginning of 1553 obtained an Act of Parliament187* dissolving the bishopric. On 21 May he was appointed steward of the revenues of the bishopric, but the death of Edward VI on 6 July put an end to his designs. Upon the accession of Mary Tunstall was promptly released, and in April, 1554, an Act was passed for ' the repeal of two several Acts made in the seventh year 1M L. and P. Hen. Vlll, xi, 1155. The others were Lord Lumley, Sir Thomas Tempest, Sir Thomas Hilton, Sir William Eure, Mr. Franklyn, with twelve gentlemen. 184 Ibid, xii (i), 148. The men of Durham had taken their oath to the earl of Westmorland to rise at no man's command except the king's. ""Ibid, xii (l), 50, 201. 186 Ibid, xii (l), 259. On 5 Feb. Tempest writes to Norfolk that the country is out of order owing to the absence of the bishop and the earl of Westmorland. 186a Ibid, xii, 615, 478. The prisoners did not include any person of importance, and among them were two cooks at the abbey. The only man of note who suffered (at Tyburn) was George Lumley, only son of John, sixth Baron Lumley. He and his father took part in the October rising, but the latter returned home after the pardon of Pomfret, whilst his son joined in Hallom's rebellion (Diet. Nat. Biog. sub nom. 'Lumley'). The only estate of importance forfeited by this rebellion was the manor of Thorpe Bul- mer, belonging to Sir John Bulmer of Wyton in the county of York (Dur. Cursitor Rec. Def. Keeper's Rep. xliv, 334). The bishop granted this estate to his nephew with the assent of the king, and thus avoided raising the difficult question of his right to such forfeitures. 1MbSee 'Eccl. Hist.' p. 33. 187 S.P. Dom. Edw. VI, vol. xiv, No. 18. I87a Stat. 7 Edw. VI, No. I. 164 POLITICAL HISTORY of King Edward the Sixth, touching the dissolution of the bishoprick of Durham.' mk Tunstall did not long survive Elizabeth's accession, but for refusing to consecrate Parker as archbishop of Canterbury he was deprived on 28 Sep- tember, 1559. Within two months (18 November) he was dead. During the vacancy Elizabeth, under the authority of the Act of i Elizabeth, cap. 19, took into her hands a large part of the temporal possessions of the see.188 When the temporalities were restored to Pilkington on his appointment as bishop, Norham, Allerton, Crayke, Sadberge, Middleham and the Easing- ton Ward, Coatham, Mundaville, and Gateshead were excepted. In 1556 the above lands with the exception of Norham were restored, but in respect of those between the Tyne and Tees the bishop was burdened with an annual rent of £88o.18" The outbreak in 1569 was far more serious, and for a time the queen's authority absolutely ceased to exist in the bishopric. In Durham the rebellion centred round the person of Charles, sixth and last earl of Westmor- land,188" who being only six and twenty years of age was influenced by the earl of Northumberland. During the month of September the rumours of the plotting of these two reached the ears of the earl of Sussex, the president of the North at York, through Sir George Bowes. At the beginning of October the outlook became more threatening, and Pilkington, the somewhat unpopular bishop, discreetly withdrew to London. Both earls were summoned to York, and the result of an interview with Sussex on 8 October seems to have somewhat quieted the latter's suspicions,189 whilst on 2 November Bowes forwarded a reassuring account of the state of the Palatinate to the Privy Council.190 Meanwhile, however, the earls had been maturing their plans. On the night of 6 November the earl of Westmorland concentrated his armed retainers at the castle of Brancepeth some 4$ miles south-west of Durham.191 Bowes immediately garrisoned and provisioned Barnard Castle, whilst Sussex, now thoroughly alarmed, summoned both the earls, who returned evasive answers, and on 10 November ' the earl of Northumberland, armed in a previe cote, under a Spanish jerkyn, being open, so that the cote might be It7b Stat. I Mary, Sess. 3, cap. 3, printed in Hutchinson, op. cit. i, 530. The other Act of Edw. VI referred to as being repealed ii j Edw. VI, cap. 10, 'For the uniting and annexing of the town of Gateside to the town of Newcastle-upon-Tyne.' To conciliate the opposition of the Newcastle corporation to the Marian Act, Tunstall had to grant them a lease at a nominal rent of the salt meadows and borough tolls for 450 years. See Surtccs, //;//. Dur. ii, ill, and Hutchinson, op. cit. ii, 579. For the proceedings against Tunstall see Dixon's Hiit. Church of Engl. iii, 3*1 ; Burnet, Hut. of Reformation (ed. Pocock), iii, 356 ; Did. Nat. Biog. Tunstall. • The annual value of the temporalities being taken as £2,821 \i. f,J., Elizabeth seized £1,000. An abstract of this valuation made 26 Hen. VIII is as follows : — Rents : Darlington Ward, £612 i ;/. i JV. ; do. Chester Ward, £476 6s. tfJ. ; do. Easington Ward, £396 ^l. +\J. ; do. Stockton Ward, £214 4*. 6J. ; total, £1,699 &'• 4i^- » bailiffs' rents of various towns, £214 17.1. <)\J. ; rents from forest of Weardale and various parks, £178 I 3/. 8>0 Of five ships carrying supplies for Leven, three were lost at sea an a the other two driven into the Tyne by bad weather and captured by the Royalists. Ibid. 167. I70 POLITICAL HISTORY town, who under the command of Colonel Fairfax drove Montrose back to Newcastle.*" By the beginning of June the Royalists were masters of the county of Durham,88* and Leven and Fairfax arranged to send a thousand horse into the bishopric to oppose Montrose.18* The arrival in July of Lord Callendar with a second Scotch army put an end to the Royalist dominion. Crossing the Tyne at Newburn the Scots marched first to Sunderland and then to Hartlepool. On 24 July Hartlepool and Stockton surrendered without fighting, and were garrisoned. Callendar now proceeded north to Newcastle, the last royal stronghold left in the north. On the 27th his advance guard was repulsed on the hill outside Gateshead, but the next day Callendar with the main body * fiercelie facing the enemy beat them from the hill, chased them downe the Gatesyde, and husling them along the bridge, closed them within the towne.' With the capture of Gateshead the war was over as far as Durham was concerned.*** Occasional Royalist risings occurred. In 1645 Raby Castle was captured, and held for a short time,*" and in 1648 there were further outbreaks, but the bishopric was too strongly held to allow anything more than a temporary success.*" Until February, 1 647, the Scotch army was quartered on the county of Durham, and loud were the complaints at their exactions from ' this poor ruinated county,' as Sir George Vane writes to his father in November, 1644. The Parliamentarians were much exasperated by Leven raising his contribu- tions on the basis of a valuation made by the marquis of Newcastle, under which, needless to say, the king's opponents, and the owner of Raby in par- ticular, had to pay heavily.**7 Another matter which caused great inconvenience was dislocation of all judicial business owing to there being no chancellor of the Palatinate. In October, 1644, an application was made for redress, on which is endorsed * whether not fit to dissolve County Palatine.'**8 The difficulty was overcome by ordering the judges of the northern circuit to sit at Durham, but in 1654 the high sheriff complained that there had been but one assize in the last four years.*** In 1653 the inhabitants of the county of Durham petitioned Cromwell that they might in future be represented in Parliament, which privilege they had not hitherto enjoyed, owing, they said, to their bishops,880 and in June, 1654, writs were issued for Durham to return one member for the city and two for the county.*" " Parliament voted the seamen .£200 for their 'affection and fidelity." Ibid. 177. m Cal. S.P. Dom. 1 644, p. 1 97. •* Ibid. p. 241. "* The account of the campaign of 1644 ii based on Professor Terry's articles in Arch. AeRana, xxi, 146—80, where a series of letters from the Scotch head quarters are printed. m Kingdom's Weekly tntelfigencer of 1 and 14 July, 1645 ; Burney Newspapers (Brit. Mus.), No. 21 ; also Weekly Account of 7 and 22 July, and True Infirmer of 28 July, 1645. m Memtriiu Pragmaticus of 16 May, 1648 ; Burney Newspapers (Brit. Mus.), No. 30 ; Cal. S.P. Dom. 1648-9, p. 168. *" Raby Castle, the property of the Vanes, after being three time* seized by the Royalists, was occupied by the Scots ; Cal. S.P. Dom. 1644-5, P- '62. •» Ibid. p. 47. " Ibid. 1654, pp. 63, 204. 110 Several Proceedings, 4 May, 1653 ; Burney Newspaper! (Brit. Mus.), No. 44. "' Ibid. 2 June, 1654 ; Burney Newspapers, No. 47. A single member for the county was returned in 1653 ; see A List of the Knights and Burgeisei tcAo have represented the County and City of Durham in Parfia- mtnt (pub. Sunderland, 1831), 13. Soon after Henry VIII had abridged the Palatinate privileges an attempt was made to obtain representation in the House of Commons. In 1563 a Bill was read in Parliament for the A HISTORY OF DURHAM At the Restoration Bishop Cosin opposed the freeholders' demand for representation, and a protracted struggle took place. In 1660 a bill enabling such representation received a first reading, but nothing further was done till 1666, when the Grand Jury, on behalf of the freeholders, at Quarter Sessions presented a ' paper ' to the magistrates to join them in their ' endeavours to right our hitherto injured county.' Despite the opposition of the dean, the magistrates by a majority decided to send proper persons to solicit Parliament. Cosin protested, and was sufficiently powerful to prevent the bill, which was introduced on 26 March, 1668, being carried. Immediately after his death an Act was passed enabling the freeholders to elect two knights for the county, and the mayor, aldermen, and freemen of the city of Durham to elect two burgesses to represent them in Parliament.832 Owing to Cosin's energy and ability the county rapidly recovered from the devastations caused by the Civil War, and, except for the Derwentdale Plot,238 the district enjoyed such a period of quiet as it had not known since the Reformation. The Revolution of 1688, despite the efforts of Dean Gren- ville, caused but little stir, and both the county and city members joined the association to stand by King William in 1696.™* In that year there had been some commotion at Durham, for a letter of 1 6 March states : — We have been mightely allarmed aboute ye late conspertsy and inteended invation. There came downe last weeke three messingers for taking sum persons into custody, amongst whome (for which I am very sorry) Captain Tempest is one : the messinger did seas him.235 The eighteenth century was marked by great industrial progress, and for that reason probably but little is heard of either the 1715 or 1745 rebellions.238 A few years later, in 1759, the Durham Regiment of Militia was raised under the Act of 1757. The earl of Darlington was colonel, and the battalion, 369 strong, was made up by the quota of the different wards, Chester supplying 105, Darlington 131, Easington 59, Stockton 45, Norhamshire 11, and Islandshire 18. The uniform consisted of a wide flapped red coat, breeches and leggings of woollen material, and buckled shoes. The hair was powdered, and a slouch hat looped up at the brim was worn.237 This battalion became the South Durham Militia, and is now the 3rd Battalion of the Durham Light Infantry. The 4th Battalion (formerly North Durham Militia) was raised in i853.238 In 1758 the and battalion of the 23rd Foot was formed into a distinct corps as the 68th Regiment, and John Lambton became their first colonel, and thus began the association of the regiment with the county. In 1 88 1 the 68th Light Infantry became the ist Battalion of the Durham Light Infantry.2 239 County Palatine of Durham 'to have two knights from thence into the Parliament' ; ibid. p. 7. In 1614, 1620 (when fourteen members were claimed), 1623, 1624, and 1640 further attempts were made, and on 7 April, 1642, a Bill passed the House of Commons. In 1645 the petition of the county passed both houses, and on 21 December, 1646, an ordinance that they have knights and burgesses was read a first and second time. No members were summoned to the 1659 Parliament ; on 31 March a Bill was brought in for restoring members for Durham ; ibid. p. viii. 131 Ibid. 8. Owing to a technical defect in the Act, no members were elected for the city till 1678. ** See ' Eccl. Hist.' p. 55. "* List of Knights and Burgesses, 18. 135 Hunter MS. (D. and C. Library, Dur.), viii, No. 31. 186 The Quarter Session Records for these years indicate the passage of troops, whilst a letter printed in Surtees, Hist. Dur. ii, 1 8, shows that considerable alarm was felt on the former occasion. "' The Dur. Militia (pub. Barnard Castle, 1884), p. 5. ** Ibid. 42. "• Hist. Rec. of the Royal Welsh Fusiliers, 71. 172 POLITICAL HISTORY The principal event of the nineteenth century in Durham was the virtual abolition of the Palatinate privileges after the death of Bishop van Mildert by an Act which separated the Palatinate jurisdiction from the see of Durham and vested it in the crown. The idea originated with Lord Melbourne, who rushed through the House of Commons a bill for the abolition of the Palatinate. In the Lords, however, the local opposition to the measure was conciliated by vesting the franchise in the crown, whereby the local courts were preserved, with the exception of the county court, which was specifically abolished. The Act was passed on 21 June, 1836.**° Of the two courts which survived, the Court of Pleas was abolished in 1873, whilst the Court of Chancery of the County Palatine of Durham and Sadberge still exists — the sole surviving symbol of the great powers formerly exercised by the prince-bishops of Durham. "• Lapsley, op. cit 104 ; Sut. 6 & 7 Will. IV, cap. 19. »73 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY I — DURHAM BEFORE BOLDON BOOK FEW counties have more thoroughly disappointed the first promise of civilization than Durham. In the seventh century the banks of the Tyne and Wear were the home of literature and the arts, but before the eighth century had closed decay had set in and Durham remained a thinly-peopled land of heath and fell till the industrial revolution of the eighteenth century. And yet Durham, even in its decay, is a fascinating study to the economic historian, for the partial independence which it enjoyed under its Palatine Bishop, who was also landlord of a considerable portion of the county, has led to the preservation of records which, even in their present fragmentary condition, encourage investigation while they tantalize by their lacunae. The present sketch is founded largely upon personal examination of the splendid series of Halmote Rolls and similar documents in the Treasury at Durham1 and in the Public Record Office. Boldon Book in its earliest form was drawn up in 1 183, and our informa- tion about the preceding centuries is scanty in the extreme. However, it is possible to glean a few facts about the social and economic condition of the county from local historians, from place-names and language, and from hints given in Boldon Book and other documents. The county seems to have been thinly peopled both in prehistoric and in Roman times. Celtic place-names, except for rivers, are few, and only one Chester (Binchester) is found far from the Roman Wall, although Roman settlements, camps, and other remains can be traced all over the county. The rivers of Durham generally flow eastwards, and in their valleys and at their mouths are the earliest settlements. Between the rivers were moors and fells far down into the eighteenth century, and in the west, sloping up to the Pennines, were moors and forests where wolves lurked down to the seventeenth century. Across the county, generally north and south, ran a number of Roman roads. One of these, in Saxon times Deor Street — the Forest-way, perhaps gave its name to the county. It ran from Ebchester to Lanchester, and thence, after a deflection to the east, to Binchester near Bishop Auckland, and reached Piercebridge, on the Tees, without further deflection. Deor Street was used as the Roman highway from York to the Great Wall, and was in later times known as the Northern Watling Street. In the eighteenth 1 The writer would like to acknowledge the great kindness of the Dean and Chapter of Durham in unreservedly placing their documents at his disposal ; and of the Rev. Canon Greenwell and Mr. K. Bailey, the late and present curators, for help rendered. 175 A HISTORY OF DURHAM century it was a ridge two yards in height and eight yards broad, all paved with stone.1 At Lanchester another road called the Wrekendike ran to Urfa,2 the Roman station at South Shields. From Startforth, near Barnard Castle, the Roman Causey crossed Deor Street just south of Bishop Auckland and ran towards Garmondsway. At the south end of the Roman bridge across the Tyne, the modern Gateshead, a Roman road seems to have run through Chester le Street towards Middleton One Row, being joined near Chester, perhaps, by a road starting near Jarrow (? Rycknild Street) and south of Durham city by another road from Urfa. Other Roman roads may be traced with a little less certainty, but it is probable that the site of one is now covered by the sea between Seaton Carew and Hartlepool. There were doubtless pre-Roman roads or tracks across the county, some of which may have been re-made by the Romans, and our modern highways are descendants in many cases of the old Salters' Tracks and Coal Roads of Saxon and mediaeval times. The great Salters' Track ran between Wearmouth and the salt-pans of Billinghamshire, with one branch towards Hartlepool and another to the once famous mediaeval port of Yarm- on-Tees, a few miles above Stockton. Closely allied to the roads as means of communication are bridges and ferries or fords. The swing-bridge between Gateshead and Newcastle occupies the site of the only known Roman bridge in the county. The history of the fords and ferries is less certain, and the former would be at the disposal of both Celt and Roman. Sunderland ford on the Wear perished in 1400* by one of those inundations of the sea which have not only destroyed the once fine harbour of Wearmouth, but have also affected so materially the contours of the Durham coast. The Tees was apparently never bridged by the Romans, but there were many fords over it, and in historic times there were or are ferries at Croft Spa, Stockton, and Middlesbrough. The history of the last of these is curious. In the neighbourhood of Middlesbrough a Roman trajectus helped men to pass between North Yorkshire and the salt-pans of South-east Durham. In Saxon times a ferry still existed and the tolls of ' Billingham Ferry ' were farmed out by the prior of Durham generally at £2 annually. However, the prior had the right to purchase at the rate of Afd. a hundred all the fish called ' sparlings ' which the ferryman or his servants might catch, and the prior and his chief officials together with their luggage had the right of free passage.* Besides the ferry there was a ford across the Tees at Newport, on the right bank of the river. Both, however, were practically superseded in 1862 by a steam ferry between Middlesbrough and Port Clarence, which in turn is shortly to give place to a transporter bridge. The oldest existing bridge over the Tees is the famous Yarm bridge built by the bishop in 1400 and strengthened in 1807. The original Croft bridge was probably built at an even earlier date, while Stock- ton bridge dates only from 1771 when it superseded the bishop's ferry. The first bridge over the Wear was Ranulf Flambard's bridge at Durham, built about 1 1 20. The Sunderland bridge was not opened till 1796. 1 Hutchinson, Hist, of Durham, ii. 432 n. {sub Ebchester). * The Roman name is lost. 3 Wearmouth R. (Surtees Society, xxix), 248. 4 MS. Prior's Halmote Book, i, fol. 136, and ii, fols. 122 and 195. Billingham ferry was the only ferry which did not belong to the bishop. Strictly speaking, the prior only farmed out half of the tolls, as the other half belonged to the lord of the manor on the other side of the Tees. 176 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY Roman civilization in Durham was too superficial to affect the Angle settlers who swarmed into the country in the early sixth century. The modern county seems to have been the southern and unimportant portion of the kingdom of Bernicia. Such settlements as were made would be near the sea in the river valleys. We can recognize them in villages such as Billingham, Harton or Wyvestowe (Westoe), and their scattered nature at first can be inferred from the curious filial arrangements that existed in the Middle Ages between them and the vills which grew up on the surrounding waste and shared their pasture or helped to till their demesne lands. In Saxon times Durham possessed no great royal village or castle, but in 673 we find the noble Benedict Biscop laying the foundation of the first monastery at Monkwearmouth. It is true that, like St. Cuthbert's dwelling and oratory on Holy Island, this monastery was at first of wood, but next year saw a stone church begun by continental masons, perhaps from the same France whence came the glaziers whom Benedict imported to glaze the windows of his new church and also teach the art to his people. Civilization was beginning in Durham, and the church was encouraged in its work by Ecgfrith, king of Northumbria, who, in 682, gave the site of the Jarrow monastery overlooking his port near the present Jarrow Slake. The name Jarrow (Gyruu) means a marsh, but the industry of the monks soon turned the neighbourhood into the glory of Northumbria, and in 685 Ecgfrith is said to have given to Cuthbert, then bishop of Lindisfarne, certain lands in North-east Durham. The life and writings of Bede prove that the Angles were fast losing their barbarism, but unfortunately their civilization made them unwarlike. In the middle of the ninth century the Norsemen fell upon Durham, and in 867 the monasteries were plundered and burnt. When we can get more definite information it is that the monks of Lindisfarne had found a refuge upon the hills of Durham in 995, and, protected by the surrounding forest and most of all by the holy body of St. Cuthbert, were beginning their mission once more of civilizing Durham. Between 883 and 995 the congregation of St. Cuthbert, after eight years' wandering, had lived at Chester le Street and, thanks to Alfred's victories over the Danes, had found favour in the eyes of Guthred, the local Danish king. Although in their first fury the Danes had made a special point of destroying churches and monasteries, Guthred, probably by Alfred's mediation, restored or recognized St. Cuthbert's right to all the land between Tyne and Wear. Such a franchise was not strange to the Danish invaders, who at a later date left Northern Bernicia to a Saxon ruler. Probably the church had little real hold upon the ceded lands till the time of the Christian Canute, but the congregation of St. Cuthbert, which would of course com- prise many who were not monks, would be a refuge for the oppressed natives and would be looked up to as their natural protectors. Durham was a safer home than Chester le Street, and in the chaos of Northumbrian history in the eleventh century the bishop and monks from their official position were able to extend their possessions by purchase, legacy, or less innocent means. However, it was not before Norman times that St. Cuthbert recovered all the lands which the savage local rulers had torn from the church, as when Ella, at the end of the ninth century, appropriated Billingham. 2 177 23 A HISTORY OF DURHAM Until recent years it was a commonplace to talk of the Danish character of the northern counties, but recent investigations have thrown considerable doubt upon the existence of any strongly Danish elements in the population except in Yorkshire, at least so far as the eastern districts are concerned.1 In county Durham much can be learned by an examination of the place-names and folk-speech.2 From it we see that, roughly speaking, only the southern half of the county bears any trace of Danish place-names.8 The suffix 'by' is only found three times* — Raby, Aislaby, and Killerby — all in the south, and ' beck ' (Danish for a rivulet) has only superseded the Anglo-Saxon * burn ' in South Durham. Not one 'beck' flows into the Tyne, but twenty-four flow into the Wear and thirty into the Tees. On the other hand, no 'burn' flows direct into the Tees, and the village of Castle Eden furnishes us with a striking contrast ; the rivulet on the north of the village is called Castle Eden Burn, that on the south Coundon Beck. It would be tedious to elaborate the argument further to sustain the view that Danish influence, except in South Durham, the old wapentake of Sadberge, was only superficial, but it is interesting to notice that serfdom lasted longest in the south-east portion of the county, where the pressure of the Danes was greatest.6 A line drawn westwards from Castle Eden would form the northern boundary of effective Danish occupation, though even here they would be little more than a governing aristocracy. North of the Wear their influence was certainly infinitesimal except on the coast between Tyne and Wear, in which district a non-Angle dialect, even to-day, hints at alien blood.8 It is safer on the whole to believe that the native population of the county looked to and found a protector in the bishop when once he had secured himself at Durham. Not till after the Norman Conquest did the bishop or monks regain all the villages they claimed in the south and begin to organize the bishopric south of the Tyne, after the sword of the Norman king had avenged the murder of Walcher in 1080. More than a hundred years elapsed after the Norman harrying before Boldon Book gives us a picture of the county in 1183, just before Bishop Hugh Pudsey acquired the wapen- take of Sadberge — Danish South Durham — from Richard I. During that time the bishop and monks had steadily gained in importance, and not only Angles but also the Danish 'drengs' or lesser nobles of the county were dependent on the bishop. Commendation and the other processes which, under the pressure of the Danish invasions, produced Anglo-Saxon feudalism were at work in Durham also. The bishop and his monks, at first joint landlords of St. Cuthbert's patrimony, would possess sake and soke, the usual jurisdictions of landowners, but from the cases of Sedgefield7 and, at a later date, Wolviston8 we see that St. Cuthbert's rights were not the same over all the land. The early Norman bishops brought with them Norman lawyers who would not be able to understand the peculiar position of the Saxon 1 Arch. Ael. (New Ser.), ix, 59. ' Ibid, x, 173. ' Ibid. 93. 4 Follonsby, near the Tyne, is a doubtful case. It seems to have been a later vill founded after the time of Will. I. See Feodarium (Surtees Soc. Iviii), 1 1 z n. * See/w/p. 221. 6 Arch. Ael. (New Ser.), x, 93. 7 Simeon of Durham says (Opera, Rolls Ser. i, 208) that Bishop Cutheard bought with the money of St. Cuthbert the vill of Sedgefield and all belonging to it, except the holdings of three men, over whose lands, however, he had sake and soke. 8 Feodarium (Surtees Soc. Iviii), 141 ». shows how the prior and convent gradually became owners of all rights in the vill. I78 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY bishop of Durham and his secular canons. In Durham, as elsewhere in England, we can assume that the new lords sharpened the traditional claims of their Saxon predecessors and imported a new spirit of order and regularity into the vague relations of former times. We know that Bishop William of St. Carileph reorganized the convent and introduced regular Benedictine monks in 1083, and in doing so suppressed the independence and annexed the possessions of the re-established monasteries of Jarrow and Wearmouth. William was succeeded by Ranulf Flambard, the minister of Rufus, and it is probably to his genius that the bishopric owed the economic and fiscal organization we find in Boldon Book. Certainly local tradition at Durham painted him as an able and kindly ruler,1 and the distance which separates Hugh Pudsey from the Norman Conquest makes it very probable that the arrangements described in Boldon Book date from an earlier pontificate. In Pudsey's time, despite the harrying of the north by the Scots under Stephen and the troubles caused by Cumin on the death of Bishop Geoffrey Rufus, the Palatinate appears as a land of scattered but well-organized agricultural vills ; and only by isolated survivals, such as the payment of cornage or castleman- money, do we get any hint of the Durham where the chief, if not the only, wealth of the people lay in their cattle, when the constant raids made it unprofitable to till the ground except in certain sheltered spots. Even when the Halmote Rolls at the very end of the thirteenth century begin to supple- ment the picture of Boldon Book we still get the impression of oases of agriculture in vast deserts of moor and forest, from which the inhabitants were just beginning to annex a few acres of ' f russura ' or, less frequently, to wrest land for new vills. When in the fourteenth century the Palatinate had begun to develop in population and wealth the Black Death aided the Scottish raiders, and the second surviving Palatine Survey, that of Bishop Hatficld, gives a woful picture of ruin and decay which is borne out by the Court Rolls. II — FROM BOLDON BOOK TO THE BLACK DEATH As Boldon Book and its contents are the subject of a special article, they will only be used here as one of the quarries for material out of which a picture of mediaeval Durham must be built up. Of course, Boldon Book only deals with the episcopal vills,1 but a comparison of the earliest existing Halmote Rolls of the prior with those of the bishop justifies the natural expectation that, down to the fourteenth century at least, the two sets of vills did not materially differ in their general conditions of life and tenure, although in course of time the tenants of the prior had to pay at least in theory a rack- rent for their holdings, while the episcopal tenants pay the same dues in Hat- field's Survey as they did according to Boldon Book. When Bishop Pudsey acquired the wapentake of Sadberge by purchase from Richard I, he and his successors became the owners of practically all the modern county8 as well as of large tracts in Northumberland. Even the prior of Durham was only a tenant of the bishop, but he and a number of other ' barons of the bishop' never exceeding ten in all, occupied a far different 1 Laurence of Durham, Dia/ogi (Surtect Soc. Ixx), 22. 1 The survey of Prior Melsanby (1233-44) '• now missing. See FeoJarium (Surtees Soc. Iviii), Introd. * Raby and Barnard Castle* did not belong to the bishopric. See Lapslcy, County Palatine, 9 1 n. 179 A HISTORY OF DURHAM position from that of the holders of one or two manors who held their lands by knight service, often however coupled with a money payment. No one of his barons was a serious rival authority to the bishop, but the prior and convent held a number of vills, especially in the north-east and south-east of the county, and from the existing records of these vills it is perhaps permissible to assume that the conditions of the bishop's vills were common to all in the bishopric. Boldon Book is by no means a satisfactory substitute for a Domes- day of Durham, and so it is impossible to mention the number of free and servile tenants in the county. All that can be said is that the wide pre- valence of copyhold and leasehold tenures in the modern county points to a scanty free population in early times. Such free tenants as we do meet with in Boldon Book may represent Saxon freemen who did not wholly lose their rights at the Norman Conquest, but they do certainly in some cases represent nothing more than favoured servants of former bishops. The Anglo-Saxon thegn1 is mentioned so late as the Pipe Roll of 1 130* together with the dreng and the 'smalman.' He has disappeared by 1183 and the dreng and the smalman have become semi-servile. The servile tenures of Durham are most interesting, and the degrees of servitude range from the once free dreng, perhaps a royal or episcopal atten- dant in earlier times, to the selffbde of Hatfield's Survey. Roughly speaking, freemen held their lands by military service, while servile land was liable for personal service, actual or commuted, but we do hear of land held in socage 8 although that is not until later times. It is, however, difficult to insist upon the distinctions free and servile except as regards the land itself, for even Boldon Book deals rather with the condition of the land than with that of the inhabitants. The dreng was probably free in person from the beginning, but the tenure of drengage would be looked upon as an unfree one by the Norman lawyers, because the services were not in the feudal sense purely military. Probably Professor Maitland* is right in tracing a connexion between the rod-knights or riding men of Domesday and the drengs of Durham, but the drengs as a distinct class died out soon after the Conquest or were merged into the ordinary bondmen. However, drengage as a tenure lasted in theory far into the sixteenth century.6 According to Boldon Book the dreng was bound to plough, sow, and harrow a certain portion of the demesne land of the bishop, to make precariae in the autumn, to keep a horse and a dog for the bishop's use, to help in the great roe-hunt in Weardale with dogs and ropes, to cart wine and to go messages. Apparently his services were not so onerous as those of the ordinary villeins and they could be performed by deputy. In Ranulf Flambard's time all the permanent landowners in Northamshire and Islandshire were drengs, for a thegn was only a dreng who held more than one estate.6 They paid a money rent instead of service, but like the drengs of 1 According to Canon Greenwell's interpretation of the returns in the Testa de Nevill for Northumbria (Record Series, pp. 381-96), the thegn was only a dreng who held more than one manor ; see Boldon Book (Surtees Soc. xxv),App. Iviii. 1 In Boldon Book (Surtees Soc. xxv), 1 6, we are told that ' Gilbert holds Heworth for three marks and is quit of the old works and service which thence as of theinage he was used to make for Ricknall which he quitclaimed.' * e.g. Dur. Curs. No. 15, fol. 9. 4 In Engl. Hist. Rev. v, 625-32. 6 Dur. Curs. No. 19, fol. 322, mentions a case at Redworth. An instance is given by Canon Green well (Surtees Soc. xxv, App. 43) in which Bishop Philip of Poitou (1197-1208) changes a drengage holding at Whitworth into a holding by one quarter of a knight's fee and probably similar cases are not rare. 6 Boldon Book (Surtees Soc. xxv), App. Iviii. 180 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY South Durham they were liable to merchet, heriot, and tallage. In historic times drengs, or land in drengage, occur in connexion with Herrington, Red- worth, Middridge, West Auckland, Easington, Hulam, Norton, and Carlton. Probably the tenure was found in early times in the prior's vills, but dis- appeared together with most extraordinary tenures before the existing Halmote Books begin. As the dreng had to pay a fee to the steward of the halmote -court for licence to alienate or enter upon his lands, and was bound to * do to the lord and neighbours the things incumbent,' his lands probably lay in the town fields. They were certainly under the obligation of mill-suit, and in general possessed no special point of difference from the ordinary town lands, save that the dreng was not personally unfree.1 When we come to the wholly unfree tenants the question becomes very •difficult. The mediaeval lawyers could talk of the ' villein en gros ' and the * villein regardant,' for the former term described the fast diminishing race of personally unfree serfs and the latter the more numerous personally free cul- tivators of holdings for which they owed or had commuted personal services. Unfortunately, Boldon Book is by no means as explicit as Domesday upon the matter of serfdom, and the few references it does give to serfs are evidently from the context later interpolations. The original text of Boldon Book •describes the holdings of a vill in such vague terms as ' In Boldon are 22 vil- leins each of whom holds 2 oxgangs of 30 acres etc.' It does not give the names of the tenants as do Hatfield's and Langley's Surveys, except where the tenant is a freeman and holds upon special terms.* In Hatfield's Survey some personally unfree tenants are distinctly styled natrvus and the inference is that all not so designated are free. Such an interpretation at least is the only one consistent with the various transactions recorded in the Halmote Rolls. The probability is that the villeins and perhaps the cotters of Boldon Book represent the original personally unfree tenants of the bishop, whose status was for a time legally debased at the Norman Conquest, although the servile incidents may have become attached to the land. Exactly how far the pre-Conquest bishops had secured a control over the persons as opposed to the lands of the peasants cannot now be determined. They would cer- tainly succeed to the legal rights of the lords in the various lands they acquired by purchase or gift, but the county was too unsettled immediately before and after the Conquest to allow of the legal rights being pressed too hardly. All we can say, therefore, is that some of the villeins in Boldon Book probably were personally unfree, but that the class steadily grew smaller. However, with very few exceptions all the tenures in the vills, at least so far as the village community was concerned, were unfree, and the holders, so long as they remained on the land, were liable to the servile incidents and duties. It is significant that throughout the later Middle Ages the land in the town fields was called ' bond-land ' and the personally unfree natfaus was called a ' bondman.' Upon the lands of the bishop we find a number of tenants whose holdings, though servile, differ from those of the ordinary villein. The 1 The entries in Boldon Book under Herrington and especially Sheraton leave a strong impression that the dreng was, before the Conquest, the lord of the village under the bishop. ' e.g. under Boldon we find ' Robert holds two oxgangs of 37 acres and renders half a mark.' 181 A HISTORY OF DURHAM malmanni or molmen appear in the Royal Pipe Rolls as ' small-men,' and1 are classed with the drengs. They are found most numerously at Norton,, Sedgefield, and Stockton, but they also occur at Bedburn and Blackwell, but in Boldon Book we find them only at Newton by Boldon. It has been suggested that the prefix ' mal ' has nothing to do with ' small,' but should rather be referred to the Anglo-Saxon ' mal '=tribute.1 In this case it is possible that the preferential terms they received from the bishop may be the reward of efforts made to resist invaders who attacked the bishopric by way of the Tees or Tyne, and both they and the drengs may have originally been a kind of small episcopal standing army. The services paid by the molmen were not the same everywhere, but although their holdings were a little smaller than those of the ordinary villeins (24 acres as compared with 30 at Boldon) they paid more in money and less in personal service ; hence, perhaps, their name. It is curious that the tenants, e.g. at Norton, who are called malmanni five Jirmarii in Hatfield's Survey, appear %& Jirmarii only in Boldon Book, and seem to have become blended into the more general heading Jirmarii. Cer- tainly in the bailiff's accounts s the villein or bondus is distinguished from the molman as late as 1338, and after the Black Death the molmen cease to be a class. Then we begin to find in the Halmote Rolls 'land of the malmanni,' 'maleland,' or ' mailand,' and finally we are told that in 1411 a certain Robert Johnson paid a fine of 40^. to hold ' by custom of the court ' a tenure he had hitherto held as maleland,3 and that all the tenants of maleland in Stockton and Norton commuted their special mowing works at the rate of 8*/. for every acre they held.4 The evidence tends to show that the various tenures gradually became merged into the commonest — the holding by custom of court, although the meaningless names lingered on. The firmars or Jirmarii form the remainder of the alien tenants of the village, if, indeed, they can be distinguished from the molmen. They are an alien element, because they seem to have formed no part of the original village community of Durham so far as we can judge from the rents and services they paid. If they were not always identical with the molmen, and perhaps it is unsafe to make the identification absolute, we must place the origin of those who were not molmen at some period between the Norman Conquest and Boldon Book, most probably when the great re- organization took place, whether under William of St. Carileph or Ranulf Flambard. Boldon Book shows us new vills, such as 'Old Thickley, which was made out of the territory of Redworth,' and we come across several vills. such as Warden or Morton, where all the tenants are firmars with identical holdings and services. A comparison between the composite rents paid by the villeins of Boldon and the fairly simple dues of the firmars is a strong argument in favour of the later creation of the second tenure. In the Court Rolls we frequently find men taking so many acres of bondland and so many acres of land of the malmanni or land of the exchequer, but as in each case the tenure is ' by doing to the lord and neighbours the things incumbent * 1 Cf. Dur. Curs. No. 29, m. 19^. where we read that three messuages in Durham city were burgages held by the service of ' land-male,' viz. of paying \d. yearly at the Tolbooth of Durham. * e.g. Auckland Roll (in Surtees Soc. xxxii), 208. 8 Dur. Curs. No. 14, fol. 420. 4 Ibid. fol. 422. 182 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY we may assume that the land lies within the town fields, although probably in the exterior ' flatts ' taken in from the waste.1 It is tempting to suggest that the firmars were the personally free and the villeins and cotters the personally unfree tenants in Pudsey's time, but the evidence is too scanty to make this more than a possible solution. Certainly where we find firmars and villeins in the same vill the services and holdings differ rather in quantity than quality, except in so far as the villein services by their complexity point to an earlier form of tenure. If there seem to be a connexion between the molmen and the firmars there is probably a closer one between the tenentes scaccarii, or chekermen, and the firmars. There is actually an entry* in the Halmote Books under Blackwell in 1468 referring to a lease of 'two oxgangs of maland otherwise called Exchequer-land.' Boldon Book tells us that there were five firmars at Blackwell holding four bovates, who rendered and did services as the firmars of Darlington. However, we are told that the latter did no works, but paid a firm 5^. for each bovate as the villeins did. Hatfield's Survey, borne out by Langley's Survey thirty years afterwards, tells us that the firmars or molmen of Darlington and Blackwell had become tenentes scaccarii by 1380, i.e. tenants who paid a money rent only to the treasury.8 What happened at Darlington or Blackwell is typical of the gradual commutation of tenures in the bishopric. As population increased fresh land was taken in from the waste. At first this land was given to freemen for life, partly for a money rent, partly for services. In some places, as at Blackwell and Darlington, these services were wholly commuted, and there would be a tendency on the part of both lord and tenant to prefer a money rent, especially as services were not needed by the lord and had become attached to the land rather than to the person of the tenant.* At other places, such as Norton and Stockton, we find in Bishop Hatfield's Survey distinct classes of malmanni srve Jirmarii, and terrae scaccarii^ but the latter are generally small and described in language which makes it clear that they are but recently won from the waste,6 while in the case of the former we are distinctly told the prices at which the various services had been commuted. Perhaps at first, cheker- men had formed a distinct class from the firmars and molmen, but it is plain that by 1380, perhaps even before the Black Death, terra scaccarii or cheker- land described the land for which money rather than services was rendered. That the chekermen were in a more favoured position than the ordinary villeins is clear from the fact that they only paid one measure in sixteen 8 to the mill at which they ground their wheat compared with the one in thirteen paid by the villeins. Light as this was in comparison the chekermen 'Cf. Bp. Hatfitlft Surv. (Surtees Soc. zxxii), 89. 'The jurors say that the parson of Gateshead holds in different places of the field there, xiv acres of land, which they believe to be the land of the exchequer.' 1 Dur. Curs. No. 16, fol. ijSa1. * Hatfield's Survey and Langley's Survey each contains a clause stating that the Unentti scaccarii are jointly liable for the 'operationes' of the four original 'cottages' at Darlington, due to the mill and at harvest, until the ' operationes ' could be attached to the proper cottages. The meaning of this is clear when we remember that the original ' firmar-holdings ' had been swamped by the fresh land taken in from the waste ; Bp. HatfieU'i Surv. (Surtees Soc. xxxii), 5-6, enumerates about thirty ttnenttt scaccarii, some of whom have holdings described as ' captum de vasto Domini.' 4 Ibid. ' Dur. Halmott R. (Surtees Soc. Ixxxii), 7, says : ' And for the three acres and a half of new land he shall pay the firm to the Treasury.' *Dur. Curs. No. 12, fol. 129, but fol. 82^. seems to make the rate one in twenty-four. A HISTORY OF DURHAM of Hardwick persistently ground their corn at the mill of Blakiston and not at the nearest mill of the lord,1 and doubtless the favoured position of the chekermen was partly responsible for the general insubordination of the villeins proper after the Black Death. It should be added that chekerland was not unknown under the prior,8 but together with the other holdings it gave way before the system of renewable leases.3 But these various tenures of the drengs, molmen, chekermen, &c. were later accretions to the villeins, who, as their name implies, formed the village community proper. It is impossible to find a more typical vill than Boldon to illustrate the payments and services due to the lord, although interesting variations of service occur, among other places, at Darlington, Heighington, North Auckland, and Lanchester. At the time of the first survey in 1183,. there were twenty-two villeins at Boldon, who each held 2 oxgangs of land. At Boldon an oxgang was 1 5 acres, the average size, but we find oxgangs of 8 acres at Lanchester, of 12 at Newbottle, and 16 at Bedlington, so that the size of the oxgang probably did correspond, at least in theory, with the ease with which the soil could be tilled. For his 30 acres the Boldon peasant paid partly in money and partly in kind or by service. He rendered 2s. 6d. as scat-pennys, i.e. an acknowledgement perhaps of \d. for every acre of land he held, and \6d. as averpennys,* i.e. instead of allowing the lord to use the oxen or horses of the tenant which legally were the lord's property. He was bound to carry five loads of wood and to give two hens and ten eggs also, in addition to various labour services. These services due from the villeins to the lord were the most important feature of rural economy up to the thirteenth century at least. The three- field system seems to have prevailed throughout the bishopric, but need not here be described. Probably one-fourth of the arable land of the village was- retained as the lord's demesne6 or home farm, and was cultivated through a bailiff with the help of the villeins' services. In most cases the lord's, demesne lay scattered in strips among the tenants' holdings, but it may have been wholly or partly inclosed in some cases. The bishop and prior held many vills, and even before Boldon Book had leased or let at farm a large number of the demesnes. But the lessee had the same right to the villeins' services as the bishop's bailiff had, and these services are in consequence described in detail even when, as at Boldon, the demesne was at farm. The villein at Boldon worked for his lord three days in every week with the exception of Easter-week, Whit-week, and thirteen days at Christmas, Besides this the villein and his family, except the housewife, were bound to reap four days in autumn. This liability was termed precariae or ' boon-days,' the theory being that the villein did them as extra service at the request of the lord. It is curious, however, to note that they had to be formally commuted at a later date and indeed survived longer than the rest as- actual services rendered. To these day-works must be added certain task- works. We are told that he had to reap and plough 3 roods and each villein plough ploughed and harrowed 2 acres, in which week they were excused 1 Dur. Curs. No. 12, fbl. 82 d. They should have used Norton Mill. 8 Dur.Halmote R. (Surtees Soc. Ixxxii), 35. 'Ibid. 4 If a new house had to be built by the villeins each was quit of \d. of averpennys. 5 Ep. HatfieltTs Surv. see:r.s to show that at Boldon this was the proportion. 184 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY other work. There were due also mowing at Houghton, works of carting and lodge building, perhaps as alternatives to week-work, and at these he received food. Perhaps the Durham peasant had not been so successful as those about Abingdon and Peterborough1 in commuting his services by 1183, but it is probable that the process had already begun and it was certainly helped by the growing disinclination of the lord to work his own demesne lands. There were already a few rent-paying peasants at Boldon besides the cotters who did works proportionate to their holdings. Halfway between came the molmen of Newton. Other dues from the peasants were cornage, milch cow, castleman, yolwayting, and michelmet. Few paid all, and the last two were confined to a group of villages around the bishop's hall at Heighington. Yolwayting may be some duty formerly exacted at Christmas, but afterwards commuted, while michelmet may refer to works of reaping about Michaelmas or else to some meeting or moot at that time. Castleman generally occurs in connexion with the village where a dreng is found or which is near the bishop's hall at Heighington. In Boldon Book it was paid by the actual service of a ' castle- man ' perhaps at Durham, but in Hatfield's time it was commuted. The ' castle ' points to a post-Conquest origin, but it may be a reorganization of the military service of the pre-Conquest dreng.1 Cornage and milch cow are too often found together not to have a com- mon origin. Generally the liability to provide a milch cow is commuted in Hatfield's Survey at the rate of 6j., but unlike cornage it was a payment in kind in 1183. It may represent either the increase of the flock which fell to the lord, or more probably his right to sustenance when in early times he travelled from vill to vill. Cornage is a much thornier subject, but one explanation,8 that it refers to tenure by blowing a horn to give warning of the Scots' approach, may safely be dismissed. In the vocabulary of an old Durham book* we find ' Hornebiel (in margin Hornegeld) this is to be free from a certain custom exacted by tallage throughout the land.' Probably we see an explanation of cornage in this, for a charter of Henry I to the monks of Durham ' tells us that the cornage of Borton was at the rate of zd, for every horned beast. Cornage is not paid by all vills in Boldon Book, and we are distinctly told that the men of Norton escaped it because they lacked pasture. Probably the vills which did pay cornage were primarily pastoral in pre- Conquest times, but the tax became somewhat arbitrary in later times and we find apparently new vills paying it and the assessments of older vills increased. The tax was sometimes levied on the whole vill, at other times on the villeins or each villein paid separately. Probably in time the incident like others became attached to definite holdings. The Stockton ward had only three episcopal cornage-paying vills. The due, together with milch cow, was paid at several of the prior's vills as late as 1507, and probably in episcopal vills also, but the origin had long been forgotten. 1 Norgate, Engl. under the Angevins, ii, 472 et seq. ' In post-Conquest time* one of the Bulmers of Brancepeth built the church of St. Mary the Less in Durham for the use of hi« men when they performed Castle-ward. ' By Littleton and Spelman. ' The Rcgistrum Primum belonging to the dean and chapter. ' Printed in FeoJarium (Surtees Soc. Iviii), 145 n. 2 185 24 A HISTORY OF DURHAM Besides the dues already mentioned certain vills or holdings near the great roads were bound to carry the lord's goods, such as wine, herrings, mill- stones, &c., when required. As usual these dues were freely commuted in later times, but other obligations such as thatching the mill, cleaning out the pond or the stream, or working on the roads, lasted as actual tasks till com- paratively modern times. The cases of South Biddick and Ryton prove that even the Durham peasants had made some progress towards emancipation in the twelfth century. They farmed their vills from the bishop, and later interpolations in Boldon Book show how Bishop Walter de Kirkham (1249-60) allowed the peasants in the outlying districts of Bedlingtonshire to commute many of their labour services. Probably similar commutations took place elsewhere. Most of our knowledge of the mediaeval Durham village is derived from the Halmote Rolls. The halmote was the manorial court of the bishop and prior, but it seems to have been much more powerful than the similar court elsewhere. It met three times yearly and the vills were grouped in sections which afterwards received the name of manors.1 At one, generally the same vill in each group, the steward, or in the case of the prior sometimes the bursar or terrarer, presided at a meeting of the lord's tenants from the vills of that group. Each tenant was fined 6d. if absent, but the vill as such was represented by the reeve and a jury, generally of three to five men, who made presentments of offences against the local by-laws and generally carried out the orders of the halmote in their vill. The reeve and jury were in theory elected yearly and sworn. The office was naturally not a grateful one, and those chosen often earned only abuse by their attempts at arbitration or at repressing wrong-doing. The jury, besides presenting offenders, valued deterioration of cottages and holdings. The reeve was the lord's agent in procuring that the tenants did their quota of work but his own exemption was dearly purchased by the obloquy he often found. He had also to give notice of the holding of the halmote. The halmote served both as court leet and court baron, but although the free tenants often took up their holdings or did homage at the halmote, its power over them was confined to attaching them to appear at the lord's free court.3 Over the bondagers the halmote's power was very great, but its penalties were wholly pecuniary. Here the villein recovered his debts, entered upon his holding, and if a neif, or nativus, swore fealty. Such litiga- tion as was necessary had to be carried out in the halmote, and the lord's tenant was forbidden to seek redress in any other court, ecclesiastical or lay, when he could obtain it from his lord's halmote. The suitors were the judges, and if a tenant disputed the presentment of the jurors he had to bring six compurgators to establish his innocence before them. The halmote, especially in later times, often became a scene of disorder, and the peasants appear at times to have been garrulous and litigious, especially the women. It was not, however, merely a petty law court, but it also served as a sort of' district council.' The reeve and jury may be compared with com- 1 In the Halmote Rolls, manerium always means the manor-house, but the phrase ' custom of the manor ' occasionally occurs ; e.g. Dur. Curs. No. 14, fol. 397. 1 The prior and bishop had each a free court. These courts met at Durham every three weeks, but the existing rolls are late and tell us little of their procedure. We learn from the Inventarium of 1464 that the prior's tenants refused to attend unless distrained ; FeoJarium (Surtees Soc. Iviii), zoy. 186 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY mittees representing the villages, and apparently the halmote had power to break itself up into a number of smaller bodies, one for each vill, whose recommendations and orders, if accepted by the steward, were entered on the halmote roll and were enforced by the court. We often find entries such as ' It is ordered to all that . . . ,' or * it is ordained by the common assent . . . .' Sometimes the free tenants appear as assenting.1 It would be interesting if we could find out the precise connexion between the halmote and the local village assembly which might be convened by the reeve when necessary to discuss matters of common interest or profit to the villagers and the lord. Unfortunately this ' tun-moot ' is seldom re- ferred to in the rolls, and then only in terms which show that attendance at it was become slack in the fourteenth century.9 It probably lingered in some form or other until it received a fresh lease of life as the vestry in Tudor times, its secular side thus being revived as the halmote was sinking into impo- tence before the justice of the peace and the constable, who had jurisdiction over bond and free tenant alike. But this shadowy village meeting had little importance in the village beside the officials whose election by the tenantry took place in or was con- firmed by the halmote. The reeve and jury have been mentioned already, and next to them came the ' messor ' or hayward, who acted as foreman over the autumn works of the peasants and had also duties in connexion with the village pasture. In some vills he seems to have acted as assistant reeve. None of the officials were popular, and the messor fared worst of all. The peasant naturally resented the order that he should reap the lord's crop whether his own was spoiled or not,8 and the careless owner disliked the fine that ensued when the messor impounded beasts that had strayed. After the Black Death the messor was the official whom the vills most frequently refused to appoint. The pinder, or pounder, was an important village official. His main work was the impounding of straying cattle till their owners redeemed them from the village pinfold. Sometimes the more daring offenders would attempt to rescue their cattle by a sudden night attack, but if caught they were severely punished. Like the reeve the pinder escaped ordinary field work, and often had in addition a few acres of land and sheaves of corn from the other tenants. He paid his rent in the form of hens and eggs, or later a money equivalent. In the fourteenth century we find that the pindership was sometimes held by the vill in common and a deputy was paid to perform the work. There was a common pinfold for the whole county at Sadberge in the eighteenth century. We also meet with the village shepherd and the village swineherd, but in some vills they appear to have had difficulty in obtaining their wages. In other vills the tenants acted as shepherd or swineherd in turn, but all agreed in showing a steady disinclination to do their share. The village geese were supposed to be sent out in charge of a ' goose-boy,' but after the Black Death we find frequent complaints that tenants did not 'keep hirsilP (i.e. send a keeper) with their pigs and geese. The hens, of which even the poorest 1 E.g. at Aycliffe ; Dur. Ha/mate R. (Surtees Soc. Ixxxit), 171. 1 E.g. at 'Coupon,' row Cowpen Bewley ; Dur. Halmote R. (Surtees Soc. Ixzxii), 17*. 1 To refuse obedience to the reeve or messor was to incur a fine. I87 A HISTORY OF DURHAM peasant had a few, were apparently allowed to wander at their will. Naturally, as the gardens were unfenced, we hear frequent complaints of devastation, and walls of various kinds were ordered. In mediaeval Durham the common drink was beer brewed from grain, generally barley. It took the place of tea and coffee, and, with the coarse brown bread made from maslin * or occasionally wheat, formed the staple of the peasant's meal. Potatoes were, of course, unknown, and meat was not only too dear for him, but not very appetizing in winter, being roughly preserved by inferior salt. Naturally we find the assizes of bread and ale referred to frequently, especially the latter. Each village down to the nine- teenth century was supposed to appoint two men as ale-conners or ale-tasters, and the same or two others were appointed as bread-weighers. The toll of beer belonged to the lord, and we find that he granted a sort of licence to brew to certain people, generally ale-wives. These were forced to submit the ale to the verdict of the tasters, either before sale or when required, and were fined if the inferior quality broke the assize of ale. Some of the regu- lations are startlingly modern, such as those which forced the ale-wife to use sealed measures and to sell either on or off the premises, at the option of the buyer. The price was fixed for each vill and varied from id. to \\d. a gallon. The seller had to exhibit a sign before his or her dwelling and must sell to anyone. If the publican was secured in his monopoly he had also to suffer drawbacks. At Sedgefield and perhaps elsewhere the brewer gave the lord, by ancient custom, a gallon of beer every time he brewed,3 and in the prior's vills he had to supply the lord's officials with good ale when they came to the vill. Sometimes the brewers on the great roads developed into innkeepers, who, we are told, were apt to pay more attention to the rich man on horseback than to the poor man on foot,8 and the halmote denounced the reprehensible if natural custom. Breaches of the assize of bread are not often referred to in the rolls,* but we hear a great deal of the common oven, which was a necessity, as the wretched huts of the peasants contained no convenience for cooking. The common oven was leased either to an individual or to the vill, and in the latter case the peasants tended it and found fuel in turn. It was a profitable investment in many cases, and we find that the obligation to use it was resented after the Black Death. When it was clear that the firmars of the oven could not enforce their rights, the lord licensed private ovens,6 but the common oven lingered for centuries in some villages. There was generally a smith in each group of villages and sometimes a carpenter. They both held a few acres of land according to Boldon Book. The smith was the more important, and he was bound to make plough-irons and other instruments. Many of the tools were of wood shod with iron, which was very expensive. Probably much of it was from native ore, but the finer kinds were imported from Spain.8 There was usually in each village a common forge which the tenants were bound to keep in repair. 1 Maslin, a mixture generally of wheat and rye, was used as late as the early nineteenth century to make the brown bread which was the main article of diet ; Bailey, Gen. View of the Agric. of Dur. 358. * Dur. Curs. No. I2,,fol. 120 d. ' Dur. Halmote R. (Surtees Soc. Ixxxii), 138. * In 1366 one of the bread-wives of Billingham was fined for forestalling and for selling bread non de integro frumento. 6 Dur. Curs. No. 12, fol. 258. 6 Dur. Acct. R. (Surtees Soc. xcix), 71, 143, &c. 188 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY They were forbidden to make their own ironwork, but in return they could force the smith to be present at fixed times to do what they wanted. Not the least important person in the village was the miller. The mill, worked either by water, or more rarely by wind, belonged to the lord, and all tenants of the lord had to grind their corn there, and to pay a portion for the service, which varied with their status. Some free tenants might get exemption ; others ground, but only paid perhaps ^ of the produce ' ; the chekermen paid from *fa to ^¥,f the burgesses in some burgs paid y1^,8 but the bondager paid ^.* We find that some mills had been farmed out as early as Boldon Book. Sometimes the whole village was the firmar, but generally we find the mill in the hands of one or two men who, for the length of their lease, had all the rights of the lord. Besides being compelled to grind at the mill the tenants had to thatch it, to clean out the mill-pond and stream, and to carry millstones when required.' Sometimes the free tenants helped in the work, but their obligations are not very clear.' Hand-mills were forbidden to the tenants, but probably were often used. If the miller was cheated he seems to have often been a rascal in his turn, and some of the vills made desperate efforts to free themselves from the obligations of mill suit.7 Technically the obligation lasted as long as the mill worked, but early in the seventeenth century the Durham Chancery Court decided that pur- chased grain was exempt. The Westoe jury in 1662 apparently strained this decision and declared that no inhabitant of Shields or Panns need grind at the mill unless he pleased.8 The local mill is now scarce in the county, and foreign wheat has largely displaced the native product. Besides corn-mills we read of fulling-mills, each one of which served a large area. These were used in the manufacture of local homespun cloth. At Oxenhall we learn from Boldon Book there was also a horse-mill which an ex-dreng was allowed to have free from suit or work at the mill. In connexion with the mill it might be as well to recall that the famous Newcastle grindstones of the Middle Ages really came from the Palatinate. They were gained from the quarries about Gateshead and Heworth, and we find the prior granting men licences to work and export them outside the prior's territory.' In later times the ordinary village officials shrank into comparative insignificance before the constable, who became the henchman of the justice of the peace and the representative in the vill of the central government. The bishop introduced into the Palatinate in some form or other the reforms and legislation of the central Parliament. The Assize of Clarendon was put into force together with similar legislation, and we find the usual machinery of justice and police at work in Durham in the thirteenth century. For instance, each ward had a coroner, and often a sub-coroner, and justices who were commissioned by the bishop to see that the various royal statutes were carried out. In 1312 we find Bishop Kellaw appointing a Custos Pads,10 and 1 The rate varied, and a free tenant at Merrington paid •fa ; Dur. Ha/mete R. (Suttees Soc. Ixxxii), 35 ' Dur. Curs. No. 12, fol. 8»' Ibid. fol. 91 d. 215 A HISTORY OF DURHAM promised to intercede with the steward, if by any chance the lord may be willing to show them a special favour by allowing them to pay for the grain and carrying works in money. But he adds : ' Let it be kept secret for three years or two, lest it set a bad example to the other villages.' l The question was debated by the bishop's council,2 and the last information we get is that in February 1356, the tenants were ordered to 'pay the ancient firm in malt, and in all other services, and in money as they were accustomed to do as of old time.' 3 In Hatfield's * Survey we find each man responsible for his own holding, but allowed to commute the works at the rate of 5-r. ^\d. for 30 acres, and it is probable that quite three hundred years passed before the men of Killerby realized their ambition of a purely money rent to the bishop.6 In the eastern district of the Palatinate similar demands were made for a frank commutation of services. It must be remembered that even in the days of Hugh Pudsey purely money rents were not unknown. The question at issue between the lord and his tenants was not ' May the tenant commute his services ? ' but ' At what price may he escape the necessity of perform- ing them when free labour is dear ? ' The tenants at Killerby fixed the com- mutation price too low. We are not told, unfortunately, what offer was made to the lord at Sedgefieldin March 1350, but we learn that the tenantry of Sedgefield and Cornforth (and probably those of Middleham also) took their lands at penyferme for three years, but at the end of that time the lord might revert to the older system of works (pristinas operationes}.* Bishop Hatfield himself tried to arrange some scheme to satisfy the discontent in the Stockton district, and by his order the tenants of bondages and half bondages (but not the cotters) of Norton, Hartburn, and Stockton were allowed to lease their vills and works at the same rate as the tenants of Sedgefield and Corn- forth had done.7 We learn from a later entry that the Stockton tenants agreed to pay a rent which would enable Richard Stere, the bishop's bailiff, to hire free labour enough to replace their commuted services.8 It was high time something was done if the whole economic system of the Palatinate was not to go down in ruin. The yield was poor enough in the Middle Ages, and one year's fallowing after two successive crops was the least the land could bear. However, at Sedgefield the peasantry had used their new rights unsparingly, and sowed even the third field that should have lain fallow. In the summer of 1352 the steward 'coerced' them into a promise that they would revert to the old system and allow one-third of the land to lie fallow each year.9 It seems probable that as each man had more land at his disposal while labour was dear, the peasants had decided to go in for ' extensive ' as opposed to ' intensive ' cultivation, or at any rate only to sow the most fertile patches of each field. The ' coercion ' of the steward was not very effectual, for not long afterwards we find that the Sedgefield jury were fined 2s. for refusing to present those tenants who sowed the fallow 1 Dur. Curs. No. 12, fol. 130. ' Ibid. fol. 151 d. 3 Ibid. fol. 4 Ep. Hatfield's Surv. (Surtees Soc. xxxii), 23, 24. It is impossible to equate some of the old obligations in terms of money, but the old system, which seems to have been restored in 1356, was certainly more burden- some and probably less favourable to the tenants than a rate of I ^d. an acre. 6 From the Report of the Commonwealth Com. in 1646—7 it is clear that the copyholders of the Palatinate professed to commute some labour services in the seventeenth century and actually did perform others. 6 Dur. Curs. No. 12, fol. 51, 51 d. 7 Ibid. fol. 75. 8 Ibid. fol. 113^. 9 Ibid. fol. 68 d. 216 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY field in defiance of the steward's order.1 Elsewhere we learn how men re- fused to sow the outlying ' rigs ' of their holdings,* and it was even necessary to order that when a man took two bondages he should work both equally well.5 The fact is that the open-field system was doomed after the depopu- lation of 1349, but Durham, thanks to her wastes, escaped the worst horrors of fourteenth-century inclosures. The Durham inclosures which occurred mainly in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries were for tillage rather than for pasture. Till those days came the open-field system survived in a curious welter of confusion, and the only clear fact is that the land became less fertile and of continually decreasing value. A good example of another kind of difficulty caused by the Black Death is furnished by the three vills of Quarringtonshire, who owed service to the grange at Quarrington, or ' Wheringdon,' as the rolls term it. Accord- ing to Boldon Book these vills of Shadforth, Sherburn, and Cassop worked as Boldon did, but we have bailiffs' rolls for 1350 which prove that they had already commuted their services.* As usual a difficulty arose because the bailiff of Quarrington Grange could not obtain hired labour enough for the commutation money. In January, 1355, the bailiff, a certain William de Coupland, was examined as to the nature of the commuted works.1 We learn that each bondager owed four autumn works with his whole family, except the housewife, and at the time of sowing of wheat and oats in each season one day's work with his plough. €ach bondager had to reap, bind, and collect into stocks three roods of whatever crop there was, and each cotter had to do three days' work in autumn for himself alone. Each hus- bandman and cotter was to receive per day in autumn one penny only. We are told that the point at issue was the interpretation of the clause ' with his whole family except the housewife,' for, as the roll puts it, ' there might well be as many as five in some households.' If the bailiff could make all the members of such a household work or commute, he could manage very well. It is probable that the clause in question had not been construed very strictly in times of prosperity, for even in 1350 the fifty-one bondagers only paid 38*. 4 ears referred to. 239 A HISTORY OF DURHAM In the eighteenth century only 2,137 acres of common fields were in- closed by Private Acts of Parliament, or about one-twelfth of the amount inclosed in the seventeenth century by Chancery decree, but in 1757 began a new movement for the inclosure of commons and wastes, under the in- fluence of the new agriculture. The four Inclosure Acts in the reign of George II relate to waste land only ; out of twenty-two others in the eigh- teenth century and fifteen in the nineteenth century, only seven relate to the inclosure of common arable fields, but three others extinguish rights of common over them.1 Speaking generally, most of the later inclosures after 1759 were made by Act of Parliament, but some were simply by agreement. The lord of the manor generally reserved the right to minerals, subject to the payment of compensation for damage by the lessee. The lord also received a certain proportion of land for his rights or else a reserved rent of 6d. or 4^. per acre, called at Hamsterley the bishop's groat. In this village 2,000 out of the 8,000 acres inclosed were not deemed worth ^d. an acre, and so George Surtees, esq., one of the principal proprietors, was allowed to have them on condition that he paid the bishop's groat. Bailey, from whose General View of the Agriculture of Durham much valuable information has been taken, is indignant when discussing the charge that inclosures wrong the poor. He points out that after inclosures population and farms increase.8 The indus- trious poor must certainly be benefited by an increase of employment and an increase of provisions ; and inclosing of commons can only be inimical to vagabonds, sheep-thieves, and other pests of society. He admits, however, that in the vicinity of populous districts there was a tendency for commons to rise in rent, but elsewhere he maintained that the rights of the commoners were of little worth. He tells how he let an allotment for ^75° f°r which, before inclosure, the owner and his tenants did not receive benefits equal to as many shillings, and he ends by estimating from personal knowledge of their early condition that upon an average the commons have increased ten times in value by inclosures. It is certain that many agreed with him, for when he wrote in 1809—10, there had been 114,071 acres inclosed since 1759 and only 19,400 acres of common remained. Very little of this survived the nineteenth century except in the far west. VI — MODERN DURHAM With the eighteenth century the golden age began to return to Durham, golden at least in comparison with the misery of the past. New coal mines, lead mines, and iron mines were opened and old ones enlarged. Villages began to spring up on the wastes, ugly and insanitary, but inhabited by a more prosperous race of colliers than the old villagers had been. The bishop had always owned or leased lead and iron mines in Weardale, there had been since the seventeenth century a flourishing iron industry about Winlaton, and coal, stone, and salt had been worked in the Palatinate at least from the twelfth century, but now a new spirit entered into all industries in Durham 1 For dates and other information as to inclosures see App. No. 2. * Bailey, Gen. View of the Agrlc. ofDur. 98. 240 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY as elsewhere. Even agriculture felt the thrill, and the people of Durham set to work to inclose their wastes and to improve the breed of their cattle and sheep until the Durham ox became proverbial. Even the power of the sea was defied in the cause of agriculture, and between 1740 and 1808 1,400 acres of excellent corn-land were secured from Saltholm and Billingham Marsh at the mouth of the Tees.1 But this revolution was not accomplished without heart-burning or distress. Much of the land of Durham being copyhold or leasehold, the development of mining led to the awkward question of the bishop's and chapter's right to lease minerals under such ground. The protagonist in the struggle was Gilbert Spearman of Tanfield Western Leigh near the Whickham mines. He owned both freehold and copyhold land in the time of Bishop Talbot (1721-30), whose son-in-law, Dr. Exton Sayer, was Spearman's pet aversion. Sayer obtained a lease to work the coal under Spearman's land, but making all allowances for Spearman's anger, the behaviour of Sayer was decidedly disingenuous. The story is told in great detail in Spearman's Inquiry into the Ancient and Present State of Durham, which was published in 1729, when Spearman lost his case, and in revenge began a campaign for the abolition of the Palatinate, and the enfranchisement of copyhold and lease- hold lands. Spearman laboured with great ingenuity to prove that the Durham copy- holder had a right to the minerals according to custom, but there is no doubt that he was quite wrong, although he personally suffered great hardship. We know little about the ancient system of working coal in Durham, but all we do know tells against Spearman's view. We find the bishop leasing mines of coal and iron ore and lead.8 The master of St. Edmund's Hospital had to obtain a licence to dig and carry coal on the several soil of the hospital at Gateshead,8 and we find that the bishop reserved all mineral rights and way- leaves in making a grant of 89 acres of forest waste in upper Weardale to Sir Ralph Eure.* It is true that all these references belong to the fifteenth century, but all entries referring to coal on the Chancery Rolls and elsewhere correspond. We can, however, trace the lord's rights to minerals far back into the fourteenth century, and probably earlier. Hatfield's Court Rolls disclose that the tenants at Whickham found it profitable to carry the coal of the lessees to Newcastle, and their charges were regulated by the bishop's council.4 From various sources we learn that they received compensation for damage done by the lessees, and it is clear therefore that they did not own the minerals.8 As a matter of fact, they were not allowed to dig for coal without a licence from the lord.7 It is sometimes objected that the tenants' 1 Bailey, Gen. View of the dgric. ofDur. 223. In the nineteenth century land-reclamation has been carried on with great success on the banks of the Tees and Wear, and especially on the Tyne. The low-lying lands are ' holms ' on the Tees, ' batts ' or ' haughs ' on the Wear, and ' haughs ' on the Tyne and Derwcnt. * Dur. Curs. No. 38, m. zoJ. ; ibid. No. 33, m. 5 J, * Ibid. No. 42, m. 13. 4 Langley's Survey (under Escombe), jtJ.;cf. similar lease of Wolsingham Parkin Dur. Curs. No. 37, m. 12. 'Dur. Curs. No. 12, fol. 132^. We learn from Dur. Curs. No. 31, m. 5^. that Bishop Hatfield appointed commissioners to find workmen and carriers for his coal mines of Whickham and Gateshead, with power to punish by imprisonment or otherwise if they see fit. * Dur. Curs. No. it, fol. 179 ; Sf. Hatfitlfi Survey (Surtees Soc. mii), 97 ; Dur. Halmote R. (Surtees Soc. bcncii), 91. ' Dur. Halmote R. (Surtees Soc. Izxxii), 1 1 7. 2 241 31 A HISTORY OF DURHAM leases and agreements contain no reservation of minerals, but the reason probably is that it seemed preposterous to think that the tenants had any claim. All they could expect was that they should be recompensed for actual loss, and upon that principle the present law is based. However, the old pits were simply shallow holes for surface mining, and the question is much thornier when serious subsidences of the soil might and do take place through modern deep mining, and ' wayleave' for a railway can be taken at the lord's option.1 It is outside the scope of this article to trace the rise of industrial Durham, but reference must be made to some of the chief trades followed. In olden times each village was almost a self-contained economic unit, and even in the village the most elementary and necessary crafts alone were followed by a special worker. The peasant might need the services of a smith or a carpenter, but his own wife and daughters spun and wove the wool from his own sheep, and perhaps did not always take it to the local fulling mill for that operation. We find dyers at Darlington in 1183 and, of course, weavers, cordwainers, &c., in big cities like Durham at a later date. There were iron-workers at Winlaton, and probably a fair number of skilled metal- workers in the county, but it was not until the eighteenth century that organized manufacture on any large scale as opposed to the satisfaction of casual wants began to be common. Even at the end of the eighteenth century Sir John Eden could find no manufactures at Sunderland except the shipping industry, and he found little else at South Shields except glass-making and a salt-refining industry, ruined by the loss of the London market.8 However, in a few places in the county flourishing industries were created. The famous Winlaton Mills, which made all kinds of iron goods, were founded by an ex-blacksmith, Ambrose Crowley, in 1690, who laid down a most excellent code of laws for the workmen, which were to be put into execution by a court of arbitrators held at Winlaton every ten weeks for hearing and determining causes among the workmen. Thanks to this court the workers secured easy, expeditious, and cheap justice, for the fees were fixed very low. The court owed its power to the fact that recalcitrant litigants could be expelled from the works, and would thus lose all claim on the fund, to which all men had to contribute. One of the laws was, ' No publican can sue in this court for debts contracted for drink.' Add to this regulations for a superannuation fund, the erection of schools and a place of worship, and we have a curious anticipation of New Lanark.8 Of course, all masters were not so considerate, but there were flourishing iron manufacturers at Blackball, Swalwell, Beamish, and Lumley, at High and Low Team, Gateshead, and Bedburn near Bishop Auckland. At the beginning of the eighteenth century some Germans established a sword factory at Shotley Bridge, and later on foundries for casting brass and iron were erected at Gateshead and a few other places including Darlington. There were glass-houses at Gateshead, South Shields, and Sunderland, and 1 This question, on its technical side, is treated elsewhere. For information as to the early system of mining see article 'Archaeology of the Coal Trade' in Pnc. Arch. Inst., Newcastle (1852). 1 State of the Poor, ii, 166, 171. 8 For a fuller account of Ambrose Crowley see article on ' Industries ' in this volume. 242 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY potteries on Gateshead Fell and at other places at the end of the century. The salt-works have already been referred to. They were found at Birtley as well as South Shields, but the salt in the former case came from springs discovered about 1785. The industries of the county of Durham will be dealt with in detail in another section of this volume so that it is unnecessary to attempt to trace their history here. However, it may be interesting to trace the chemical works on the Tyne and Wear to the end of the eighteenth century, but the coal-tar industry sprang up first at Cockfield, near Barnard Castle, in 1779. Thus the 'ingenious Mr. George Dixon,' as Bailey calls him, anticipated Lord Dundonald's patent by two years, but cost of carriage to his nearest market, Sunderland, caused him to drop the Cockfield business. Bailey also claims for him the discovery of coal gas ; but it is startling to find that he actually experimented with a view of lighting collieries with the new illuminant. The textile trades never have flourished in the county. Durham city itself had a strong weavers' gild in mediaeval times, but one of the few things we know about its early history is that the two sections of workers in it quarrelled furiously as to which should make the more profitable articles. The jurors decided that the * wolnewebsters ' ought to make and weave 'woollen cloths and lynen called plain lynen, caresay, sak cloth, and haircloth,' while the 'chalonwebsters' were to make and weave 'coverings, tapestry work, say, worsted motleys, twilled work, and dyaper.' No workman might make articles assigned to the other section under penalty of £5. But by the eighteenth century the Durham gilds had ceased to be of any practical concern to the trade. Just before Bailey wrote in 1810 the one considerable woollen manufactory had failed. It had made a considerable amount of worsted goods, 'tammies, wildbores, &c.,' and carpets. An attempt was made to revive it by a Mr. Cooper, who claimed the buildings, workshops, &c., left to the corporation to be let free, together with £$oo free of interest, to encourage the woollen manufactory, if anyone would bind himself to employ a sufficient capital for carrying on the business. Durham did not succeed in becoming a seat of the woollen industry, and the attempt to create a cotton industry in the city failed even more completely. In 1792 a factory for making corduroys and 'cotton' goods was started at Castle Eden, which found employment for '200 boys and girls' in spinning, besides a number of men for weaving, cutting, &c. The owners moved the trade to Durham in 1796, but before long the new factory was destroyed by fire and was not re-erected. The old buildings at Castle Eden became a sail-cloth factory, but the industry ruined its founders and the building was taken down. Other towns were more fortunate. Darlington used to be famous for linen, and the manufacture of huckaback, diapers and sheeting employed 500 looms in 1810. Bailey tells us that worsted goods were being made there too, partly by hand and partly by machinery. 300 looms, and 100 combers, and 5,000 spinners by hand were needed, and even then much of the yarn was spun in Scotland. Another Durham inventor was John Kendry, who invented a machine for grinding optical glasses in true spherical form, but derived much more benefit from inventions for spinning flax. In 1810 there 243 A HISTORY OF DURHAM were four mills for spinning flax and one for spinning worsted. Darlington prospered by the decay of Barnard Castle's industries. Up to about 1760 there was a flourishing worsted manufacturer at this town, but competition tempted the manufacturers to undersell each other at the risk of producing an increasingly inferior article. The result was that they offended their customers and lost the trade. The workmen migrated to Durham, Darling- ton, and elsewhere. Probably the decrease in Durham's activity as a manufacturing county has been more apparent than real, as Gateshead, South Shields, Sunderland, Hartlepool, and even Darlington and Stockton, have made large gains in wealth and population during the last century. The failure of inland towns and villages to retain manufactures is largely due to a question of transport. The mediaeval roads that survived to the eighteenth century are described in caustic terms by Arthur Young.1 The first Durham turnpike road dates from 1 742." Between that date and 1751 the principal Durham roads .were made, but little was done after 1751 until 1789, when road-making recommenced. Financially the turnpikes were a success, but the gradients in many parts of the county are still very steep. The materials used for repairing the roads are whinstone, limestone, river gravel and freestone, the first being preferred whenever available. Brindley surveyed the Tees valley in 1768 for a canal to link up Darlington and Stockton. Nothing came of it, as it was super- seded by the Stockton and Darlington Railway in 1825. Canals never came into favour in Durham except so far as the Tyne, Wear, and Tees were all canalized or straightened during the nineteenth century. The favourite method of transport is now the railway, with which Durham is well served. Sir John Eden in 1797, Bailey in 1810, and Mackenzie in 1833, supply a chain of interesting information as to the state of the working classes down to the reform of the Poor Law. The population of Durham increased from about 97,000 in 1730 to 135,000 in 1750." The census of 1801 gives us the first authentic figures, 160,361. In 1821 and 1831 the figures were 207,673 and 253,910 respectively. The increase was in the commercial, manufactur- ing, and mining districts. Bailey* points out with glee that in the purely agricultural parishes the population was either stationary or decreasing except where inclosures and improved methods of cultivation were to be found. In the decaying parishes much arable land had been laid under permanent pasture. • Durham's method in dealing with the indigent and pauper class was no better than that of other counties. The industrial revolution had created an unemployed question in Durham as elsewhere, and unfortunately the character of the justices of the peace was not calculated to produce originality or resource in a difficult situation. Spearman's view is, of course, a prejudiced one and at the most only refers to those of the early eighteenth century, but the clerical and tradesmen justices against whose ignorance and folly he inveighs 6 were to be found after Spearman's time. The Elizabethan Poor Law broke down from sheer maladministration, and it is possible that laziness 1 Bailey says that even in 1 8 1 o the township or by roads were much neglected and blames the system of statute labour for it. Bailey, Gen. View of Agrlc. ofDur. 274. 1 From Durham to Yarm and Catterick Bridge. 3 Mackenzie and Ross, Hist. ofDur. i, Ixxvii. * Op. cit. 333. 6 Inquiry, 103. 244 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY and timidity had quite as much influence on the justices' treatment of the poor as compassion had. Our three authorities agree in saying that the poor were well and even kindly treated. Out-relief was given freely, especially in small parishes. Relief varied from one to seven shillings a week and was theoretically graduated according to the recipient's power of earning his own living. As usual, the deserving poor were crowded out by the idle and worthless, there was no labour test, and drunkenness and immorality were the marks of the pauperized class. Some of the towns and more populous parishes found it advisable to have workhouses. Darlington adopted the statute of 22 George III, and a visitor and two guardians of the poor were appointed annually. They provided food and clothing and appointed a salaried master and matron for the workhouse. The visitor and guardians held weekly meetings to discuss the matters brought before them by the master or governor as he was called, and to grant out-door relief. There was a parish doctor for the sick poor, and regulations as to the kind of food, but not as to the clothing of the inmates. The able-bodied inmates of the workhouse were employed in the spinning and weaving mills of the town, but their earnings were credited to the township. At the beginning of the nineteenth century Stockton adopted something akin to what is now known as the Elberfeld system, and a committee of the more respectable inhabitants investigated the actual circumstances of appli- cants for relief, and outside assistance was only given in deserving cases. The workhouse inmates varied from twenty-five to thirty in 1810. For each the master was allowed 4^. The 200 out-door paupers seldom got more than 2s. a week. The total expense was £1,000 a year, towards which the labour of the able-bodied paupers seldom contributed £20 a year. A few of the larger centres followed the example of these towns in attempting to grapple with the problem, but generally the parishes took the line of least resistance. Sunderland gave out-door relief on a large scale, but published a list of the recipients. Framwellgate parish in Durham appointed visitors to investigate the conduct of outside paupers. Gateshead tried to make the paupers contribute something towards their food. However, these were exceptions. At Stanhope the upkeep of the workhouse was let by contract, and as usual the state of affairs was very bad. The poor of Crossgate parish at Durham were contracted for at the rate of 2s. id, a week each. In general parishes considered workhouses expensive, and several followed the example of those in Durham in giving outdoor relief freely, or else, like the parish of Brandon (near Brancepeth) on the eve of the new system, they boarded out their poor in the neighbouring workhouse, in this case at zs. 6d. a week. The conditions of life in these workhouses and the food supplied were too often equally bad. The regulations as to diet were a farce, and when wheat became dear during the great war it simply disappeared from the paupers' diet. All the workmen were not thriftless, and in most towns and villages box clubs were to be found. The members paid a small sum, seldom more than 22'i, the highest in England. Northumberland with 40-2 per cent, came a dose third to Yorkshire's 40-8. 'On the death of Macdonald in 1 88 1 differences arose among the members of the National Miners' Unien. In 1888 there appeared the semi-Socialistic Miners' Federation, which agitated for a legal eight hours' day and a minimum wage with its corollary of limitation of output. As a result the National Miners' Union, which clung to the sliding scale, was practically confined to Northumberland and Durham. 2 249 32 A HISTORY OF DURHAM which included both trade-unionists and non-unionists, was backed up by Joseph Cowen of the Newcastle Chronicle^ and ably organized by John Burnett, afterwards the first labour correspondent to the Board of Trade. After a five- months' struggle the masters found that even the Times and the Spectator opposed them, and they gave way to the demand for a week of fifty-four hours. The boiler-makers or iron ship-builders were organized into a strong society in the 'seventies under the leadership of Robert Knight, and the idea of trade-unionism became unceasingly popular until bad trade appeared. In more recent times the London Dock Strike of 1889 produced the Tyne- side and National Labourers' Union, while the National Amalgamated Sailors' and Firemen's Union also took its rise in 1887 ; this time at Hartlepool and on Tees-side. In 1863 the miners had to face a threatened reintroduction of the yearly bond, which for the past eighteen years had been abandoned in favour of a monthly agreement. It was this move of the employers that enabled Macdonald and Crawford to reorganize the union in Durham and Northum- berland. Strikes broke out in every direction, but as the miners had in 1863 organized a permanent relief fund, and saw that a national union had been formed they entered upon the struggle with a light heart. However the miners' leaders began to quarrel, and in 1864 the owners succeeded in again enforcing the yearly bond. In disgust the Northumberland miners seceded from the union of the two counties, and it was not until 1869 that the present Durham Miners' Association arose upon the ruins. The new union was lucky in securing William Crawford as its agent in 1870, and the fall in wages that had just occurred helped Crawford to form a strong society. In 1872 began the better era of Durham mining. In March both masters and men agreed to abandon the yearly bond, and in April it was arranged that a joint committee of masters and men should settle all disputes that arose. In August the Coal Mines Regulation Act was passed, and since that date strikes have rarely taken on the bitter nature of earlier days. In 1875 Alexander Macdonald could boast of his success in in- ducing 75,000 workmen and their masters to submit their differences to arbitration. The victory was only gained after twenty-five years' hard work, but the principle of arbitration still holds the field in most matters. In Durham there are two pieces of machinery which may vary from time to time in detail, but are best described as the Board of Con- ciliation and the Joint Committee of Masters and Men. Their working is somewhat complicated, and they are concerned with quite different sets of circumstances.1 From time to time representatives of masters and men meet as a Board of Conciliation to settle whether wages should rise or fall in relation to an artificial figure known as the County Average. Apparently the men claim increased wages when the selling-price of coal rises, and resist as far as possible the masters' proposals for a reduction in a falling market. The Board consists of eighteen representatives of each side with an umpire mutually agreed upon, or in default nominated by the Board of Trade. However, when the agreement has once been reached the Board of Con- ciliation are not further concerned with any disputes that may arise with 1 For an interesting account of this machinery, see Webb's Industrial Democracy, \, 192. 250 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY regard to affairs at any particular colliery. These are dealt with by the Joint Committee of masters and men, which is rigidly confined to the application of the existing agreement to particular mines or seams. The work of the Joint Committee is incessant, but although its impartiality is recognized its necessary dilatoriness and lack of personal knowledge has resulted in its being often superseded by a committee of one masters' repre- sentative and one workman with power to choose an umpire. It says a great deal for the proverbial * canniness ' of the North-country- man that this complicated system of arbitration and collective bargaining should have lasted so long and worked so well. It is true that strikes have not been wholly avoided, but they have been less bitter and frequent. Since 1869, the year of its foundation, the Durham Miners' Association has engaged in four arbitrations between 1874 and 1876, and its members worked under a sliding-scale from 1877 to 1889. Even under the sliding- scale a strike occurred in 1879, but both sides had learned wisdom, and both on this occasion and several times during the years 1888-92 arbitration settled disputes as to wages. At last in 1892 occurred the great Durham Coal Strike. For three months the men held out against the proposed 10 per cent, reduction, which the masters demanded in a falling market. It was the worst strike for perhaps half a century, and as trade grew worse and other industries felt the want of coal, the masters demanded even greater reductions. At last when the whole county was on the verge of ruin the good bishop of Durham (Westcott) earned his title of the ' Miners' Bishop ' by persuading the masters to allow the pits to re-start at a 10 per cent, re- duction in wages, not, as he said, on business grounds, but for the sake of ending the misery of the people. In this connexion should be mentioned the undoubted fact that the success of collective bargaining in Durham is due to the presence of public- spirited men like Dr. Westcott, or Dr. Robert Spence Watson, who time after time have given of their time and ability to the cause of industrial peace without receiving any monetary reward. In 1888, to mention only one case among many, Dr. Spence Watson acted as arbitrator in a dispute in the iron trade, and the principle of collective bargaining, often with the mediation of an outside public man, has been accepted by most of the trades in Durham. In the dark days of the 'eighties many of the unions were less success- ful than that of the miners in keeping up their numbers. The skilled boiler- makers or iron ship-builders of the Tyne and Wear suffered severely as the total tonnage built fell from 1,250,000 tons in 1883 to 473,000 in 1886, and the secretary of the boiler-makers (Mr. Robert Knight) in his annual report for 1886 hinted that their unavoidable sufferings were inducing men to criticise an organization of society which made them possible. It is but natural to find that the idea of direct labour representation is so popular in Durham, which with ii'2i per cent, of its population in a trade- union is barely second to the leading trade-unionist county in England — Northumberland, with a percentage of 1 1*23. However, the Durham miner is seldom a socialist ; but there are signs that he is becoming less contented with some of the doctrines of his older leaders. During the strike of 1892 a miner is reported to have said (Times of 24 March, 1892), 'Why should 251 A HISTORY OF DURHAM my wages fall when the masters can sell the coal at any price they like and then choose to take less for it ? ' When the miners lack a succession of leaders of the old type the practice of collective bargaining may fail to solve such differences of interest as the more ignorant miners may conceive to exist. The depth of degradation for the Durham working-men was the two decades before the reform of the Poor Law. At this time the artificial stimulus of war was removed from agriculture, while manufactures felt an in- crease of foreign competition. Mackenzie gives some interesting figures to illustrate the growth of poor relief. The county poor rates for the year end- ing Easter 1750 were £7,143. In twenty-five years they had about doubled; by 25 March 1803 they had risen to £51,966. The year after Waterloo they reached £83,650; from 1818 to 1820 they oscillated at a little over £101,000. Then for a few years they varied between £75,000 and £97,000 with a slight tendency to decrease, but in 1832 the rates were again over £100,000, and out of the actual rate of £102,951, £86,000 was spent solely on the relief of the poor, although the population was little more than 250,000. And what a weltering confusion was this system of relief. It was adminis- tered by eighty-six select vestries and sixty-eight assistant overseers, not to mention the ordinary parish organization. In 1832 we learn that 193 paupers were employed on the roads and earned £1,618 8s.; 357 paupers employed in parish work earned £663 i%s.1 The new Poor Law of 1834 was a powerful, if unpleasant, remedy for the increasing pauperization of the workers, but it was as ill received here as elsewhere. Riots developed into militant chartism, especially in the neigh- bourhood of Newcastle, and chartism was followed by the growth of the Labour Party, whose trade-unionist wing is especially strong on the local governing bodies of the county and has several representatives in Parliament. However, thanks to the mediation of Bishop Westcott in 1892 Durham has been singularly free from labour troubles since the great strike of that year. The old days of bull-baiting, pugilism, and hard drinking seem to have passed away in Durham, but there is still much to be deprecated in the social and moral life of the county. Intoxication is a painfully common vice among the colliers, especially at week-ends ; while the language and behaviour of the crowds at football or bowling matches too often recall the habits of their mediaeval ancestors.8 However, real progress in education and refinement is being made. If colliery villages are often ill-built and insanitary the reason is that they are the result of fluctuations of population almost inseparable from the industry, and even so public opinion is slowly but surely effecting improvement. Serious crime is certainly on the decrease in the county, and minor offences, generally the result of drunkenness and moral perversion, will probably disappear considerably as education and the higher ideals of trade-unionism and co-operation increase their hold upon the working classes. 1 Mackenzie and Ross, Hist, of Durham, i, Ixxxv. ' It is curious to note that ' pila,' some kind of football or bowls yrobably, was a favourite game in Durham in the fourteenth century. Repeated but vain attempts were made tc suppress it. In 1 3 8 1 a match between the prior's tenants at Southwick and Monkwearmouth and those of the 'lord of Hylton ' ended in a free fight in which the prior's tenants were ' in grave peril of their bodies.' Dur. Halmote R, (Surtees Soc. Ixxxii), 171. 252 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY VII — THE BOROUGHS In the report of the commission on municipal corporations, five boroughs were recognized in the modern county of Durham. These were Durham, Hartlepool, Sunderland, Gateshead, and Stockton, but at least two others, Bishop Auckland and Darlington, appear in the Durham documents. Little is known of any of the seven1 before the time of Bishop Hugh Pudsey (1153-95), who sold charters to Durham, Sunderland, Gateshead, and more doubtfully perhaps to Darlington, Stockton, and Bishop Auckland. The difficulty is that most of these charters have disappeared, and the character of the two best-known survivors, those of Wearmouth (Sunderland) and Gateshead, makes us hesitate in accepting any early claims to municipal self- government in Durham. Pudsey's charters to Gateshead and Sunderland1 point to Newcastle as the model upon which the rights were based, apparently referring to Henry I's charter,8 but the burgesses of Gateshead, for example, arc only guaranteed certain vague forest rights like those enjoyed by Newcastle, and it is remarkable that none of the towns of the Palatinate, save perhaps Hartlepool, could produce a charter for real self-government of an earlier date than the sixteenth century. Traditions of past greatness there might be, but except at Hartlepool and Durham mayors and aldermen had doubtful legal claims to their titles in 1835. Hartlepool was the only royal borough in the Palatinate. It could point to a charter from King John in 1201 guaranteeing it the rights of Newcastle,* and although in 1230 Bishop le Poor forced it to accept a charter from him, the terms were fairly liberal. It obtained a mayor and the only gild-merchant in the county. Thanks to the rival claims made upon its allegiance by the bishop, the king, and the powerful family of Bruce, the town of Hartlepool managed to retain a fair degree of independence and self-government, but the other towns, even Durham, were less fortunate. Down almost to modern times the bishop's bailiff or similar officer took the place of the mayor in all the other boroughs except Durham, for even the mayor of Stockton did not possess undivided control of the town, as the borough only comprised one-fourth of the manor. At Gateshead the bailiff was appointed by the bishop until 1681. After that date no bailiff was appointed. Two stewards ' elected by the bur- gage holders and freemen managed the borough property subject to half- yearly meetings of their electors, while the manor court, the justices of the peace, and, above all, the curious select vestry known as the ' Four and twenty ' provided such government of the town as there was. In 1835 the burgage holders of Gateshead were content to explain their title as a question of tenure and denied that there ever was a borough corporate at Gateshead. Even Durham had to wait for its real charter until the time of Bishop Pilkington in 1565. Before that there was the usual vague charter of Pudsey, but even a confirmation by Pope Alexander III did not increase its 1 Simeon of Durham says that the Usurper Cumin in 1 140, on the death of Geoffrey Rufus, forced certain burgesses to take an oath of fidelity to him ; Symeon of Durham, Opera (Rolls Ser.), i, 146. ' Printed in App. to Boldon Book (Surtees Soc. rxv). * Printed in Stubbs' Select Chart, ill. 4 Ibid. 313. * Mackenzie says that the churchwardens fulfilled the duties of stewards until the latter were appointed in 1695 ; Hist, of Newcastle and GateihtaJ, ii, 748. 253 A HISTORY OF DURHAM freedom. Pilkington's charter, followed by one of Bishop Toby Matthew in 1 602 placed the government in the hands of a mayor, twelve aldermen, and twenty burgesses elected by the gilds. The experiment was never a success, and at last in 1780 a fresh and more definite charter was given by Bishop Egerton. The story of the other boroughs contributes no additional information upon the subject of municipal history in Durham. One thing alone is clear. Down to the seventeenth century, at least, the bishop retained practically complete control over the boroughs, with the doubtful exception of Hartlepool, and even Hartlepool's freedom was fitful. It will be seen, therefore, that the towns in the Palatinate had not made any serious advance towards self-government in the Middle Ages. So long as he could the bishop treated the towns as a source of revenue. Pudsey tallaged the boroughs as well as the vills of the bishopric,1 and all the boroughs except Hartlepool were farmed out to the highest bidder in mediaeval times. The amount paid gives us a rough idea of the relative importance of the boroughs. Durham city was, of course, the most important, being farmed for£86 3^. ^d. in 1 385,* but Darlington for many years averaged little less.8 Gateshead was farmed for £22 in 1356.* Sunderland brought in £20 in 1357," but only £6 in 1465. 6 Auckland was worth 50 marks in I356,7 but only £16 6s. in I442.8 Stockton seems to have grown greatly in importance in the four- teenth century and steadily increased from 4 marks in 1350— i 9 to £4 in 1 40 5, 10 and probably superseded Yarm as a port. It is significant that these leases of boroughs appear as part of the transactions of the Halmote Court. What they meant can be gathered from one of the few leases given in full. At the Darlington halmote Ingelram Gentill and two others came before the steward and took to farm the borough of Darlington with the bailiwick of the same, and with the mill there and of Haughton and Blackwell with the oven of the said burg with the soken of the same, and with the court of the burg the soken fines, amerce- ments, and services of the same, and with other courts there ; likewise with whatever toll ' Shamelhires ' rents and services approvements, &c., as is accustomed by lease ; and likewise with all other commodities and profits to the same burg and bailiwick belonging and thereof coming ; except escheat and forfeitures of lands and tenements there falling. It is granted also to the same firmars that they have power to arrest and punish and adjudge all the trespasses against the peace in the same burg. And likewise that they may have the office of marshal to their own use with the profits of the same, according to the law and custom of the county, so that no sheriff or marshal or other bailiff shall intrude himself unless by default of the same firmars during their term To have and to hold, &c., for one whole year, rendering for the said year £80." Under such a system a real corporation could not exist. It was not applied to Hartlepool so far as we know, but over Hartlepool and Durham 1 BoUon Book (Surtees Soc. xxv), App. ri. * Dur. Curs. No. 32, m. 8 d. ' Ibid. No. 12, fbl. 83, 164 ; No. 13, fol. 165 d. 4 Ibid. No. 12, fol. 1 61. ' Ibid. 191 d. « Ibid. No. 1 6, fol. 1 10 d. ' Ibid. No. 12, fol. 164 d. 8 Ibid. No. 15, fol. 167. ' Ibid. No. 12, fol. 52. 10 Ibid. No. 14, fol. 9. According to Bf. Hatfield't Surv. the firm was io6s. SJ. in 1380. "Ibid. No. 13, fol. i66d. 254 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY the bishop had considerable powers. It has been mentioned that Durham was farmed out.1 In 1343 Bishop Bury ordered the escheator to take into his hands the ' town and manor of Hartlepool and answer for the profits till the bishop otherwise directed.'* If the mayor and commonalty wished to endow charities they had to buy a licence from the bishop.8 Similarly a religious gild could only be founded in St. Nicholas's, Durham, after a licence had been procured.* Again, if Durham or Hartlepool wished to levy an octroi duty to raise money towards the repair of the town walls they had to obtain the bishop's consent. This duty, called murage, was granted to Durham city in 1344, 1378, 1386, and 1407,' and to Hartlepool in 1384, 1398, and 1421.' The grant to Durham in 1344 was at once revoked,7 and it seems from entries in the Chancery Rolls that in the case of both vills a strict audit was taken of the way in which the receipts were spent.8 The bishops kept an especially tight hold over Hartlepool until late in the fifteenth century, when their own power decayed. For instance, in 1391 some disturbance took place owing to a quarrel between the mayor and commonalty and their neighbours, Sir Ralph de Lumley of Stranton and Matilda widow of Sir Roger de Clifford. The bishop ordered his chancellor to intervene, as unlawful assemblies had been held to the terror of the people.9 Lumley seems to have been the aggressor, as the bishop forced him to give a recognizance to keep the peace.10 In 1410 another disturbance took place, and this time the mayor and commonalty had to give a recognizance to keep the peace towards certain people, probably non-freemen of the borough.11 The bishop's anxiety can be understood when it is remembered that Hartlepool was the only port in the Palatinate of any size. He claimed a right to levy customs at the port, but the manor belonged to Robert Bruce's family until forfeited to the king by his treason. Even in 1327 the king had attempted to plant officials at Hartlepool,1* and in 1334 he actually appointed controllers of customs there. A lawsuit by Bishop Bury forced Edward III to withdraw them.18 Little is known of the early history of the gilds of the Palatinate. Bishop le Poor recognized the gild-merchant of Hartlepool, but it either did not possess or did not retain much authority in the government of the town and no craft-gilds are found there. The first mention of craft-gilds is at Durham in 1447, when we find several men, probably the wardens and searchers of an informal shoemakers' gild, giving a recognizance for due observation of an ordinance or statute by which the local shoemakers are prohibited from employing a Scotsman,1* and there is a similar recognizance by the fullers." In 1450 the weaver-craft obtained the bishop's approval of their ordi- nances and regulations including directions for going in procession to * ger I In 1387 the city was farmed for 120 yean ; Dur. Curs. No. 32, m. 8 d. ' Dur. Curs. No. 29, m. 1 5 7.963 390.997 508,666 685,089 867.258 J. 016.454 1.187,361 PARISH Acre- age 1801 1811 1831 1831 1841 1851 1861 1871 i8Si 1891 1901 Chester Ward— East Division (excluding Bed- lington Parish) Boldon t • • • • 4,031 619 662 733 855 9'5 1, 008 1,024 1,745 3,097 4,878 5,389 Gateshead (with 3,005 8,597 8,782 11,767 «5,'77 19,505 24,805 32,749 47,808 65,041 84,728 108,024 Gateshcad Fell)' Jarrow : — 10,305 15,624 21,468 24,189 27,995 33,945 42,448 52,925 85,616 115,216 152,196 182,362 Harton Town- ship t 1,430 160 205 235 277 265 770 577 2,76< 3,484 <,525 5,056 Heworth Chap.1 2,577 2J87 2,905 3,921 5,424 • 7fl08 8069 10015 13,755 17,138 18,454 24031 Hedworth, 4,225 7,566 3,193 3030 3098 3,600 3,835 6,494 24061 37,719 50026 55,712 Monkton and Jarrow Town- ship f South Shields 90 8,108 9,001 8J85 9,074 9,052 9025 8f73 8,677 7,770 5,946 2,804 Township4 Westoe Town- 1,749 2J303 6,164 7,618 9,682 13&90 19,349 26,266 36059 49,165 72,445 94,459 ship4 Monkwear- 5,180 6,293 6,504 7,644 9,428 '2,493 16,911 23,440 29,041 36,358 41,866 49,171 mouth: — Fulwell Town- 737 85 145 118 158 134 769 205 318 527 1,038 2,959 shipt Hilton Town- 2J93 312 363 320 420 550 546 487 638 If 33 1013 7,775 ship Monkwear- 550 1,103 7,097 1J78 1,498 2,155 3066 3,343 5,507 8055 9,125 9,929 mouth Town- ship f Monkwear- 287 4J39 4,264 4024 6,051 7,742 10,109 15,139 76,6*7 17,765 20,077 21010 mouth Shore Township *f Southwick 1,013 554 641 1,004 1001 1012 2,727 4,263 5.9J7 8,178 10013 12,728 Township t Washington : — 5.563 2,475 2,589 2,687 2,673 2,396 3,485 5,981 7,»5 8,901 9,058 11,969 Barmston 979 49 48 79 73 81 270 475 703 650 592 588 Township Great and Little 2,677 1J36 7,277 1J65 1<477 1074 2,057 3077 4J09 5,229 5,144 6,822 Usworth Township t Washington 1073 1,190 1J64 1,243 1,123 941 1J24 7,529 2J03 3,022 3022 4059 Township Whitburn t 4,250 675 843 856 1,001 1,061 1,203 1,215 1,343 2,024 2,760 3-3" 1 Aneimt County. — The county as defined by the Act 7*8 Vic. c. 61, which reduced Durham to the following extent :— (i) Craike Parish was annexed to Yorkshire (North Riding), and (2) Bedlington Parish and the whole of Islandshire and Norhamshire were added to Northumberland. The area Is taken from the 1901 Census Volume and includes certain lands common to two or more Parishes (or Places), which uninhabited lands, however, are not included in the areas of the Parishes (or Places) to which yJThe ^811 population Is exclusive of 830 militiamen, who were not assigned to the places to which they belonged. ' Gatishiad. — In 1821 seamen belonging to registered vessels included. • Htworth —The 1841 population excludes 118 seamen in vessels. « In 1831. 1.080 seamen in South Skiilds and 1,037 in Wtttot were excluded from the populations of those places. 1 Uonkwearmoutk short — In 1841 the population includes 119 mariners at sea belonging to it. 263 A HISTORY OF DURHAM TABLE OF POPULATION, 1801—1901 (continue^ PARISH Acre- age 1801 1811 1821 1831 1841 1851 1861 1871 1881 1891 1901 Chester Ward- • Middle Division Chester le Street 28,339 10,454 11,059 12,052 12,528 14,062 15,937 21,018 27,106 37,222 44,227 57,086 (part of) : — Birtley Chap. . 1,429 1,026 1,094 1J86 1,520 1,759 1,833 2,246 2,868 3,540 4,175 5,373 Chester le Street 2,900 1,662 1,726 1,892 1,910 2,599 2,580 3,013 4,205 6,646 8,227 11,014 Township f Edmondsley 1,960 439 223 205 150 253 348 434 864 930 1,051 1,392 Township f Harraton 2,460 1,607 1,759 2,217 2,171 1,601 1,614 1,642 1,667 2,108 2,177 2,161 Township f LamesleyChap.t 7,178 2,121 2,054 2,167 2,387 2,262 2,590 3,234 3,817 4,670 4,931 5,346 Pelton Town- 1,161 539 672 522 550 1,030 1,207 2,787 3,070 4,130 4,966 6,603 ship f Plawsworth 1J66 177 225 227 249 266 286 681 717 942 1,028 1,199 Township f Tanfield Chap, f 6,887 2,228 1,810 2,357 2,498 2,671 3,480 4,593 7,283 10,282 12,610 18,417 Urpeth Town- 1,725 524 } I 650 716 907 952 1,123 1,412 1,692 2,148 2,608 ship f \1,419 Ouston Town- 641 48 } 304 273 282 300 320 311 854 953 963 ship 1 I Waldridge 732 83 77 125 104 432 747 945 892 1,428 1,961 2,010 Township St. Oswald (part of):— Broom Town- 1, 086 118 123 93 93 108 123. 136 IS' 719 1,508 2,253 ship Chester Ward- West Division Edmondbyers : — '3,'7I 43° 699 769 995 1,025 1,100 1,233 1,047 854 523 429 Edmondbyers 5,132 215 313 358 484 458 485 455 343 352 252 209 Township f J Hunstan worth 8,039 215 386 411 511 567 615 778 704 502 271 220 Chap4 Kimblesworth 638 22 42 32 36 33 36 37 34 1,132 1,192 1,216 Extra-Par.f Lanchester (part 42,467 3,768 4,248 4,73° 4,846 7,582 15.444 21,971 29,748 42,907 48,907 60,218 of):- Benfieldside 1,832 — 275 341 534 1,074 2,475 4,026 4,432 5,700 6,272 7,463 Township * f Billingside 289 54 — 45 18 13 16 10 11 8 12 11 Township » f Collierley 1,998 539 549 556 526 853 576 1,322 2,906 3,856 4,455 4,648 Township a f Conside and 2,715 — 139 141 146 195 2,777 4,953 5,960 6,746 7,742 9,279 Knitsley Town- ship » f Ebchester 1,126 168 210 200 255 331 610 697 830 1,402 1,398 1,649 Chap, f Esh Chap, f • . 3,119 276 383 470 486 518 642 942 2,294 6,305 6,341 7,802 Greencroft 3,183 184 205 229 235 392 720 717 1,602 2,000 3,005 2,920 Township f Healeyfield 1,282 145 156 161 159 189 299 336 380 357 410 507 Township f Iveston 1,956 251 214 238 212 448 2,500 3,327 3,495 4,032 4,189 4J16 Township f Kyo Township} 2,203 281 385 448 412 965 1,401 1,679 2,502 4,065 4,561 7,366 Lanchester (and 15,235 955 1,151 1fl40 1,210 1,595 2,221 2,398 3,115 4,038 5,255 8,417 Hamlets)Town- ship4Sf Langley 2,472 83 102 97 75 81 80 129 116 143 135 154 Township f Medorasley 5,057 754 391 461 466 796 840 1,296 1,957 4,133 4,999 5,525 Chap. > 8 f Satley Chap. ' f ' 78 88 103 112 132 287 139 148 122 130 161 1 Benfieldside returned with Mtdomslcy in i8or. 3 Conside and Knitslty returned with Medamslty in 1801. •" Lanchester includes Burnop and Hamsteels, Butsfield, and Holmside. 5 The area of Satley is included in that given for Lanchester. 264 " Collierley includes Billingside in 1811. SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY TABLE OF POPULATION, 1801—1901 (continued) PARISH Acre- age 1801 1811 1821 1831 1841 1831 1861 1871 1881 1891 1901 Chester Ward- West Division (cont.) Muggleswick Par. 13,086 201 224 278 298 421 688 788 ',677 841 799 893 Chap.1 f Ryton:— 5.459 1,956 1,953 2,231 2,363 2,589 3,757 3.052 3,943 5,3" 6,341 9,266 Crawcrook 1,136 325 26S 308 340 290 320 319 346 450 7,054 2,435 Township t Ryton Township 1J20 432 462 445 590 677 739 1,140 1J39 3fl36 3,393 4,708 Ryton Wood- 2,813 885 838 7,057 951 7,059 1,133 IflSI 1,066 1,082 1,106 1J09 side Town- ship f Stella Township 290 314 385 421 482 563 565 542 592 743 788 814 Winlaton : — 9.059 3.367 3,354 3,532 4,205 5,326 6,085 7,372 8,282 9,944 12,583 '8,973 Chopwell 3,842 346 291 237 254 320 458 563 788 1,614 2,193 4,183 Township Winlaton 5,217 3fl21 3063 3J95 3 #51 5,006 5,627 6,809 7,494 8J30 10J90 14,790 Township Whickham f Witton Gilbert 5.961 3.249 3,659 359 3,746 399 3-7 '3 364 3,848 417 4,3>9 1,243 5,565 1,758 5.921 2,098 6483 2,708 7,976 3,430 9,167 4,668 12,708 5,710 Par. Cbap.'f Darlington Ward — South-east Division Auckland St An- 8445 792 896 1,009 1,187 1,820 3,042 3,7l6 4,682 9,972 10,350 9,843 drew (part of):- Byers Green 1flS2 77 199 237 207 489 1ft 25 1JB34 1J52 2<452 2J46 2J33 Townshipf Coundon Grange 638 25 23 28 44 313 585 552 846 If 64 1,893 1,740 Township t Eldon Township 1,421 101 86 94 129 186 238 311 742 1J89 1,646 7,570 Middlestone 893 78 88 117 92 113 451 497 482 1,733 7,947 1,789 Township Midd ridge 1,160 198 199 201 307 345 300 313 331 853 874 774 Township \ Middridge 950 41 39 58 55 40 54 56 46 64 77 65 Grange Township • f Old Park 414 20 14 30 67 30 26 23 18 910 902 873 Township Westerton 699 56 58 77 85 89 210 196 211 463 495 480 Township Windlestone 1,188 196 190 173 201 215 153 134 154 244 176 179 Township Aycliffe » :— II, 106 M37 1,129 ',379 1,564 1,372 1,366 M58 ',374 1,290 1,079 ','75 Aycliffe, Great 2,191 640 633 807 937 823 812 840 822 839 702 7C5 Township f Braflerton 2,428 212 204 263 247 211 206 254 236 171 157 129 Township Preston le S kerne 2j680 119 127 126 176 131 139 146 137 135 102 135 Township Woodham 3#07 166 165 183 204 207 209 218 179 143 118 146 Township f Coniscliffe t :— 3, '78 35 ' 376 39' 374 422 45' 434 456 5«9 498 4'5 Coniscliffe, High 7,855 220 234 245 234 244 248 234 192 355 338 280 Township \ Coniscliffe, Low 1J20 131 142 146 140 178 203 200 264 164 160 135 Township f Darlington : — 7,805 5,349 5,82° 6,55' 9,417 11,877 12,453 16,762 30,298 36,666 39,450 45,958 Archdeacon 1,064 72 71 64 50 63 62 61 SO 54 52 68 Newton Township Blackwell 1J64 277 281 268 271 299 272 336 343 406 391 372 Township ck. — The increase in population in 1871 ii attributed to the presence of labourers employed in con- structing two reservoirs. > Wilton Gilbtrt Parochial Chaptlry was said to be connected with Durham St. Oswald Andtnt Parish. ' Middndgi Grange, although entirely shown in Auckland S«. Antrim Ancient Parish, was stated to be partly In Hrighington Ancient Parish. 2 265 34 A HISTORY OF DURHAM TABLE OF POPULATION, 1801—1901 (continued) PARISH Acre- age 1801 1811 1821 1831 1841 1851 1861 1871 1881 1891 1901 Darlington Ward — South-east Division (cont.) Darlington (cont.) Cockerton 1,808 330 409 469 522 482 537 576 2,176 2,778 3,108 3,323 Townshi] Darlington 3,369 4,670 5,059 5,750 5,574 11,033 11,582 15,789 27,729 33,428 35,899 42,195 Townshi] Gainford (part 2,052 243 242 247 274 249 267 244 224 187 203 181 of):— Denton Chap 987 141 129 725 144 119 727 777 777 84 774 104 Houghton le 1,063 102 113 722 130 130 146 133 113 103 89 77 SideTownship Haughton le 6,899 589 673 746 1,108 i, 008 883 979 1,413 1,302 1,323 1,263 Skerne (part of):- Barmpton 7,545 126 727 705 90 124 135 727 772 108 103 100 Township Burden, Great 605 78 66 76 102 117 96 104 772 120 104 89 Township Haughton 1,946 308 398 466 710 576 474 536 661 713 737 627 Township * Morton Palms 1,359 — — — 83 73 68 59 85 105 101 70 Township l Whessoe Town- 1,444 77 82 99 123 118 110 153 443 256 278 377 ship Heighington * : — 7,429 1,118 1,074 1,182 1,432 1,347 1,294 I>323 1,326 1,485 1,412 ',345 Coats a moor 455 9 77 72 13 19 27 16 20 77 16 70 Township f Heighington 1,766 543 502 557 767 695 685 668 697 621 626 653 Township f Killerby Town- 635 66 85 707 95 105 93 109 97 89 90 91 ship Redworth 1,886 322 284 307 370 351 322 325 325 553 522 449 Township School Aycliffe 531 41 34 37 32 25 31 25 27 23 20 20 Township f Walworth 2,156 137 152 162 155 152 142 180 160 182 138 122 Township Merrington : — 8,164 1, 068 1,098 1,279 1,325 1,704 2,673 4,046 4,997 8,204 7,992 8,363 ChiltonTownshi] 2,422 176 777 182 168 189 977 1,456 643 2,693 1,536 1,411 Ferryhill Town- 2,502 507 507 574 591 850 958 1,423 2,647 3,510 3,971 4,306 ship «f Hett Township 1,279 157 178 233 227 234 234 241 394 338 357 369 Merrington 1,961 228 242 290 339 431 504 926 1,313 1,663 2,128 2,277 Township Whitworth Par. 3,351 331 407 409 341 61? 1,059 4,988 o,°35 3,772 3,943 13,962 Chap. :— Tudhoe Town- 1,785 219 292 298 237 327 400 1,359 5,007 7,555 7,648 7,644 ship f Whitworth 1J66 112 115 111 104 290 659 3,629 5,028 6,187 6,295 6,318 Township St. Oswald (part of):- Croxdale with "J Sunderland [ Bridge Town- f 1,438 250 224 204 283 262 204 227 355 1,372 1,359 1,402 shipj Darlington Ward — South-west Division Cockfield :— 4,49' 539 577 688 i,°'3 1,187 887 1,256 1,294 1,785 2,266 2,545 Cockfield Town- 7,765 461 475 533 790 944 647 1,004 1,030 1,205 1,596 1,857 ship f Woodland 2,726 78 102 155 223 243 240 252 264 580 670 688 Township f 1 Morton Palms was first distinguished in 1831 ; it is supposed to have been previously returned with Haughton nshit>. 3 Ferrykill.—A. new village of Low Spennymoor built here between 1851 and 1861 266 Township. ' See note ('), p. 265 . SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY TABLE OF POPULATION, 1801—1901 (continued} PARISH Acre- IP I Sot 1811 1821 1831 184: 1831 1861 1871 1881 1891 1901 Darlington Ward — South-west Division (cont) Gainford (part 2,710 4,884 5,046 5,966 6,801 6,834 7,081 7,020 6,9' 7 6,823 6,955 6,937 of):— Barnard Castle 4fl17 2,966 2#86 3,587 4,430 4,452 4,60S 4,477 4J78 4J69 4J2S 4J94 Chap.f Bolam Town- 1fl13 93 121 121 115 119 125 77 3 111 117 134 141 ship Clcatham 1,124 73 103 126 94 95 107 95 101 125 87 88 Township ' Gainford 2J45 445 431 500 524 585 669 735 820 897 868 869 Township Headlam 808 89 175 232 109 117 129 102 105 107 87 87 Township Langton 7,085 78 65 90 107 99 95 116 114 101 79 86 Township Marwood 3,711 156 177 212 200 224 205 241 200 197 174 166 Township f Morton Tin- 416 23 28 31 19 28 28 27 33 31 35 27 mouth Town- ship Pierce bridge 973 193 231 236 278 224 235 211 253 206 219 207 Township Stainton and 2*352 272 232 251 324 373 344 351 387 340 299 292 Streatlam Township t Summcrhouse 830 158 156 189 192 165 177 184 145 118 127 95 Township Westwick 7,467 93 95 97 98 67 63 76 91 74 72 78 Township VVhorlton Chap.; 7,969 245 246 300 311 286 296 292 279 241 249 207 Middleton in 40,929 1,843 2,218 2,866 3>7'4 3,787 3,972 4,557 4,579 4,412 3,812 3,588 Tcesdale:— Eggleston 8f>73 306 335 464 623 £77 636 788 75<5 747 653 560 Chap, f t Forest and Frith 17,699 460 601 723 760 884 904 862 792 757 675 635 Township \ Middleton in 10<497 796 988 7,263 1#24 7,770 If 49 2,266 2,386 2,292 2,008 7,987 Teesdale Township f Newbiggin ¥,660 281 294 416 507 516 583 641 645 616 476 406 Township t Staindrop1 : — 12,206 1,930 ',95° 2,187 3,527 2,436 2,447 2,406 2,198 2,302 2,329 2,374 Hilton Town- 7,096 88 104 113 its 112 707 98 773 106 91 700 ship Ingleton Town- 847 236 285 295 355 334 305 300 247 246 290 311 ship Langleydale anc ¥,692 143 160 198 217 185 163 220 178 224 237 257 Shotton Township \ Raby and Kever- 2#14 313 201 203 247 284 313 295 270 280 266 246 stone Town- ship Staindrop 2,006 1,156 1fl87 7,273 1,478 7,399 1,429 7,333 1J34 7,378 7,307 1,307 Township Wackerfield 751 94 113 105 112 122 136 160 156 128 738 153 Township Winston J . . 3>°44 307 284 287 327 293 301 342 336 334 312 344 Darlington Ward —North-west Division Auckland St An 39,755 6,246 6,413 7,241 9,974 17,280 «9,596 28,395 38,082 44,046 48,630 54,108 drew (part of):— Auckland 7,275 121 135 779 296 7,367 7,329 1<401 7,877 2,289 3,770 3,504 St. Andrew Townshi| > Chatham, although entirely shown in Gainford Atcitnt Parish, was stated to be partly In Staindrop Antimt Parish. 267 A HISTORY OF DURHAM TABLE OF POPULATION, 1801—1901 (continued) PARISH Acre- age 1801 1811 1821 1831 1841 1851 1861 1871 1881 1891 1901 Darlington Ward North-west Division (cont.) Auckland St. An- drew (part of — cont.) : Auckland 7,570 206 209 220 410 720 789 842 972 918 923 932 St.HelenChap. Auckland, West 3,470 978 971 1,106 1,529 2,310 2,303 2,581 3,187 3,177 3,651 3,702 Township t Bedburn, North 2,858 245 282 351 387 457 1,151 1,771 2,305 2,426 2,503 2,437 Township f Bedburn, South 7,409 310 421 366 296 350 349 332 283 345 307 293 Township f Binchester S83 42 45 49 37 43 30 33 40 52 53 54 Township t Bishop Aucklanc 2,126 1,961 1,807 2,180 2,859 3,776 5,112 7,279 10,112 11,632 12,436 14,886 Township 1 f Coundon 824 163 163 222 475 990 1,073 2,765 3,148 3,510 3,671 3,801 Township f Evenwood and 5,433 769 719 785 1,019 1,729 1,381 2,674 3,060 2,954 3,882 4,428 Barony Town- ship f Hamsterley 2,967 491 529 552 503 490 532 522 475 493 510 545 Chap, f Hunwick and 1,594 122 150 160 164 338 486 1,203 1,558 2,086 2,115 2,225 Helmington Township f Lynesack and 6,375 517 602 732 795 910 787 1,120 1,386 2,347 2,760 2,989 Softley Township f Newfield 206 11 16 11 8 345 1,016 1,024 995 1,150 1,130 1,043 Township Newton Cap 1,681 114 134 145 156 148 280 404 1,030 1,349 1,503 1,506 Township f Pollard's Lands 438 82 93 117 138 224 212 355 583 614 539 — Township * t Shildon 598 101 124 115 867 2,631 2,144 2,947 5,574 6,946 7,870 9,011 Township Thickley, East 468 13 13 11 35 452 622 1,142 1,563 1,758 1,667 2,748 Township Brancepeth (ex- 21,239 1,508 1,481 1,905 1,449 2,151 6,041 14,353 24,617 35,l6o 39,279 40,492 cluding Whit- worth Par. Chap.) :— Brancepeth 4J65 367 455 539 329 352 470 1,496 1,558 1,567 1,964 1,952 Township " f Brandon and 6,840 522 435 609 478 467 525 1,486 4,273 10,853 14,242 15,579 Byshottles Township a f Crook and Billy 4,056 193 176 228 200 538 2,764 5,134 9,401 11,096 11,430 11,471 Row Town- ship Hedleyhope 1,653 47 48 51 72 48 91 93 381 1,504 1,418 1,274 Township * * Helmington 1,274 121 120 154 97 435 1,182 3,469 3,900 4,040 3,981 3,923 Row Town- ship f Stockley 1J47 89 62 103 57 53 44 282 712 1,094 1,137 1,073 Township f Willington 1,504 169 185 221 216 258 965 2,393 4,392 5,006 5,107 5,220 Township Escombe Par. 1,063 162 190 232 282 510 1,293 3,743 4,313 3,982 3,449 3,678 Chap, f Lan Chester (part of] Cornsay 3,088 234 254 249 230 201 370 367 1,432 2,327 2,275 2,255 Township t 1 Bishop Auckland and Pollard's Lands Townships are returned together in 1901. a Brancepeth and Brandon and Byshottles. — The 1831 decrease in both is attributed to the removal of workmen employed in building Brancepeth Castle in 1821. 8 Hidleyhope, although shown entirely in Branceptth Ancient Parish, was stated to be partly in Manchester Ancient Parish. 268 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY TABLE OF POPULATION, 1801—1901 (continued} PARISH Acre- age 1801 1811 iSax 1831 1841 1851 1861 1871 1881 1891 1901 Darlington Ward North-wist Division (cont) Stanhope t • • • Witton le Wear 5l,I95 3,168 S.'SS 450 6,376 544 7,341 S3' 9.541 502 7,063 565 8,882 918 9,654 1,366 10,330 2,329 8,793 2,469 8,045 2,601 7,777 2,783 Par. Chap, f t Wolsingham ^ f . zi.934 1,834 1,983 3,'97 2,239 2,086 4,585 SiS3I 7,778 7,895 7,5'9 7,653 Easington Ward — North Division Bishopwearmouth: 9,225 7,806 8,810 11,542 16,590 27,092 35.035 50,541 67,253 88,102 103,048 118,851 Bishopwear- 2,669 6,126 7,060 9,477 14,462 24J06 31 #24 45fi73 59,032 74,441 87J48 99,437 mouth Town- ship Bishopwear- 6 564 476 483 363 298 310 272 264 105 68 5 mouth Panns Township Burdon 1,135 69 107 149 162 114 123 95 116 104 125 195 Township Ford Township 1fl29 602 712 791 911 1,720 1&22 2,036 2,477 2,631 2,737 2#54 Rvhope Chap. . 1J85 254 255 368 365 423 475 2,082 4J76 6fl24 7J41 10,414 Siiksworth 1J993 138 150 210 252 267 305 289 396 401 426 446 Township Tunstall 808 S3 50 64 75 64 70 94 392 4J06 4J03 5JOO Township Chester le Street 3.208 1,211 1,205 1,884 2,950 2,297 2,182 2,058 2,294 2^92 2,648 2,717 (part of) : — Lambton 691 266 253 293 256 120 its 130 149 151 164 151 Township Lumley, Great 1,642 696 693 1,240 2J01 1,796 1,730 1fS5 1f19 If 30 1J27 2,004 Township Lumley, Little 875 249 259 351 393 381 337 373 326 511 557 562 Township Dalton le Dale :— 4439 185 181 211 «,305 2,709 5.125 8,432 10,376 12,650 14,912 1 7,9' 5 Dalton le Dale 812 40 52 49 73 88 83 102 128 118 134 339 Township Dawdon 1,101 22 27 35 1fl22 2fl17 3J38 6,137 7,132 7,714 9,044 10,163 Township ' Cold Hesledon 1fl30 48 31 55 112 83 117 89 99 108 682 899 Township Mutton, East 1,496 75 71 72 98 521 1J87 2,104 3fl17 4,710 5fl52 6 £14 Township Houghton le '5.575 6,414 8,339 «2,5S<> 20,524 16,833 20,284 22,582 27,135 35.115 38,794 41,757 Spring : — Biddick, South 352 490 141 167 799 74 38 48 50 50 58 48 Township Hournmoor 513 889 955 1,139 938 891 891 973 1J06 1J5S 1J62 1,449 Township Coclcen 464 17 59 59 71 65 96 77 104 184 176 100 Township Eppleton, Great 706 35 28 43 47 74 63 71 ' 87 55 78 65 Township Eppleton, Little 337 6 30 32 17 38 24 26 37 38 31 36 Township Herrington, East 1,037 123 161 133 229 231 250 242 221 159 206 279 and Middle Township f Herrington, 1,022 209 253 329 381 343 344 752 832 3f>n 3jS01 3,769 West Town- ship t Helton le Hole 1,617 212 264 919 5J887 4,158 5,664 6,419 7J33S 10J34S 12,726 13fi73 Chap. Houghton le 1JS1 996 1,356 2005 3*317 3,433 4,075 4,741 SJ76 6,041 6J76 7699 5,345 6,741 6,801 6,994 Pittington 2,616 220 277 304 If 32 2,295 2JS30 2,155 2,106 2,424 2,389 2,449 Township f Shadforth 2,904 184 226 223 236 336 1J48 1,164 1J064 1,677 1,424 1,495 Township Sherburn 1J10 252 259 281 337 If 46 2J63 2J80 2,175 2f40 2J88 3,050 Township Sherburn Hospital 740 80 56 67 59 86 34 186 142 196 217 235 Extra Par. Trimdon .... 3,495 a78 274 302 276 382 1,598 2,975 3,266 3,057 4,136 4,844 Whitwell House 643 27 17 38 32 173 160 180 '43 '35 2IO 174 Extra Par. Stockton Ward- North-east Division Billingham : — 10,394 962 940 1,154 1,212 1,653 1,811 2,166 2,749 3,221 4,437 5-483 Billingham 3,036 335 341 395 401 7*2 723 93 1 7,022 1,488 2,675 3,729 Township Cowpen Bewley 3J48 128 125 132 137 196 217 448 970 997 7,057 1,026 Township Newton Bewley 1,564 88 84 86 92 87 121 134 132 131 726 121 Township Wolviston 2,446 411 390 541 582 588 750 653 625 605 5*5 607 Chap. Bishop Middle- 6,241 738 813 827 837 M34 1,719 2,272 4,'75 3,377 5,3'3 5-956 ham: — Bishop Middle- 2,0*7 331 391 404 387 511 446 432 506 480 445 552 ham Town- ship Comforth 1,758 324 327 330 353 700 1,040 1,619 3,416 2JS3 4,459 5,060 Township Garmondsway 1,149 28 41 35 43 157 129 125 109 156 160 777 Moor Town- ship Mainsforth 652 55 40 44 39 42 59 58 51 114 158 144 Township Thrislington 595 — 14 14 15 24 45 38 93 74 91 89 Township Elwick Hall t . . 4,438 129 129 176 169 165 187 206 217 1 66 I78 258 Greatham \ : — 3,372 484 453 484 55' 687 700 779 768 788 918 949 Claxton Town- 881 42 46 38 32 52 49 55 51 57 48 40 ship Greatham 2,491 442 407 446 519 635 651 724 717 7J7 870 909 Township Grindon : — 4,295 363 275 3'4 384 337 3'7 343 490 1,026 M8I M90 Grindon Town- 3J11 325 230 255 309 285 267 303 348 345 400 391 ship J Whitton Town- 784 38 45 59 75 52 50 40 142 681 7,0*7 7,099 ship Hart (part of) : — 6,644 5'7 523 590 624 695 878 1,380 2,543 4,353 6,666 9, '75 Dalton Piercy 1,006 70 68 75 79 78 91 98 69 82 86 70J Township Elwick Town- 1J37 170 179 213 232 238 250 240 247 228 206 256 ship Hart Township 2,465 219 228 231 243 278 297 297 309 291 291 300 Throston 1,636 58 48 71 70 101 240 745 7,97* 3,752 6,083 8 £16 Township Hartlepool . . . '39 993 1,047 1,249 ',330 5,236 9,5<>3 12,245 13,166 12,361 14,585 •4,074 271 A HISTORY OF DURHAM TABLE OF POPULATION, 1801—1901 (continued) PARISH Acre- age 1801 1811 1821 1831 1841 1851 1861 1871 iSSi 1891 1901 Stockton Ward- North-east Division (cont.) Sedgefield :— 7,839 1,756 1,936 i,955 2,178 2,105 2,192 2,656 2,940 3,505 3,712 4,108 Bradbury 2,777 106 725 152 147 167 171 174 165 193 223 242 Township Butterwick 1,543 60 49 54 38 51 64 48 58 61 51 40 Township Embleton 3,423 98 105 102 105 98 113 136 129 114 147 134 Township Fishburn 2,126 134 171 192 212 239 261 255 288 317 290 323 Township Foxton and 1,803 S3 62 63 73 44 58 56 49 48 52 58 Shotton Town- ship Mordon Town- 1,572 101 117 124 174 161 163 179 203 171 133 144 ship Sedgefield 5,259 1,184 1,307 1,268 1,429 1,345 1,362 1,808 2,048 2,601 2,816 3,167 Township Stainton, 1,996 141 136 '54 248 132 '55 140 IS6 172 '47 125 Great J :— Elstob Town- 738 37 29 28 94 27 38 30 49 74 59 49 ship Stainton, Great 1,258 104 107 126 154 105 777 110 107 08 88 76 Township Stranton : — 6,997 610 659 704 736 2, 1 06 4,769 14,515 23,246 30,914- 44,252 63,756 Brierton Town- 762 22 27 22 27 33 30 27 37 38 41 ship Seaton Carew 3,404 263 659' 312 333 588 728 S84 1,053 1,734 2,388 2,253 Township Stranton Town- 2,831 325 371 381 1,491 4,008 13,601 22,165 29,143 41,826 61,462 ship Stockton Ward- South-west Division (excluding Craike Parish) Bishopton \ : — 4,175 450 408 453 512 473 484 448 515 459 460 416 Bishopton 2,178 349 312 365 423 362 365 342 409 350 357 322 Township Newbiggin, East 852 42 34 26 35 37 37 33 44 39 40 36 and West Township Stainton, Little 1,145 59 62 62 54 74 82 73 62 70 63 58 Township Low Dinsdale J . 1,174 1 08 125 III 169 169 '57 208 243 252 221 238 Egglescliffe t :— 4,931 420 476 542 625 628 701 698 729 844 965 1,426 Aislaby Town- 2J18 116 148 166 143 128 141 752 142 725 108 128 ship f Egglescliffe 1,323 270 293 332 424 443 493 496 539 655 791 1,240 Township Newsham 1,090 34 35 44 58 57 67 50 48 64 66 58 Township f Elton t . . . . 1,444 78 76 105 103 92 84 1 08 90 113 1 06 I'3 Haughton le 3,719 563 547 499 578 510 520 494 473 498 475 525 Skerne (part of):- Coatham Mun- 1,631 772 151 184 175 138 749 139 125 727 138 729 deville Town- ship f Sadberge Chap. 2,088 391 396 31 S 403 372 577 355 348 371 337 396 Hurworth J : — 4,075 867 960 1,124 1,348 1,599 1,449 1,525 1,722 1,940 1,774 1,761 Hurworth 2,438 661 692 811 7,077 1,235 1,154 1,192 7,357 7,579 1,439 7,377 Township Neasham 1,637 206 268 313 331 364 295 333 365 421 335 384 Township Middleton St. 2,516 215 202 209 299 433 332 294 826 1,103 870 1,157 George Newton, Long . . 4,3" 295 253 338 313 293 325 353 313 268 287 386 272 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY TABLE OF POPULATION, 1801—1901 (continued} PARISH Acre- age 1801 1811 1821 1831 1841 1851 1861 1871 1881 1891 1901 Stockton Ward- South-west Division (excluding Craike Parish) (cent) Norton 1 1 • • • 4,653 965 ',053 1,186 M86 1,628 «,725 2,3 1 7 2,824 3-«95 3,778 4,523 Redmarsball : — 3,528 228 223 264 335 272 332 278 320 350 36o 389 Carlton Chap. 7,500 99 105 140 183 157 186 176 185 209 217 254 Redmarshall 875 60 76 75 56 48 76 62 75 91 78 55 Township Still ington 1,153 69 42 49 96 67 70 40 60 50 65 80 Chap. Sockburn (part 712 34 37 43 50 42 43 59 35 44 44 74 of)1 Stockton upon Tees: — 5-324 4,177 4,406 5,184 7,991 10,071 0,459 ji3,76i 28,339 »2,242 50,653 52.833 Hartburn, East 1fl45 104 115 t2t 153 135 174 163 20* 360 474 559 Township Preston upon 1,117 64 62 57 76 111 113 111 110 163 156 521 Tees Town- ship Stockton upon 3,162 4j009 4J29 5,006 7,763 9,525 0,172 3,487 8fl21 1,719 50fl23 51,753 Tees Town- ship f Durham City Castle Precincts 9 ^m __ 55 __ 138 57 24 29 38 35 37 and Site of Old Gaol Extra Par.1 University Extra 28 1 06 103 112 61 86 84 62 9« 66 107 83 Par. St. Mary-le-Bow '4 477 553 448 501 308 269 300 324 334 302 294 (or North Bailey) • t St. Mary-the-Less 4 "54 118 '57 128 87 104 106 118 no 103 133 (or South BaileyJ'J St. Nicholas t . . 73 1,754 1,958 2,215 2,265 2,757 3,031 2,606 2,482 2,134 2,167 1,886 St. Oswald (part 8,077 4,099 4,3'6 5,598 5-903 7,379 9,366 11,057 12,519 15,323 15,049 16,389 of):- Crossgate Chap. 504 1,201 1fll1 1,454 1,403 1,712 2,074 2,597 3,123 .3,799 5,907 4,710 El vet (Barony 3 £91 1#27 2,115 2,621 2,976 3J44 4207 4,140 4,848 6,293 5,596 5,974 and Borough Township \ Framwelltfate 3,682 1071 1,190 1J23 1J84 2J23 3,085 4,326 4J48 5 J31 5,546 5,705 Township \ St Giles (or Gilli- 1,729 940 906 1,237 1,277 3,396 5,423 6,135 5,852 5,420 5,394 5-854 gate Magdalen Place (or 27 — — — — — — 18 16 27 16 17 St. Mary Mag- dalen) Extra Par GENERAL NOTES FOR DURHAM 1. Many of the great fluctuations in the population of «ome of the places in the Table are occasioned by the expansion or depression of the coal-mining industry. 2. The abnormal increases in population in 1831 and 1841 of some of the places in the Table are mainly due to the presence of labourers on railway work. 1 Setkburn — The part in Durham la known as Sockburn Township. The remainder of thi . Ancient Parish li In Yorkshire (North Riding). ' Caitlt Pruinttt and Silt of Old Gaol. — Castle Precincts In 1801, 1811. and 1831 was included in St. Mary-It-Bom Parish. Site of Old Gaol included in St. Mary-le-Bow Parish in 1801. and in 1811-31 in SI. Mary-ttu-Ltu Parish Rightly shown together 1841-1901. 273 35 A HISTORY OF DURHAM 3. The Parishes which are divided are all entirely in this County, unless a note is made to the contrary. 4. The following Municipal Boroughs and Urban Districts are co-extensive at the Census of 1901 with one or more places mentioned in the Table : — Municipal Borough, or Urban District Crook U.D Helton U.D Houghton le Spring U.D. Ryton U.D Seaham Harbour U.D. Shildon and East Thickley U.D. South Shields M.B. Place Crook and Billy Row Township (Darlington Ward — North-west Division) Hetton le Hole Chapelry (Easington Ward — North Division) Houghton le Spring Township (Easington Ward — North Division) Crawcrook, Ryton, and Ryton Woodside Townships (Chester Ward— West Division) Dawdon Township (Easington Ward — North Division) Shildon and East Thickley Townships (Darlington Ward — North- west Division) South Shields and Westoe Townships (Chester Ward — East Division) 274 INDUSTRIES INTRODUCTION I industrial development of the county of Durham, except in re- spect of mining, is of late date. The constant inroads of the Scots, the isolation from the rest of England which resulted from its position as a county palatine, the ruthlessness of Newcastle in suppressing any possible rival, all tended to retard its progress. But from an historical point of view the mass of details available concerning the early salt and iron trades amply compensates for the tardiness of the county in reaching a full industrial development. All the towns of more than a few thousand inhabitants lie to the east of a line drawn from Gateshead through Durham to Darlington ; the west of the county though containing many mining villages is sparsely populated. In spite of this limited area it has succeeded in crowding into its industrial life illus- trations of many of the most interesting phases of economic development. This is the more remarkable as the county is by no means rich in gild records, the source of so much of our knowledge of early trade. Little has been pre- served concerning the gilds of the city of Dur- ham ; Gateshead alone of Durham towns can supply adequate materials for a picture of gild life. For so many centuries episcopal influence was the controlling factor in determining the lines along which Durham should develop that there is a certain dramatic fitness in the earliest in- formation of the industrial activity of the county being the fact recorded by Bede that the art of glass-making was taught to the English by the foreigners brought from Gaul by Benedict Biscop to glaze the windows of the great abbey he was building at Wearmouth. When, after an inter- mission of more than a thousand years, glass- making was once more begun on the Wear, and Sunderland became for a time one of the best- known centres of the industry, the site of the nineteenth-century glass-works was not far from the spot where the seventh-century glass-blowers plied their trade, and among the employees in the modern works numbers of French workmen too were included. Unfortunately there is no corresponding early account of the salt industry, though in all maritime counties the salt-maker was from the earliest times an important member of even the smallest village community, and the great monastic establishments of Wearmouth and Jarrow, admirably placed for producing this necessity of life, doubtless made salt by evapora- tion for their own use. But what the salt trade, as compared with the glass trade, loses in antiquity it gains in continuity. In the possession of MSS. giving an uninterrupted account of an industry from the thirteenth to the twentieth century, Durham has a heritage of the utmost historical importance. Each link in the chain of events which connects the granting of a salt-pan at Hart for the rental of a pair of white gloves in 1290 to the export of salt from the Cerebos Works at Great ham in 1907 can be supplied from authentic records. A fourteenth-century trades directory seems an anachronism, but a MS. is extant which shows that William Pult, William Assom, William de Thorp, Gilbert Boys, William Schephyrd, John Golding, Thomas de Schorneton, Gilbert son of John, William son of Roger, Thomas Mart, John Staneson, Richard Pult, Gilbert Wodrof, William de Seton, and Thomas de Ferry at their twenty- four salt-pans were engaged in 1396 in making salt at Cowpcn, practically in the same way in which salt is now being made at Greatham only a mile distant, the one difference being that the fourteenth-century salt-makers used sea water, and the modern salt-maker bores 1,000 ft. into the earth for his brine. Nor is it only as a study in continuity that the Durham salt trade repays investigation. The misdirected energy of the Stuarts in attempting to interfere with the economic freedom of the people was an important factor in bringing about their downfall. The impression among all classes that the Stuart industrial innovations were beneficial to the king but prejudicial to the com- munity was universal and possibly justifiable. It is as a source of information of the Stuart methods of- producing the maximum of irritation with the minimum of financial profit, that the history of the company of the salt-makers of North and South Shields stands unrivalled. In the eighteenth century the centre of in- terest moves from the salt to the iron trade. The settlements at Winlaton and Swalwcll which owed their initiation to the enlightened 275 A HISTORY OF DURHAM despotism of Ambrose Crowley afford an inter- esting example of one of the earliest efforts after industrial betterment. The attempt to found a new industry at Shotley Bridge by bringing over German sword- makers from the world-renowned Soligen was a reversion on the one side to the methods of Burghley ; but there is an essential difference be- tween the Elizabethan experiments and the attempt in the reign of Anne : the one was the work of a statesman, the other of a private com- pany. The disaster of the Stuarts was too fresh in every one's mind for quasi-royalist company- promoting to be countenanced. But to turn from these interesting industrial experiments to the region of inventions, here too Durham can claim to have left her mark. It seems but natural that a maritime county the chief indus- try of which is ship-building should have been the birthplace of the lifeboat, and the honour of this invention undoubtedly belongs to South Shields. Durham has never taken a foremost part in the textile industry ; still, a Darlington man, John Kendrew, was the first to apply machinery to the spinning of flax, though it was the Marshals of Leeds who utilized the inven- tion on a sufficiently large scale to render it a financial success. Coal is the staple industry of Durham, and Bailey in his well-known General View of the Agriculture of the County claims for George Dixon the discovery of coal tar. The discovery is generally attributed to Lord Dundonald, but he did not take out his patent until 1781, when George Dixon had been supplying the Sunderland shipbuilders with coal tar from his works at Cockfield near Barnard Castle for fully two years. Dixon claimed to have arrived at his results twenty years before putting them into practice. On the other hand there is no evidence to prove that Dundonald took out his patent as soon as he made his dis- covery, in fact, as he was generally penniless, the immediate realization of his discovery is im- probable. There is, however, not the slightest doubt that Dixon was a man of ingenious and inventive mind. He was unquestionably among the first to realize the potentialities for illuminat- ing purposes that lay in coal. Bailey describes with every mark of verisimilitude being present as a boy when Dixon with the very rudest appli- ances, a kettle half filled with coal, tobacco pipes, a lump of clay for fastening the pipe to the spout, and a hot fire, succeeded in producing a brilliant light. A serious explosion which took place while Dixon was pursuing further investiga- tions into the nature of coal tar led him to abandon all hope of being able to apply his dis- covery practically. The use of gas for the light- ing of mines or houses seemed to him fraught with too much danger to be feasible. Unfor- tunately somewhat the same story is told of Dun- donald. It is impossible to decide between the rival claims of two men working at the same time at the same subject, but Dundonald is universally accepted as the inventor of coal-tar; the patent too stands in his name, and as, according to Bailey himself, Dixon relinquished the manufacture in 1783 as unprofitable, Dun- donald seems substantially to have the greater claim. It is, however, beyond dispute that friction matches were invented at Stockton. In April, 1827, Mr. John Walker, a chemist by trade, but a scientific investigator by nature and training, while experimenting with an explosive mixture dashed some of it on the hearth-stone, the friction produced explosion, and suggested to the experi- menter the idea of the friction match. The first box sold contained fifty matches, made like the old-fashioned fusees with double tips ; a piece of folded sand-paper was supplied with each box, the total cost being a shilling. The exact com- position of the mixture was never divulged, but Walker described the contents of the box as sulphurated hyperoxygenated matches, and it is doubtless owing to his lack of business capacity that he derived but slight advantage from his invention.1 Before the introduction of railways trade followed the rivers. Iron and steel forges and paper-mills clustered round the Derwent, abundant coal and iron were near it, and the rapid fall in the lower part of the river supplied a motive power of more importance at that time than in these days of electricity and steam. On the southern banks of the Tyne, salt, glass, and, at a later date, chemicals and shipbuilding were the chief industries. A network of mills — linen, wool, and worsted — were on either side of the Skerne ; and the same description firs both Wear and Tees — carpet-weaving in the higher reaches of the river, shipbuilding and potteries in the lower. But Durham is the home of lost indus- tries ; at the beginning of the nineteenth century the county had a world-wide reputation for pottery, glass, carpets, linen, leather, mustard, and nails ; for all practical purposes these industries are now extinct. Almost all the towns had their tanneries. Darlington especially, in the days of slow methods and excellent wear before chrome and chemicals were so exten- sively used, counted amongst its inhabitants many tanners and many dyers ; now worsted has to be sent into Yorkshire to be dyed, and one small tannery represents the multitude of tan-yards given in early directories and maps. When Arthur Young travelled through the north, he reports that round the city of Durham there is much mustard cultivated. The farmers sow it alone, on good rich moist ground, and on that which is pared and burnt. They get from thirty to one hundred bushels per acre, some crops worth ^100 an acre have been known. 1 Arch. Ael. (New Ser.), vii, z 1 7. 276 INDUSTRIES John Timbs gives a circumstantial account of the way in which an old woman named Clements residing in Durham in 1720 invented a method of extracting the full flavour from the mustard, the details of which method she refused to impart to anyone ; George I and the various notabilities of the capital are said to have patronized her. How much truth there is in the story it is difficult to gauge accurately, but the fact remains that within the memory of many people Durham mustard was highly esteemed for its extreme pungency, and the industry was sufficiently flourishing to keep one of the Gateshead potteries busy in supplying the pots in which to send it away. The Durham mustard trade was killed by the competition of an article with less flavour but at a lower price. How far the competition of Germany is answerable for the collapse of the trade in earthenware is a difficult question to decide. The study of the history of the individual potteries leaves the impression that an important if not the determining factor in the matter was the incapacity of the managers who were installed on the death of the original founders. Many of the potteries came into the market at the moment when the rapid development of the iron and shipping industries led men to prefer to place their capital where a high rate of profit and a quick return could be commanded. Speculation was in the air ; frugal men, contented to watch the development of their own trade, had built up the pottery business ; unfortunately they did not succeed in handing down their own traditions to their sons, and the firm often consisted of persons ignorant of the details of the business. The situations of Sunderland, Stockton, and South Shields near the mouths of rivers gave thfem an advantage over the Staffordshire pot- t/res ; and the success of the Malings at New- yastle, who left Sunderland early in the last century, suggests the inference that had the Durham firms been willing to put energy, brains, capital, and new machinery into the potteries, / Wearside and Tees-side might have held their own against competition, foreign or home. Another factor which must not be overlooked in accounting for the decay of both the glass and the pottery trades is that sometimes the site of the works was required for the extension of the shipyards, and the temptation to sell out when trade was not very flourishing was irresistible, especially when, as during the boom of shipping, shipbuilders were willing to pay enormously for land in the immediate neighbourhood of the shipyard. The loss of the carpet and dress material manufactures was doubtless partly due to the geographical position of Durham, Darlington, and Barnard Castle, the places chiefly associated with the trades. Buyers rightly prefer a market where, if one establishment does not supply their wants, they can without loss of time find another in the neighbourhood ; the centralization of northern textile industries in the West Riding of Yorkshire is economically sound, though the pathos of a decaying industry tends to make one overlook the inherent weakness of its claims to sympathy. The closing of the American market militated seriously against the Durham trade, and the more extensive use of linoleum against the cheaper carpets made at Barnard Castle. Nails were once extensively manufactured ; now Messrs. Galloway, of Gateshead, are the only important dealers. The trade has gone to Staffordshire. The fact of the extensive em- ployment of women in Staffordshire, with the consequent lessening of the cost of production, may be one reason why Durham, where, except in the textile industries, the employment of women is rare, has ceased to be a nail-making centre. Now that the potteries have vanished, and the manufacture of glass gone to Lancashire, the capital and energies of the county have concen- trated during the last fifty years on the building of ships, the working of iron, and the making of chemicals. This change has seriously affected the distribution of wealth and population ; Hartlepool, Barnard Castle, Bishop Auckland, and Durham, proud of their historic past, naturally mourn their lost precedence, but Con- sett, Blackhill, Spennymoor, have practically been created by the iron industry, Jarrow and West Hartlepool by the shipping and timber trade. In the midst of the enormous iron and steel works which spread like a net over many parts of Durham, it is difficult to realize how modern the trade is. But until the application of steam engines to the working of blast furnaces at the end of the eighteenth century, which almost immediately doubled the production of pig iron, the output in Durham was very small. The iron trade made steady progress for the first half of the nineteenth cermiry, for the next quarter it grew rapidly, but the substitution of steel for iron rails about 1876, and, a few years later, of steel plates for iron plates in shipbuilding, has revolutionized the trade. In shipbuilding, the Durham tradition or a firm handed down from father to son, the family system, still continues ; but in the iron and steel industry, except in the case of Bell Brothers, at Port Clarence (geographically a Durham firm, but for convenience of classification generally included as a Middlesbrough firm), there is no such continuity. The most marked feature of the steel industry in Durham during the last few years has been the amalgamation of many of the large works under one directorate ; the same applies to the chemical works ; the gradual sub- stitution of a trust system as contrasted with the family system of the last century is clearly dis- cernible throughout the county. 277 A HISTORY OF DURHAM During the initial stages of its industrial development the county of Durham owed much to imported energy. The influence of the Cooksons from the middle of the eighteenth to the middle of the nineteenth century, and of the Peases during the nineteenth century, cannot be overrated ; but both these families belonged to other counties — the one came from Cumberland, the other from Yorkshire. The rapid growth of Sunderland was one of the marvels of the early Victorian age. The zeal with which Sunderland had espoused the Parliamentary cause was prophetic, for it was as a town free from gild or corporation restrictions that later she was to appeal to England. It is true that the Stallingers or 'the Freemen of the ancient borough of Sunderland,' as they grandiloquently styled themselves, appropriated various rights often taken by gild fraternities or corporations ; but a certain sense of incongruity in their environment, and a knowledge of the slender basis on which their pretensions rested, restrained them from much active interference. No one in Sunderland seems to have taken the Stallingers very seriously except themselves. But at one time Sunderland stood to England in the relation that the Colonies do to-day. The restless son of the Yorkshire dalesman, chafing at the restric- tions of narrow country life, was attracted to Sunderland by the somewhat lawless traditions of the place, while the absence of all trade restrictions naturally appealed to the Scots. When the stolidity and caution of the York- shireman was tempered by the strenuosity and enterprise of the Scotchman, a type was pro- duced whose tenacity of purpose is nowhere more clearly shown than in the history of the struggles to overcome the natural defects of the River Wear. But not only does the removal of the impedi- ments to navigation in the Wear show the energy of Sunderland. Its iron bridge, designed by Tom Paine, and executed by the enterprise of Roland Burdon, points the same moral. It was among the early iron bridges in England ; la built in 1796, its single span of iron excited the greatest wonder and some alarm. A local poet celebrated thus the completion of the work : — SUNDERLAND BRIDGE Ye Sons of Sunderland, with shouts that rival ocean's roar, Hail Burdon in his iron boots, that strides from shore to shore. O may ye firm support each leg, or much, O much I fear Poor Roland may o'erreach himself in striding cross the Wear. A Patent quickly issue out, lest some more bold than he Should put on larger boots, and stride across the Sea ! Then let us pray for speedy peace, lest Frenchmen should come over, And, following Burden's iron plan, from Calais stride to Dover.* As an engineering feat the building of the Sunderland bridge at the time was rightly re- garded as marvellous, and it still claims our admira- tion as the symbol of the enterprising and pro- gressive spirit that dominated the town. Stockton was once the centre of a corn-growing district, and so fruitful was the land in the neigh- bourhood of Hartlepool that ' Those of the cor- poration affirm that with six weeks' warning they can provide corn for an army, and the like for butter and cheese.' 3 Even as late as 1832 about one-third of the labouring class of Durham were engaged in agriculture, but these things seem incredible as one looks at the intersecting blast furnaces, collieries, engineering works, shipyards, and chemical works that extend in an almost un- broken line from Jarrow, through South Shields, Sunderland, Hartlepool, Stockton, and Clarence, to the mouth of the Tees. IRON AND STEEL The heaps of iron scoriae which still remain scattered over the west of the county of Durham, far distant from any known iron works of modern times, point to the working of iron at a very early date.1 These mounds of slag are, it is true, generally in the neighbourhood of known Roman stations. The iron and steel discovered la The first iron bridge was over the Severn, built in 1779. W. Cunningham, Growth of English Industry and Commerce ; Modern Times, 525. 8 The Bishoprick Garland. Collected by Sir Cuth- bert Sharp, 1834. 3 S.P. Dom. Chas. I, Feb. 1638-9, vol. 4 12, No. 57. at Vinovium may possibly be of local manu- facture ; still, in the absence of the discovery of tools or coins of Roman origin among the slag, it remains an open question whether the ore was worked during the period of the Roman occupation, or not until mediaeval times. The evidence of the Pipe Rolls of Richard I and John disprove Scrivener's statement that the 1 Sir Isaac L. Bell, ' Manufacture of Iron,' Industrial Resources of Tyne, Tees, and Wear, 82 ; W. H. D. Longstaffe, ' Durham before the Conquest,' Proe. Arch. Inst. Newcastle, 1852, p. 72. 278 INDUSTRIES iron of the north of England was rarely worked from the Conquest to the death of John,1 while later records show that a considerable amount of iron was produced during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. The bishops of Durham, however, sent to Spain when in need of iron of superior quality. Little information is extant as to the methods adopted in the early ironworks, whether Roman or mediaeval. Probably the ore was sandwiched between layers of charcoal and placed in tall furnaces, the site being carefully selected on a high hill or in a draughty valley, the wind thus providing a capricious but natural bellows. Two tunnels have been discovered on the side of a hill near Lanchester, thought by Collingwood Bruce to be of Roman origin.1 These tunnels taper from a wide mouth and converge on a point where the furnaces were placed. The mouths were towards the west, from which quarter the wind in that valley principally blows. The happy discovery by Mr. Lapsley among a miscellaneous bundle of Auditors' Records in the Public Record Office of the account roll of John Dalton, the first Durham ironmaster of whose work any accurate account is extant, throws a flood of light on the subject during the fifteenth century. This extremely interesting document gives a detailed and consecutive account of the working of some newly-erected furnaces from 12 June, 1408, to II November, 1409. Up to this date the bishop had apparently put the mineral products of the Palatinate out to farm ; but Bishop Langley tried the experiment of running a forge of his own, and put the venture into the hands of John Dalton. The history of the enterprise subsequent to 1409 is not recorded ; possibly it was unsuccessful ; though the mana- ger seems to have put both energy and foresight into his work, for he visited a neighbouring forge to get an insight into the best methods of working his own. It is impossible to settle with complete certainty the precise site of the new undertaking. ' Byrkeknott preliminary process of smelting, and a ' stryng- harth,' where any impurities that still remained were got rid of, and the iron was heated for its second working by hand into vendible shape — were erected by local workmen under the super- vision of John Dalton.* Probably the furnace discovered and described by Mr. Richardson in 1884 was somewhat of the same nature. It had an internal diameter at its widest part of from five to six feet, contracted at its boshes to about 1 8 inches. Higher up the bank was found a heap of iron ore, where it had probably been placed to be calcined before being put into the furnace. About 30 loads of slag, some birch charcoal, and some lime- stone for flux were found round the furnace, and at the bottom of the furnace were a few small lumps of imperfectly smelted iron. . . . . the water of the burn furnished the power for the blast. The furnace was entirely built and lined with stone, and no bricks were found.' These primitive methods were a slight advance on the very earliest fashion of smelting, for an artificial blast was produced by a bellows, kept in motion by a wheel 7 turned by water from the dammed-up stream. Apparently this was the sole mechanical appliance, for no forge hammer is mentioned among the detailed list of tools given. The staff consisted of the general manager, John Dalton ; a collier, who prepared the char- coal from the brushwood of the neighbouring forest ; a ' blomesmyth ' or ' smythman * in charge of the ' blomeharth,' and a ' faber ' working at the ' stryngharth.' Some additional help must have been required, and from a reference to William Aycle, who undertook a journey to Yorkshire in order to procure workpeople, it may reasonably be conjectured that more hands were employed than are specifically enumerated. The employ- ment of the wives of the foreman and smith lends an air of domesticity to the little settlement. The wife of John Gyll, 'the blomesmyth,' seems to have been a general factotum ; sometimes helping her husband or the labourers, then work- juxta Bedbourne' has disappeared, but pro- ing at the bellows. At first her employment was intermittent and her payment irregular, but later she seems to have settled down to fixed employment at a regular rate of \d. a blome, i.e. a weight of 15 stones of 13 pounds each. bably Mr. Lapsley is right in identifying it with Bedburn Forge, a very small hamlet close to Bedburn Beck, between Hamsterley and Wolsingham. A foundry was carried on there in the early nineteenth century,4 but the buildings are now used as a stocking factory. Any ambiguity there may be about the position of the bishop's forge is amply compensated for by the precise description that is given of the erection of the works. Two furnaces — a 4 blomeharth,' where the ore passed through the 1 H. Scrivener, Hut. of the Iron Trade, 6. ' J. C. Bruce, The Roman Wall, 433-4. • White & Parson, Dir. Narthumb. and Dur. 1828, p. 234. ' R. Dur. Aud. Rec. 5, 149, printed in Eng/. Hist. Rev. xiv, 509-29. • J. C. Hodgson, Hist. ofNorthumb. T!, 161. 7 At the bishop's forge we hear of the making of a 4 water gate ' and a waterwheel and of ' les spowtes lignea ducentia aquam i dicto Watergate usque dictam rotam pendentcm,' but it is doubtful whether water power was always applied for working the bellows, as the wife of the ' blomesmyth ' is not only mentioned as ' folles sufflans,' but also on occasion ' operariis auxi- lians ad le belowes.' 279 A HISTORY OF DURHAM Piece work and specialized employment was the order among the men. The collier was paid id. a load for burning the charcoal, the blome- smyth received 6d. for smelting a blome, the same sum was paid to the faber for working over the iron at the stryngharth, id. a blome was given for cutting the iron into suitable lengths for sale. The output was not great according to modern standards ; but if we consider the primi- tive character of the appliances a weekly produc- tion of 2 tons is considerable. The account roll gives a clear picture of a self-sufficing community, working up materials procured in the immediate neighbourhood to supply the wants of the district, the enterprise being in the hands of local men, living on the scene of their labours, for four houses are men- tioned among the building operations undertaken in connexion with the forge, but having under them workmen from the neighbouring county. How long Bishop Langley continued the experiment is not recorded, but doubtless the iron obtained from the Durham mines, to which we have frequent reference in the fifteenth century, continued to be worked at local forges8 under much the same conditions as at the forge of John Dalton. The fact, however, thai: in 1473 all the ' conyng iryns ' for the bishop's mint had to be supplied by William Omorighe of York, may point to a lack of competent workers in iron in the Palatinate.9 Early in the sixteenth century another change was made in the management of the mineral wealth of the Palatinate. A committee consisting of Robert Chambers, chancellor of Durham, William Senoys, clerk, William Lee, and John Rakes10 was appointed, and two years later a surveyor .of mines was added.11 No change of management made any difference to the prime factor in the retrogression of the iron trade — the scarcity of timber. Elizabeth legislated freely12 to prevent further depredations, with the result that, according to Scrivenor, the ironworks in many parts of the country were stopped entirely, and in other parts materially decreased.13 The immediate effect of this legislation was probably to hinder the development of the Durham iron trade ; but the effect was not permanent, for a piteous picture is drawn by A.L. in 1629, in a ' Relation of Some Abuses against the Common- wealth composed especially for the County of 8 Robert Kirkhous, ' irynbrenner,' in 1430 cove- nants to work certain forges, for which the bishop will furnish suitable ground and iron ore at a fixed rate. Dur. Curs. 37, m. 3 d. 9 Dur. Curs. No. 49, m. 6. 10 Ibid. No. 64, m. 6. 11 Ibid. No. 64, m. 23. " I Eliz. cap. 5 ; 23 Eliz. cap. 5 ; 27 Eliz. cap. 19 ; 28 Eliz. cap. 3, 5. 13 H. Scrivenor, The Inn Trade, 7. Durham,' u of the reckless destruction of timber for smelting purposes. For wee have scarce a Lord or gentleman (entring to his landes) but the first act wch hee doeth (after hee hath called a Court and inhansed his rentes) is to view his woodes, and if it can appeare that eyther the tymber (for building) the underwoods (for iron or lead workes) or the barke (for tanners) will yeild pre- sent money, then the woodes are the first thing wch come to ruine. ... I have often heard that the Spanyards (for the maintayninge of their iron workes) plant six trees for each one wch they cut downe ; but wee (to mainteyne iron workes, lead workes, tillage &c.) for each tree which wee plant cut downe six hundred (I might sale six thousand, for, in these partes, there is no such thing as planting or springing of woodes heard of) the consideracon whereof makes me thinke that such poore Bachellors as myselfe (wch have neither wives nor children) are happy men ; for to what purpose do men marry wives or beget chil- dren ? or how is it likely or possible that those wch succede us shall live, when wee (ourselves) use all meanes to destroie and waist our countries ? and (which is worse above all comparison than the rest) without all sence of sorrow for the same ! . . . There is one man, whose dwelling place is within twenty miles of the cittye of Durham, which hath brought to the grounde (to omitt all underwoodes) above 30,000 oakes in his life tyme, and (if hee live longer) it is to be doubted, that hee will not leave as much tymber or other woode in this whole country as will repaire one of our churches if it should fall, his iron and leade workes do so fast consume the same. The extraordinary paucity of material concern- ing iron-working during the early Restoration period enhances the value of a bill, dated 1664, in the Mickleton MSS.16 It is the account of John Hodgshon, who had charge of the bishop's iron furnace ; the locality is not named ; the first item is a charge for repairs of the furnace, amounting to £41 js. $d. Itm paid by him for the charges of getting Iron Stones and Coales for the blast last Somer and the Founders for casting ye Iron and other charges as Sume 219. 18. 01. 261. 05. 05. On the opposite page 'The Proffetts' are given. There was cast into rough from last somer 43tun. 2hund. 2qr. at 5//. per tunne comes to 215. 15. oo. So that John Hodgshon was out ot puree more then ye rawe Iron was worth ye sume of 045. 10. 05. but he helps to repay himselfe by his having sold 6 tunne and a halfe of rawe Iron at 1 1/ per Tunne, which was cast into smelting hearthes at ye furnice and 3 Tunne drawn into vans wch will reimburce him about 4O// when reed. 11 B.M. Add. MSS 18147, fol. 8, 9. 15 Cosin's Lib. Mickleton MSS. Nos. 91, 29. 280 INDUSTRIES Into this Stock my Lord putt in Money in Iron Stone wch lay upon hunnicke Moore & 7 Tunne of Bullettt and grenades & a ycare Rent for ye furnicc & Ironstone Sume And there is more due to my Lord this present yeere 1664 for 1000 cord of wood which he tooke out of Badbernne Birtley wood and for a yeer Rent of ye furnicc by a new bargaine made with Job Hodgshon the present yere 1664 Sume soe due to my Lord of wch pd by Joh Hodgshon to Edw Arden and acco in his booke of Disbursrnts p. 2420 & due from Jo Hodgshon to be pd at Mart next And more to be pd by him at Pent 1665 which makes ye sume a 50. oo. oo. 20. 00. 00. 28. oo. oo. 02. oo. oo. IOO. OO. OO. 10. 00. 00. 1 60. 00. 00. 050. oo. oo. 055. oo. oo. 055. oo. oo. 160. oo. oo. The civil wars stopped all industrial develop- ment, and under the Commonwealth the pro- sperity of the county of Durham seems to have focussed itself in Sunderland owing to the pronounced Parliamentary bias of that town. The effects of the general outburst of commercial activity which greeted the Restoration, and the prevalent scientific spirit of that period, were not immediately felt in the northern county ; but in 1682 Ambrose Crowley, a well-known and enterprising ironmonger of Greenwich, possibly struck by the absence of foundries where iron was plentiful, chose the rapidly developing town of Sunderland in which to found a branch establishment.1* The building where the enterprise was started still stands in Low Street ; but the people of Sunderland objected to the foreign element among Crowley's work- people, and Crowley had to appeal to the king for protection : — Upon the petition of Ambrose Crowley, Ironmonger of London, praying his Majesty to order that the Cat- hock (tic) and other workmen which he shall employ in the Factory he hath set up in Sunderland in the County of Durham for making Iron ware may a* quietly enjoy their Religion and be not molested as Protestant Strangers or as the English do." The king referred the petition to the attorney- general ; M unfortunately the actual petition has eluded a somewhat prolonged search, but the Privy Council Register gives a summary of the '* J. Cowen, Northern Tribune, i, 25. 17 P.R.O. S.P. Dom. Petitions, Entry Bk. vol. ii, 24. " At the court at Whitehall, 2 July, 1 688. facts brought forward by Ambrose Crowley to support his claim for royal interference : — Upon Reading the Petition of Ambrose Crowley of London Ironmonger setting forth that he hath erected at Sunderland a Factory for making of Ironware, where he employs at present about one hundred men, several of whom came from Liege, and there he de- signes to employ three or four hundred men more in the said Factory, That the Persons already imployed by the Pet' have taught the English workmen there to work better and swifter than formerly and to make such nailes as are used in Holland for sheathing of Shipps wherefor humbly praying that his workmen may not be molested on account of their Religion or otherwise As in the Petition a Copy whereof is hereto annexed is more at large exprest And upon reading a Report of his Majesty's Attorney General! to whom the same was Referred And due consideration had thereof His Majesty in Council! is graciously pleased to order, And it i> hereby Ordered that the Right Reverend Father in God the Lord bishop of Durham do take speedy and effectual care that the Petitioners workmen be protected and quieted in their carrying on the manufacture in the said Petition named, And that his Lordship do signify this his Majestys pleasure to the Justices of the Peace in the neighbourhood where the Petitioners men Reside to the end the same may be observed by them accordingly. At the Court of Whitehall the sixth day of July 1688." But the men of Sunderland gave little heed to royal mandates ; the persecutions continued, and Crowley, actuated partly by this hostile attitude and partly by the fact that a district lying between the rivers Tyne and Derwent, in the immediate neighbourhood of mines of coal and stretches of forest-land, offered him even more facilities for his works than this position at the mouth of the Wear, moved in 1690 toSwalwell and Winlaton. On the banks of the Derwent, in a district of considerable beauty, one of the most inter- esting enterprises of the early eighteenth century centred. A self-made man, probably the original of Addison's Sir John Anvil,80 Crowley's in- domitable energy and appreciation of the im- portance of detail started an industry which gave employment to hundreds, and turned the most deserted part of one (at that time) of the least industrial counties of England into a thriving manufacturing district, the fame of which has left its traces on the local ballads of the time : That day a' Hawks's blacks may rue They gat mony a verra fair clanker-o Can they do ouse wi* Crowley's crew Frev a needle tiv an anchor-o ?" and spread to the Colonies, for William Penn, when he came over to England to consult the best authorities for the development of Penn- sylvania, obtained from Ambrose Crowley 281 "P.C. Reg. 1687-8, fol. 702. 10 Spectator, 12 Feb. 1712. 11 Swalwell Hopping, North country song. 36 A HISTORY OF DURHAM directions as to working the iron of the colony.22 It is said that the last hoes sent to the slave plan- tations in the West Indies, the weight of which roused the indignation of the writer whose description of the works in 1793 appears in the Atkenamm of 1807, were made at Winlaton.23 Crowley continued to live in London, but his frequent visits to the north kept him in touch with both works. In a letter from Winlaton, dated 13 November, 1702, he attributes the success of his enterprise to Sir William Bowes, to whom the letter is addressed : — My business at home is very pressing for me to be at London, but the greatest of my griefs is that I am not in London to show how sensible I am of the great favours I have had from you even to the enabling of me to establish the Iron Manufactory in this country which will be to your immortal glory." The works were carried on at Swalwell, Win- laton, and Winlaton Mill ; the heavy goods, such as anchors, were made at Swalwell, for the river was navigable as far as that point, and as the anchors weighed as much as 70 cwt. or 80 cwt. there was a saving of carriage ; but a great many goods were shipped from Blaydon, for the cost of conveying from Swalwell to Winlaton was is. 5^., from Winlaton to Blaydon only gd. At Swalwell, too, were the forging hammers and slitting mill. The lighter goods were made at Winlaton and Winlaton Mill. A tilt-hammer that excited some astonishment by its rapidity of action, 520 strokes to the minute, was erected at Winlaton Mill.26 All the iron used was brought in bars to the works, much coming from the Baltic, and the most extraordinarily minute direc- tions are laid down in the regulations drawn up by Crowley for the conduct of his works, as to the correct counting of the bars when disem- barked from the keels at Swalwell or Blaydon ; * that thoughtless bruit Thirkeld ' had counted wrongly and caused this new law to be made. The teller must have a clear voice and not be given to idle talking, ' he must cry aloud (I say very loud) ' so that the bystanders could be a check on him.26 Even to the present day the whole district is reminiscent of Crowley. At the mill dam, about a quarter of a mile from Winlaton, ' Sir Ambrose Crowley, 1691, 'is carved in the stone ; the ' Sir ' must be an interpolation, for he was not knighted until 1 706 ; at the works, the bell with its date 1799 recalls the fact that for nearly 200 years, from 1690 to 1860, the Winlaton Mill curfew was rung each evening ; the time- gun which was fired at nine each evening, when " J. M. Swank, Manufacture of Inn in all Ages, 163. 13 ]. Cowen, op. cit. 26. " Letter inserted in beginning of Law Book. 15 Atheneeum, loc. cit. 1807. 16 Law Book of the Crowley Ironworks, Winlaton, Law 30, v. 5, fol. 47^ ; B.M. Add. MSS. 34555. 282 the men began their night shift, is also in existence.87 (PI. Ill, fig. i.) An old brass clock with four cherubs' heads at each corner, used at the Crowley works, still gives the time to the workers at the Winlaton Mill, which goes on under Messrs. Raines, the works having been sold in 1863, after having been carried on under the same name for more than 170 years. The Swalwell factory does not show so many signs of its age ; on different parts of the buildings, where Messrs. Ridley & Co. still carry on the manufacture of steel, various dates, 1713, 1812, 1842, appear, and it is said that a much earlier date is to be seen when the water supply is drawn off. How rapid was the growth of the works in the early days is shown by some facts recorded in the Universal Magazine for August, 1788 : — Before Sir Ambrose settled his people here, the place (Winlaton) consisted of a few deserted cottages, and now contains about 1,500 inhabitants, chiefly smiths. The works carried on in this town are various. The making of nails is the chief branch ; but there is an eye of jealousy on inquiry, and the traveller can reap little information as to the various articles manufac- tured, or quantity produced." A Crowley bill of 1795, for £38 18*. -]d., gives a good idea of the local trade done by the firm.29 Nails of various kinds, flat-heads, sharks, spike, rose and drawd, are the principal items ; but locks of every description, chisels, claw-hammers, trowels, glass-house shovels,screwbolts,Birmingham spades, are included, and miscellaneous items as bread, lime, sand, pantiles, and glue.80 Further par- ticulars of the trade are given in an advertise- ment inserted by Crowley in The Post Boy.31 Mr. Crowley at the Doublet in Thames Street, London, Ironmonger, doth hereby give notice that at his works at Winlaton, near Newcastle upon Tyne, any good workmen that can make the following Goods, shall have constant Imployment, and their wages every week punctually paid, (viz) Augers, Bed- screws, Box and Sad Irons (flat-irons, sad = heavy), Chains, Edge-Tools, Tiles, Hammers, Hinges, Hows for the Plantations, Locks, especially Ho-Locks, Nails, Patten Rings, and almost all other sorts of smiths ware. Later, Crowley's steel had an immense reputa- tion in the mercantile world, the waters of the " I am indebted to the courtesy of Mr. Parker Brewis of Newcastle-upon-Tyne for the photograph. S8 Universal Mag. Aug. 1788, 57. 19 I am indebted to the courtesy of Mr. Mackey of Pudding Chare, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, for the loan of this document, and also for drawing my attention to an article in the Athennum for 1807 concerning Swalwell. 30 Bill of Sir Thomas John Clavering, bart., to Messrs. Crowley, Millington & Co., from 24 Jan. 1795, to 17 Dec. 1796. " The Post Boy, No. 510, 1699. INDUSTRIES Derwent being supposed to be peculiarly adapted for tempering steel. The following document gives an idea of the trade in this commodity : — Sent on board the Anne Ralph Jackson Master by William Johnson Skipper the I5th April 1712 as by shipping bill of this day's date viz. : — 250 Baggs of Nailes 5 Casks 10 Whole Faggots of Steel 6 Half Faggots of ditto 45 Bundles of Hoops 10 Bundles of Rod Steel 20 Whole Bars of Blistered Steel 8 Barn of Iron 172 Bundles of Rod Iron 525 Parcels being 21 tuns.™ The extant Crowley Law Book is the joint work of Sir Ambrose Crowley and his son John, who on the death of his father in 1713 carried on the works on the same lines. This voluminous code of laws and orders, numbering 119, deals with every detail of the workman's life, and lays down the most minute directions for the carrying on of the firm's busi- ness. Possibly Ambrose Crowley had tried his prentice hand on a similar experiment at his works in Thames Street, Greenwich, as two or three allusions arc made to the success which had attended the enactment of a similar rule in the older establishment. The most interesting feature is the arrange- ment by which the workpeople, instead of settling their grievances by an appeal to the law of the land, sought remedy in a local tribunal set up for their benefit by Sir Ambrose Crowley, as he says in the preamble to the law dealing with the court, to prevent which (sundry irregularities), I did frame and it hath been my continual thought to be framing such good wholesome Rules and Orders for them to be governed by as would make them quiet and easy among themselves and a happy and flourishing people among their Neighbours. The better to see such good Rules ordered and observed have thought fit to com- mit the Administration of the same to five persons to be termed Arbitrators that in my absence shall hear and determine all petty differences amongst my work- men and to whom they may appeal in case of any Aggrievance and -to have power to inflict the penalties upon the offenders and disturbers of our peace and Societie as by the said Rules and Laws are pre- scribed." This committee of arbitration consisted of the chaplain, two members appointed by Ambrose Crowley, and two elected by the workpeople, one being chosen from the nailers and the other from the odd waremen. Each workman who had given bond, received a stock of iron and paid to the poor box at Winlaton was allowed a vote. The standard of conduct required from the arbitrators was high, they were disqualified n Law Book of the Crowley Iron Works, Winlaton, fol. 806. * Ibid. Law 49, fol. 84*. 283 by selling strong liquor, behaving badly in church, going there drunk, conniving at the chaplain's letting the seats in church, treating or standing treat, misapplying the poor's money, spending the public money on liquor, except at a funeral, even then their expenditure was limited to gs. They took a stringent oath to hold sacred the standing law and rules of the factory, to foster and rightly administer the fund devoted to the poor. Con- sidering the onerous nature of their duties, their pay was small ; 2d. an hour while they were attending at court or overlooking the workpeople's stock, the last payment being forfeited if they sat down or drank or smoked during their supervi- sion hours.*4 Time was divided into ten weeks, and every Wednesday when the unit was three or eight, the court sat. Both plaintiff and defen- dant paid a nominal fee, id. and id. respectively, to the clerk. There was a right of appeal from the court of arbitration to the council, or a fresh trial was granted, in case either party was dis- satisfied with the verdict, on the payment of a fee of 2s.3* The final court of appeal was Ambrose Crowley himself. John Crowley, in re-enacting this law after his father's death in 1713, says that the reason why the court was first instituted was to avoid the expenses of liti- gation ; evidently the workpeople had been some- what disorderly, for their constant appeals to the magistrates ' had brought an odious character upon the works.' He adds, too, that the proceedings were instituted at the request of the governors of the poor, the committee of grievances, and in the name and behalf of the whole society. The juris- diction of the court was restricted ; in case of treason, murder, felony, or any other heinous crime, the criminal was prosecuted in the ordinary law courts, the prosecution being instituted by Crow- ley himself, and the cost defrayed out of the poor's stock.36 The court sat first at Winlaton, but in 1816 it was moved to Swalwell." The Court Book of the Arbitrators, covering the period from 1806 to 1846, is still extant, and the record of the proceedings of one court throws light on the nature of the cases brought forward : M Wednesday Evening March I ith, 1807. Account 53*9- present T. Litchfield T. Hall A. Hall W. Bennett J. Hirst W. Belt R. Rutter A. Belt T. Hall B. Jameson J. Rowell Law No. 1 6 was read. Benjamin Summcrland requests the loan of 5/- Granted. 14 Ibid. Law 40, verses iz-38,fols. 854, 85^. u Ibid. Order 50, verses 3-9, fol. 87. * Ibid. Law 53, Preamble, fol. 90^. " Crowley MS. Newcastle-upon-Tyne Free Library, 24 July, 1816, Account 16818. '" Crowley MS. Newcastle-upon-Tyne Free Library. A HISTORY OF DURHAM Joseph Greenfield being very infirm and unable to do work humbly requests the superannuation allowance. 4/6 per week granted. Robert Haddrick requests Joseph Greenfield's shop in the Square. Granted. Robert Siddoway's Note requests a shop in the Square. Rejected, the shop not being suitable. Joseph Wright requests a stock of his own. Desired to produce his Register. John Oliver requests to be superannuated. Granted to have y/- a week. John Ayre being 63 years old. A report being pre- valent that he is going to marry a foreigner It is ordered that in the event of his superannuation this Committee consider nothing for this wife or in the event of his Death the widow so left will not be intitled to relief from the Poor Box. Women frequently figure in the court : — Mary Wright is reprimanded for not cleaning the chapel thoroughly ; 39 Margaret Ayre was put into the court for scandal, and the arbitrators agreed that in all such cases the defendant, although a widow, must pay the court's charges ; 40 Mary Brew- house requests that her son may be bound to patten-ring making.41 Heavy fines were exacted from any transgressing the laws which affected the successful working of the mill. Thomas Evans', John Evans', and William Evans' stock having been found incorrect, on being weighed by the Governors They are judged guilty of borrow- ing and lending contrary* to Law 51 verse 10 and z. They are therefore ordered to be mulcted 8/- per verse 5, to be collected by 6d. per week for the Benefit of Winlaton Poor." Contracts between those workmen who em- ployed hammermen were also drawn up in this court, 1 5*. being the usual weekly wage.43 But the principle of popular government does not always work smoothly; in 1704, Sir Am- brose Crowley was forced to dismiss the com- mittee of aggrievances and gives his reasons for his action in an order which throws considerable light on the founder's requirements in his co- workers : — And I do appoint to chuse six new Committee men and do order that you see they be chosen in a fair way and not such that by their evil practices are not Qualli- fied ; and that the odd Waremen choose 3 and the Nailers 3 and recomend to them to chuse Men of good principle of a Quiet and sober temper to such I shall \ always give a due regard to what they write, and my workmen will find all matters of agrievance redressed, but if they chuse men of Turbulent spirits that will set forth Agrievances and there is none, its but reason- able to think that it will much lesson their complaints of ;eal Agrievances and quite overthro my good designe to have all my People's Agrievances fairly laid before 89 Growl eyMS. Newcastle-upon-Tyne Free Library, 18 March, 1807, Account 6330. 40 Ibid. 10 Feb. 1813, Account 6638. 41 Ibid. 6 Jan. 1808, Account 6372. ** Ibid. 1 8 Oct. 1809, Account 6465. 48 Ibid; 24 Dec. 1814. me, and then I will never be wanting to do them jus- tice. I would have you consider the Trust you have taken upon you, its no less than to hear all my peoples Agrievances and to lay them before me, without Favour or affection, Illwill or hatred, you must not be afraid to write against any of my clerks if they in any way abuse my people or do not in all Lawfull Hours give their attendance and duly dispatch every Reckoner and chearfully in their due course. I also recommend to you to use your best Indeavours to keep my people Quiet and Peaceable and show them a good example and shun the pernicious advice of that base and wicked fellow Za Goodwin, who always was the promoter of Villany and the overthrow of all that was good. I also recommend to you when you see any of my People, agrieved that you complain first to the Council, if they do not relieve you then write to me.44 But the power of general supervision of the mills, whether at Winlaton or Swalwell, was vested in a grand council, which sat at Swalwell, and held weekly meetings. Their business was to hear and Determine all Requests complaints or appeals of workmen with true regard for my orders favouring the just and careful and in no respect to en- courage the persons who are guilty of the breach of Law 48, particularly verse 2 and order 57. The utmost care was taken that the meetings should be decorous. Swearing, cursing, giving any man the lie, challenging anyone, using pro- voking language, interrupting, talking of any thing foreign to the subject, were finable offences, 'every joke or jest' cost the perpetrator id. ; as a rule the fines went to the fund for the poor, but the fines for misbehaviour at council meet- ings were divided equally among the other mem- bers of the council.46 In order to prevent waste of time by too frequent applications to the council at Swalwell, a committee was appointed by the head of the firm to manage the Winlaton mill. They met each day, read the letters, settled the business of the day ; all matters were decided by the votes of the Committee ; in case of equality of voting the member of the committee, who was also a member of the council, had the casting vote. All action taken by the committee was to be laid before the council at Swalwell, who had a sus- pensive power, until the views of the head of the firm could be ascertained.46 Any workman could be suspended by the action of the governors, the council, the committee of survey, or the committee of aggrievances, but a minute of the proceedings had to be sent to Crowley to be endorsed or countermanded.47 The system of payment was somewhat com- plicated. A newcomer had to enter into a bond for a considerable amount before the tools and materials necessary for his work were advanced 44 Council Direction, E.N. verse 1115, 26 Dec. 1 704 ; apparently copied from another MS. 45 Law Book, Law 83, verse 3, fol. 130. 46 Ibid. Law 44, verses 7-18, fols. 754, 75^. " Ibid. Law 53, verse 20, fol. t,\a. 284 INDUSTRIES to him.4* The regular master-worker when his stock was getting low went to the ironkeeper, who gave him the requested amount of iron and entered it to him at a fixed rate of 22s. per i6olb. ;4' this he took to his shop, where, with the help of hammermen to whom he paid 1 51. a week, or apprentices to whom he paid ios., he made it into the articles that, by application to the overseer, he knew were required. He then re- turned to the surveyor, who, after examining the goods, weighed them, allowing a certain percen- tage for waste in making up, counted them, and then deducted the price of the iron. The final payment after all deductions, the price of the material, the assessment for the poor, and any fines the men had to pay, was called ' the gets.' * Of course it was impossible that payment by piece should be made in all cases, and the domestic system by which the master-worker did the work in his own shop, assisted by his own family, work- people, and apprentices, was superseded in some cases by a system more akin to the present factory system. But the shops in the square, that is the shops erected by Crowley himself for his work- people, were always in great request, in spite of the fact that the tenants had to lead a life corre- sponding in many ways to the English collegiate life of the present day. The square was in charge of a warden, whose duty it was to ring the bell for beginning work at five in the morning, three hours later he rang the second bell for breakfast, for which meal half an hour was allowed ; twelve was the dinner hour, but work began again at one, and continued until eight.61 The utmost vigil- ance was used with regard to the square ; on Sundays every one was compelled to come in by nine at night, and before ten on weekdays, and no Hawkers, tinkers, pedlers, or any such like suspected, pilfering people, nor any suspicious persons with great Coats or Cloaks or any Woman with Hoods on or Coats tucked up were allowed there.63 Drunken people were to be driven out unless they lived in the square, in which case they were to be persuaded to go to their own homes. The warden was warned to prevent from coming within the boundaries those who make any disturbance or do any injury or throw Coals Stones Snowballs or anything else or shall fight quarrel or abuse anyone in any place whatsoever or shall use scurrilous language against me or any of my officers or by blowing of a horn or other ways raise a Tumult or Mobb ; betting within the square or boundaries above the value of 2d. in three hours' space was fined. Children breaking any of the regulations were either to be whipped by their parents or their 48 Law Book, Law 17, verse 3, fol. 41 b. 4> Ibid. Law 88, verse I, fol. 135^. 40 Cf. R. O. Heslop, Norlhumb. Words. 41 Law Book, Law 40, verse 23, fol. 674. ** Ibid. Law 40, verse 24, fol. 6jb. 285 parents were to pay the fine ; a fine of 2d. was inflicted for cursing.5* Some of the methods adopted to keep up a high standard of morality are open to objection. The treasurer was to make his chief concern 'to Pry and Enquire' into the conduct of the clerks and report if they were extravagant, too fond of change and pleasure, especially if they often went to Newcastle, ' which hath been the mine of several.' Intercourse with women ' under a light charac- ter ' is explicitly forbidden ; even if the suspected people ' have as much sanctity as John Walford and Mrs. Junning,' they are to be kept under supervision.64 Smoking was forbidden as being the occasion of ' much time spent, but little business done," for the first offence the fine was id., for others 2 and Hermon Mohll was seized and put in Morpeth Gaol. Henry Villiers, J.P. for Northumberland, at once communicated with the Secretary of State, who replied from Whitehall that the arms must be detained until some satisfactory explanation could be given. Henry Hooper, sword-blade maker of Shotley Bridge, and Thomas Cornforth, cutler of Newcastle, both gave testimony as to Mobil's respectability ; the former had worked with him for about fifteen years for the Sword Blade Company at Shotley Bridge. The Sessions Records do not refer again to the matter ; 81 how long Mohll was detained is not known, but he was buried in 1716 near Shotley Bridge, and 80 Land. Gaz. Aug. 25-28, 1690. I am indebted to Mr. W. W. Tomlinson, of Monkseaton, for drawing my attention to this advertisement and for a transcrip- tion of the Morpeth Sessions Records. 91 Morpeth Sessions, Dec. 1703. 288 INDUSTRIES another of the family ten years later.83 The precise time when the sword factory passed from the company into the sole proprietorship of Robert Oley is uncertain, but within the last few years a great deal of the property in Shotley Bridge belonged to descendants of the Oleys. Many houses still possess steels and knives bearing the name, and a curious horn with very elaborate keys of ironwork said to have been in their possession is still to be seen. A German inscrip- tion with the date 1691 is legible on a stone over the door of a house in close proximity to where the first sword factory stood : — DCS Herren scgen machet Reich ohn alle Sorg wan du zughleich in deinem stand Treuw und Fleisig Bist und duest was Du Befohlcn ist. 1691. Another and more interesting inscription has now completely disappeared : — Deutschland . die Sudt Ge . .... Eingan. . ver vatterland s . Heer Beht . . sc und Possibly the completed inscription was : — Deutschland ist unsuer Vatterland Soligen ist die Stadt Gehasset Der Herr bchlltc deinen Ausgang und Eingang." It is futile to speculate whether the German sword-makers came on their own initiative or were driven here by religious persecution or came at the request of some company, who knew that the waters of the Derwent were admirably adapted to temper steel, and that the proximity of coal and iron rendered the situation ideal for that particular industry, though the most authentic evidence supports the last theory, but the whole neighbourhood bears witness to their presence. The house where William Oley lived, with its inscription, CUTLERS HALL W ° A 1787 still stands, though now divided into two houses ; a cottage now occupies the site of the first mill, but some distance from Shotley Bridge, about 300 yards below Allansford Bridge, a little higher than the farm-house, there are some interesting remains of a hexagonal furnace, the bricks show- ing signs of extreme heat, and the slag in the immediate neighbourhood proving that iron was smelted there. A little higher than the furnace some faint traces of a calcining kiln may be seen, though the remains are not so evident as when Mr. Lax wrote his historical poems, the notes to which contain much interesting tradition " Ebchester Reg. 6 Dec. 1716 ; 28 Jan. 1726. * Surtees, Hist. o/Dur. ii, 287, 294. Surtecs asserts that they were driven from their country by religious persecution, but I have found no evidence to support this theory. 289 concerning Mohlls, Oleys, Vooz, and Bertrams.84 In the Delves colliery many indications of the old method of working coal are to be seen ; tradition points to the Germans as working both coal and ironstone, and some probability is lent to this by the absence of any information that can account for the subsidence in any other way. Nothing is known of any other workers in the immediate neighbourhood. The Oleys were the sword-makers, the Moles — for Mohll soon became corrupted into Mole — ground the swords ; tradi- tion says that the Vooz managed the trade with Germany, for blades were often imported and fitted with hilts at Shotley Bridge. At one time there must have been a great output of these weapons, but it is difficult to find one now ; an excellent specimen, however, is preserved in the Black Gate Museum, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, for a description of which I am indebted to Mr. Parker Brewis : — SHOTLEY BRIDGE SWORD AT THE BLACK GATE MUSEUM, NEWCASTLE-UPON-TVNB This sword weighs I Ib. 1 2 oz. and is 3 ft. and £ in. long over all. The Blade is two-edged, and 30} in. in length and i Jin. broad at its base, tapering to fin. at i in. from the point. It is of Vesica section and slightly fluted in the forte, having one shallow central groove (probably this central groove accounts for the term hollow being applied to these swords *), 5$in. long on each side, in one of these is the word 'SHOTLEY' and in the other ' BRIDGE,' and beyond the groove on either side is the running FOX, or wolf, mark, having the feet to the same edge as the tops of the letters. (PI. I, figs. I and 2.). Inscriptions on sword blades read from hilt to point, but when so viewed the Fox mark is almost always upside down. This may be accounted for by the fact that it was originally in the nature of an assaye mark, and was not then put on by the maker of the blade, but by the Guild in the market place. It was granted by the Archduke Albert in 1349 to the Armourers' Guild at Passau, a Bavarian town on the Danube, but by the fifteenth century it had become a very common mark on the swords made at Solingen. These blades were imported into England in such quantities that the common name for a sword was ' Fox,' thus Shakespeare says ' Thou diest on point of fox,' King Henry V, and in Webster's White Devil ' O what blade is't r A Toledo, or an English Fox ? ' &c. Perhaps the occurrence of this mark on the Shotley Bridge swords may be accounted for by the German origin of their makers. The Fox mark is also very common on Ferrara blades. The Hilt is of brass, and appears to be contemporary with the blade ; it consists of counter curved quillon prolonged forward into a knuckle-bow, from cither side of which springs a counter guard which coalesces with a shell guard on either side of the quillon. These two shells arc also of cast brass, and arc ornamented 84 I am indebted to Mr. C. F. Scott for showing me these furnaces and also for much information concern- ing the subject. ** Sessions Record, Jan. 1703. 37 A HISTORY OF DURHAM on both sides in relief. (PI. I, fig. 3> which is rather larger than full size.) The pommel is spherical and ijin. in diameter. There is a hole into which the knuckle-bow appears to have entered, but it is now filled up with lead, and a new one made nearer to the grip. In 1828, the manufacture of sword-blades was still carried on at Shotley Bridge by Mr. Christo- pher Oley, a direct descendant of the first German sword-blade maker.86 It is interesting to note that Thomas Bewick, in his autobiography, tells us that his first employ- ment was to etch sword-blades for William and Nicholas Oley, sword manufacturers at Shotley Bridge.87 But by 1832 the district had lost much of its industrial glory : — The iron works at Winlaton Mill were formerly of great extent, and the several paper mills, steel forges, and other manufacturing establishments in the Vale, evince how well this part of the country is adapted for such purposes. But cutlery at Shotley Bridge is almost forgotten ; Winlaton Mill is comparatively a deserted village.88 The Bertrams, another family of German settlers, worked the Blackball steel mills.89 The ruins of the mill still remain, and a curious old sun-dial of German type is built into one of the walls ; further up the Derwent, on the opposite side at Derwentcote, there is another old steel mill ; both these mills were in the hands of Isaac Cookson early in the nineteenth century,90 but there is no evidence that the Bertrams were ever at Derwentcote. There were very few industrial enterprises of the later eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries in Durham with which the name of Cookson was not connected. The first blast furnace with coked coal in the north of England was erected by Mr. I. Cookson, on Chester burn, at Whitehill.91 The foundry was begun early in the eighteenth century.92 Some indentures re- 8'! White and Parson, op. cit. ii, 174. In a letter from William Bell to Robert Surtees written 2 1 June, 1812, there is a reference to these swords. ' Last week I met with a fine sword made by the Ouleys of Shotley Bridge, which has the figure of William and Mary on the blade with "Shotley Bridge 1697," you no doubt have seen such.' 87 A. Dobson, Memoirs of Thomas Bewick, 57-8. 88 T. Sopwith (Surveyor), Observations to accompany a Map of the Vale ofDenvent, 1832. 19 Arch. Ael. xxiii, 128. 90 White and Parson, op. cit. ii, 185. Mr. N. C. Cookson tells me that when he was called upon to wind up the business, between twenty and thirty years ago, he found a mere handful of men, but the steel they produced was of extraordinary excellence, and the workers were all between sixty and seventy. 91 ' Manufacture of Iron,' Industrial 'Resources of 'Tyne, Tees, ana" Wear, 84. M Mr. N. C. Cookson thinks that the blast fur- naces at Whitehill were started about 1704. cited in a deed of 1760 throw considerable light on some of the Durham foundries working at that time : — also that by indenture dated 25 March 7 George I, between William Cotesworth late of Gateshead Park and the said Isaac Cookson and Joseph Button, the two latter were entitled to the two houses lately built for a founding house for casting iron wares near the East end of the Quay or staith called Old Trunk Staith at Gateshead, for the residue of a lease. It is wit- nessed that the parties thereunto should be partners in the art trade or mystery of carrying on iron foundries at ... and Gateshead for 31 years from I September 1729, and that the capital should be 4800^ of which Joseph Button contributed 900^ And whereas Joseph Button died, leaving John Button executor, and the said John Button is dead also, leaving Gabriel Hall and John Cookson executors ; And whereas John Button and the other parties agreed for a 31 years lease of ground near Whitehill, co : Durham, and have built a blast furnace etc. there, and the said John Button at his death and his co- partners were entitled to a freehold estate, mill and colliery near Clifton, 4/5 of an iron foundry and several messuages in Pipewellgate, and freehold pre- mises in Clifton, Gateshead, Whitehill, and Newcastle. And whereas Gabriel Hall and John Cookson are entitled as devisees and executors of the said John Button to one sixteenth part or share of the said four- fifths of the premises in Pipewellgate and the same of all the other premises and profits, and have agreed to sell the said shares to the said John Williams for 8 lo£. Now this indenture witnesseth etc.9* Witnesses : JOHN WIDDRINGTON NAT PUNSHON. The Whitehill furnace was 35 ft. high, 12 ft. across the boshes, and produced 25 tons of iron per week. The blast was supplied by bellows worked by a water-wheel placed on Chester burn, but the poor supply of water led to the furnace being abandoned. The iron ore came from Robin Hood's Bay as well as from the immediate neighbourhood, and at one time the Government got most of their ordnance from the forge at Whitehill. There still lives an old inhabitant of the ' Furnance,' as the row of cot- tages close to the site of the works is called, who can describe the situation of the different parts of the works, having got his information from his grandfather, who worked at the ordnance fac- tory, and he asserts that the bank on the opposite side of the burn, which rises to a considerable height, is studded with cannon balls, for the cast-iron guns made there were tested by the balls being projected across the river. A tra- dition is still current that Cookson wealth owes its origin to their command of capital, which enabled them to fulfil their contracts and take payment in government stock, which at the period of their greatest activity during the Napo- leonic wars was very low, and to make colossal profits by realizing when consols rose after the 58 From a copy of the original deed, kindly lent me by Mr. Richard Welford, Gosforth. 290 FIG. I. — BLADE FIG. 2. — BLADI FIG. 3. — HILT PLATE I : DETAILS OF SHOTLEY BRIDGE SWORD INDUSTRIES conclusion of peace.*4 But the firm did not restrict itself to the manufacture of warlike im- plements, for in 1813 the churchwardens paid to Messrs. Cookson for the iron chest j£io 101.** But Cookson's was not the only iron foundry near Chester-le-Street, for in the first half of the nineteenth century W. and J. Murray of Chester- le-Street were the most noted engineering firm of the county.** The change that had been wrought by Ambrose Crowley in the early eighteenth century in the neighbourhood of the Derwent was to be re- peated on a much more gigantic scale not far from the scene of the first experiment. In 1839, John Nicholson, a cartwright by trade, but a somewhat speculative man by nature, discovered ironstone on the blue heaps at Consett (the present site of part of the public park). He took a specimen to Jonathan Richardson, mana- ger of the Northumberland and Durham District Bank, who in his turn submitted the specimen to the Quaker managers of the Bishopwear- mouth Iron Works. They at once agreed to take up the enterprise, and in 1840 the works were started under the name of the Derwent Iron Company, with Jonathan Richardson as managing director." In 1857 the stoppage of the District Bank caused a crisis in the affairs of the company, for nearly a million was owing to the bank. Some of the shareholders of the bank formed themselves into a company registered under a new name, the Derwent and Consett Iron Com- pany, Limited ; but the new company were not able to complete the purchase, and the works came again into the market. They were pur- chased by the present Consett Iron Company in 1 864. The transaction was a large one ; eighteen blast furnaces, with puddling forges, plate, angle, and bar mills, producing 80,000 tons of pig iron, and from 40,000 to 50,000 tons of finished iron were purchased. Five hundred acres of free- hold land, 1,000 cottages, and coal royalties were included. Mr. Jonathan Priestman was appointed managing director,98 and the company was reconstituted by him, with Mr. Dale, later Sir David Dale, as adviser. On his resignation in 1869, Mr. Dale, who had throughout acted as his chief adviser, succeeded to his post, and in 1884 become chairman. But many changes have taken place in the works since the inauguration of the new com- pany. When Mr. Dale took over the manage- ment in 1869, the firm had practically con- ** From information given by Mr. N. C. Cookson of Oakwood, Wylam. " Rev. Canon Blunt. A Thousand Years of the Church in Cheiter-le-Street. Extract from church- wardens' accounts. M White and Parson, op. cit. i, 236. " I am indebted to Mr. C. F. Scott of Lcadgate for these details. " W. Jenkins, Description of the Coniett Inn Works, \ 2 . centrated on the manufacture of iron rails and plates ; taking the home, colonial, and foreign trade about the year 1876, the output for rails alone sometimes touched a weekly maximum of 2,000 tons. The substitution of steel rails for iron about this time reduced the output at Con- sett fully one-third. Fortunately, however, the increased demand for iron plates for shipbuilding neutralized the effect of this change ; they con- centrated on iron plates, the rail mill was aban- doned, and by 1882 frequently nearly 2,000 tons of iron ship-plates were turned out each week. Another change was imminent in 1882, for steel plates made by the Siemens-Martin process were being rapidly substituted for iron plates. To meet this new demand the company had by 1883 erected two small Siemens furnaces, a steam hammer, and an additional Siemens fur- nace for heating the ingots. Before long eight furnaces had been built, cogging substituted for hammering, and a 2O-ton melting furnace for the Siemens gas-heating furnace. Exclusive of collieries and coke ovens, the Consett Iron Works consist of seven (an eighth is being built) blast furnaces. Each furnace has seven tuyeres and three Cowper stoves, is 55 ft. high, is fed with imported Spanish and other ores by means of a bell and hopper, with standard beam hydraulic brake. The average weekly pro- duction of each furnace is 700 tons. The hema- tite ore comes from Bilbao, in which mines the company have a large share, and the limestone comes from the company's own quarries at Stan- hope. The temperature of the blast when it enters the furnace is 1,200 deg. Fahr., the pressure 5 Ib. per square inch. There are two melting shops for supplying ingots for the manufacture of steel plates, twenty furnaces with a total capacity of more than 500 tons, and producing about 4,200 tons of ingots per week. There are four plate mills with twenty-five boilers, all driven by high-pressure, direct-acting, non-condensing fly-wheel engines, each having one stand of pinions, one stand of roughing, and one stand of finishing rolls ; in addition, No. 3 has one stand of chequering rolls, 5 ft. 6 in. by 25 in. No. i and No. 3 have steam lifts with slab-raising capacity of about 25 cwt., No. 4 is a 28-inch clutch reverse mill, with a weekly output of 1,250 tons of steel plates. It has also an over- head 15-ton steam travelling crane running upon steel-built girders. All the mills have plate and scrap-shearing machines conveniently placed for their use. The total maximum output from the four plate mills is 3,000 tons of plates per week. There are three angle mills : there is a 32-inch, a 22-inch, and a 12-inch angle mill, the total capacity of the three mills being about 2,000 tons of finished material per week. Two over- head cranes with boiler attached run the whole length of the three angle mills. At the south end of the mills is a bar bank. The loading is 291 A HISTORY OF DURHAM done by two 3-ton steam travelling cranes, having 3O-foot jibs ; eighteen boilers arranged in pairs and working through nine brick-lined iron chim- neys are attached to these mills. The ingots for the angle mills are supplied from the seven Siemens-Martin melting furnaces immediately adjoining with a producing capacity of nearly 2,000 tons a week. The 45-inch cogging mill is opposite the melting furnaces, so that little heat is lost in transmitting the ingots from the melting furnaces to cogging heating furnaces, which are served by a steam derrick locomotive crane. Directly in front of the cogging mill, but at a distance of 75 ft., is an enormous bloom shear, connected with the 32-inch and 22-inch angle mills, which are 1 25 ft. distant, by live roller gear. The live roller gear also leads to the scrap- cutting billet shears and steam circular sawing machines, the latter being of vertical type worked by hydraulic force. The new angle mill plant was designed by the company's mill engineer, Mr. James Scott. In connexion with the plate mills there is also a 28-inch cogging mill, capable of dealing with 1,650 tons of ingots per week, and a 45-inch mill ; in a line with the latter is placed a large bloom shear, driven by high-pressure reversing engines. This mill is capable of cogging 2,600 tons of ingots per week. Eleven collieries, 1,050 coke ovens, a foundry at Crookhall, brick works about half a mile from the iron and steel works, and numerous engineer- ing shops, supply material or repair the wear and tear of the works. Practically the whole world is their market ; but a small pamphlet bound in bright yellow linen, illustrated with diagrams and containing the price list of the Consett Works in Japanese, which the firm have thought necessary to have drawn up, testifies to the activity of their Japanese trade." The Weardale Iron and Coal Company was started by Charles Attwood, financed by Baring Brothers, who purchased a small furnace at Stanhope, where the first pig iron from Weardale ironstone was smelted ; the old furnace is still to be seen there. In 1845 five blast furnaces were built at Tow Law, within a few miles of Stanhope. It was not, however, until 1853 that the Tudhoe iron works were begun in order to deal with the pig iron manufactured at Tow Law. Two forges and two mills were soon so fully occupied that two years later it was necessary to add two more, and the works developed so rapidly that they soon covered 60 acres of ground. In 1861 the Bessemer process of making steel was begun, Tudhoe being one of the first places 99 I am indebted to Mr. George, of the Consett Iron Works, for much of the above information ; W. Jenkins, op. cit. ; Excerpt Minutes of Proceedings of the Institute of Mechanical Engineers at Newcastle, 1885. where it was installed. The plant was laid down under the direct supervision of the inventor himself. In 1870 two blast furnaces were built at Tud- hoe and exclusively devoted to smelting Cleveland ore. Gradually, however, steel was substituted for iron. In 1899 a complete change took place in the history of the work, up to this date the company had consisted practically of the Baring family, but in October, 1899, the private com- pany became a limited liability company, with nine directors, of whom Sir Christopher Furness was chairman. Inclusive of their coal and coke works, the company pays £1,000 a day in wages. The South Durham Steel and Iron Company, of which Sir Christopher Furness is chairman, was formed by the amalgamation of three com- panies : the Stockton Malleable Iron Company, the Moor Steel and Iron Company, and the West Hartlepool Steel and Iron Company. The Malleable works at Stockton are the largest ; they cover 90 acres, and the plant consists of 8 Siemens furnaces, I cogging mill, 3 plate mills, I sheet mill, 32 puddling furnaces, I angle mill, I pack- ing mill, i guide mill. Two furnaces for the Talbot process of steel manufacture are being added. These works have the enormous advan- tage of a river frontage on the Tees and a wharf of their own. The smallest of the works, those at West Hartlepool, which only cover 22 acres, are adjacent to the North Eastern Railway, and are able to secure pig iron from the neigh- bouring blast furnaces. Two furnaces for the Talbot process are to be installed here also. The Moor works, also at Stockton-on-Tees, cover almost twice the ground covered by the West Hartlepool Works ; the shops for making and repairing the electric motors for both the South Durham and the Cargo Fleet _( Yorkshire) Companies are there. At the meeting of share- holders in 1906 the chairman reported that the output from the three works reached almost 8,000 tons of finished material, the weekly wage bill was about £8,000. During the last nine months they had paid £37,845 in railway carriage and dock dues. At none of these works is the raw material manufactured ; this fact places them at a disadvantage as regard the Consett and Wear- dale Works. There is an allusion to an ironfounder in Darlington as early as ijg8.lM In 1807 Edward Carlton was bound to Messrs. Ridsdale and Porter, forgers, makers and grinders of Heckle- pins, Darlington, for seven years.101 During the first half of the nineteenth century a number of small foundries were at work. In 1827 two iron merchants, John Botcherley, Union Row, and Wass Bright, Grange Row, and three iron and brass founders, one in Commercial Street, one in the Market Place, and one in the Horse Market, 100 Reg. of the Church of St. Cuthbert, Darlington. 101 Parish Apprentice Reg., Hurworth. 292 INDUSTRIES were at work in Darlington.10* From one of these small foundries, started some fifty years ago, the Darlington Forge has developed. At one time Sir Thomas Bouch, the engineer of the fatal Tay Bridge, was connected with the works. In the early days they were chiefly employed in supplying the needs of the North Eastern Rail- way, but now their chief work is marine forgings and castings. The stupendous size of some of these emphasizes the growth in the dimensions, during the last few years, of the liners for which they are made. The castings for the two Cunarders, the Mauritania and the Lusitania were made by this firm during the current year (1906). They are the heaviest and most complicated castings of this type hitherto produced. The total weight of stern frame, rudder, and brackets for each ship is 223$ tons.10* Gun tubes for the Government are also made here, and the propeller shafts for H.M.S. Defence, 76 ft. long, 23 £ in. external diameter, were supplied by this firm. The Weardale Iron Company have also exten- sive wagon and engineering works in Darlington. The St. Bede Works at Tyne Dock were opened in April, 1900, by the Fownes Forge and Engineering Company. Possibly the success of the enterprise owes something to the position of the works, for they are situated between Scuth Shields and Jarrow, abutting on Jarrow Slake, the dreariest district in the whole of England, but in the very centre of industrial activity. The works were enlarged in 1902 according to the design of Mr. Henry Fownes, managing director, whose experience has been gained on the Mersey, the Clyde, and as manager of the Ouseburn Forge on the Tyne. A huge hydraulic forging press capable of crushing ingots of 40 tons weight is a marked feature of the works, but the extent to which hydraulic power is utilized is also remarkable. The great marine engineering firm of Messrs. • Richardsons, Westgarth & Co. is situated on the west side of the harbour at Hartlepool. This business was founded about 1842 at Castle Eden by Mr. Richardson. It was transferred to Hartlepool in 1847, and carried on under the name of T. Richardson & Sons. In 1894 the business became a private company, and in 1 900 an amalgamation was arranged between Sir C. Furness, Westgarth & Co. of Middlesbrough and William Allan & Sons of Sunderland, the new company being called Richardsons, Westgarth & Co. ; originally builders of locomotives and stationary engines, since 1854 they have specialized on marine engines and boilers. THE CHEMICAL WORKS1 Rock salt was discovered in the county of Durham about 1 859, but it was not until 1885 that a company was started for utilizing the discovery. It was, however, rather the revival of an old trade than the beginning of a new industry, for as early as 1290 there is an allusion to the working of salt at Hart. This reference is found in a grant '* by Robert de Brus, lord of Annandale, grandfather of Robert Bruce, king of Scotland, to Sir John de Rumundebi of a salt-pan in the territory of Hart, formerly held by Adam the Miller, at the rental of a pair of white gloves or a penny at Easter. The date is not given, but from intrinsic evidence it must have been previous to the passing of Quia Emptores in 1290. But even in the fourteenth century Cowpen was the centre of the salt industry ; a list of salt-pan holders for 1 396 is given with the rent paid in kind.* The Halmote Court Rolls * and the Durham Account Rolls4 give many interesting details of '"White and Parson, op. cit. i, 249. "* ' Darlington Forge Works,' by Thomas Putnam, managing director, Syren and Shipping, Mar. 1906. 1 It is difficult for me to acknowledge adequately t'le help I have had in this lection from Canon Greenwell and Mr. Bayley of Durham, and Mr. Craster of All Souls College, Oxford. the Cowpen salt trade ; in 1330, 35 quarters of salt were bought at different prices, but the total cost was £5 7*. 6d. It is somewhat difficult to get a precise idea of the manner in which these early salt-pans were worked, but an account is preserved of the working of the pans a few miles from Cowpen, at Coatham, and probably the same method was followed in both places. And as the Tyde comes in, yt bringeth a small wash sea-cole which is imployed to the makinge of salte, and the Fuell of the poore fisher Townes adjoininge : the oylie sulphurousness beinge mixed with the Salte of the Sea as yt floweth, and conse- quently hard to take fyre, or to keepe in longe with- out quenchinge, they have a Meanes, by makinge small vaults to passe under the hearthes, into which by fore-setting the wynde with a board, they force yt to enter, and soe to serve insteede of a payre of bellowcs, which they call in a proper worde of Art, a Blowccole.* ''The grant is in the possession of Mr. William Brown of the Old House, Sowerby, Think. It was printed in the Prof. Sor. Antij. (New Ser.), iv, 211. 'Dur. Trcas. Rentale Bursarii, 1396. *Dur. Hal. R. (Surtecs Soc. Ixxxii). 4 Dur. Hal. R. 1330; Dur. Treas. MSS. ; Dur. Acct. R. (Surtees Soc. xcix-ciii). 'B.M. Cott. MS. Julius, F. vi, 185, fol. 455. 293 A HISTORY OF DURHAM The salt was extracted by perpetual boiling and reboiling of sea water ; at Ross in Northumber- land the salt water was first exposed to the heat of the sun for some time, and then salt could be extracted by one boiling of twelve hours, but in Durham the usual plan was to apply artificial heat at once, and this often necessitated eight different boilings before salt could be obtained.6 Until within the last few years distinct traces of salt-pans having been worked were to be seen at Seaton Carew near the present golf links ; the inquisitions post mortem and Chancery enrolments furnish a complete history of these for more than a century. In 1381 a salt-pan was in the possession of Robert Lumley,7 but Avisia, widow of Thomas Elmeden, in 1425 inherited estates round the Tees, the passage of the river, ' una salina edificata et una salina et quarta pars unius saline,' also rents issuing out of divers lands and tenements and out of a salt-pan with the ominous name of make-beggar ' ('de una salina vasta vocata Makebegger 8); later, Thomas de Carrowe owned four salt-pans there.9 During the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries ' salt de Gretham ' had more than a local celebrity,10 but the award of 1650 states that the salt-cotes were long since washed away or rendered useless by the tides of the sea. One of the branches of the Salters' Track, an old road running south- wards from Wearmouth, which got its name from the fact that it was constantly used by the salt pedlars, leads to Greatham.11 Surtees says that traces of these ancient salt-works were still to be seen in his day, and that several farms in the neighbourhood paid a salt rent to Greatham Hospital13 A considerable quantity of salt was made at Sunderland, but it is not until the reign of Eliza- beth that any definite account is found of the trade ; then John Smythe asked Lord Burghley for a lease of the salt-pans and ' other implements appertaining to them ' in Sunderland. This lease could not be granted without Mr. Bowes's con- sent, for Ralph Bowes had in 1511 been granted the ' fermhold ' called Sunderland, for the term of five years at 66s. 8d. per annum, and his de- scendants had retained their hold on the neigh- bourhood.13 Smythe asked also that the licence for making salt which had been granted to Mr. Wilkes should be made so stringent that other 6 Portland Papers (Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. xiii), App. pt. v, 100 ; 'Journeys in England of Lord Harley,' MS. at Welbeck Abbey. 7 Dur. Curs. Rec. P.R.O. Inq. p.m. 36 Richard de Bury Reg. ii, fol. 107. 8 Ibid. 20 Thomas de Langley Reg. ii, fol. 227. 'Dur. Curs. No. 31, m. 12. '"Thorold Rogers, Hist, of Agric. and Prices, ii, 390 ; Compotes Finchale (Surtees Soc.), 1447. " W. H. D. Longstaffe, Dur. before the Conq. 72. 11 Surtees, Hist, of Dur. (under ' Greatham ' ) ; J. Brewster, Hist, of Stockton, 6 1. "Dur. Curs. No. 71, m. 2. makers would be prevented, and that any salt made at Sunderland should have free sale, other- wise the salt-pan would be useless, but in return for these concessions he offered to make a yearly payment of ^8oo.14 It is however in South Shields that the salt trade eventually centred, although as late as 1580 the inhabitants of Cowpen petitioned Mr. Thomas Wylson, Secretary of State and dean of Durham, against the sale of salt at Yarm in Yorkshire by the Scots, who paid no duty for unloading.15 Shields is referred to as having salt-pans in 1448-9, 1449, 1453." Certain deeds17 of 1489 and subsequent years, preserved in the treasury at Durham, record the successive leases granted by the prior and convent of land near St. Hilda's Chapel between Jarrow and South Shields, where salt-pans existed. The substance of one of these, which is in English, can alone be given here. Indenture made 10 January, 1490, between John Prior and the Convent of Durham of the one part and John Raker of Duresme of the other part : ' berith witnesse that the Prior and Convent hath grauntyd ... to the said John Raket a parcell of ground lying betwix Shelys milne and Ebgare con- tinuyng xi yerdys in lentn lying Est and West and iiij yerdys in breyd above the hough, and from that ground into the ground-eb of the watyr of Tyne,' to hold from Whitsunday next ensuing for the term of Ix years, paying yearly to the Bursar of Duresme 3/. 4 charges & hire of a horse & horse meat) Sma o/ xvi'L xiiiv x'1 Sold to the sayd Symonde waughe the> old lerne that remaned unoccupied weyinge xxvii stoones & : x : pounds at ixi a stoone wch deduct owte of the secunde some the some remayn- inge wch is the chairge ; Tobias Matthew Dec Ricardi Johnsonn " At the opening of the seventeenth century the suggestion that an official measurer for salt should be appointed roused the northern salt-makers to vehement protest. They drew up a description of the salt trade in Durham and Northumberland which is full of interesting details.31 The salt produced by the two counties amounted to about 7,650 weys annually, 430 workmen were em- ployed at the pans, the coal used in heating the pans was brought chiefly by water, 1 20 keelmen being employed, but cadgers and wainmen also brought coals where there was difficulty in get- ting coal by water. Salt-making does not appear to have been a very profitable investment. The owner supplied the coals, which for one pan cost £42 131. ifd. In return for this the worker delivered to the owner forty weys of salt, which if sold at 25;. the wey, 'communibus annis yealdeth the owner £$O.' 35 The annual yield of a pan being fifty weys, the salt-maker only gains ten weys, or £12 10s. for his yearly wage from each pan. But the owner's ^50 was not all gain ; from that had to be deducted a rent of id*. per annum,8' and wear and tear of pans and im- plements, £4. The initial expenses too were large ; each pan cost £100,*' then the owner had to provide keels and keep a stock of coal, so that allowing for the fact that the statements are of an ex parte nature, possibly those who drew up the account were not far from a true estimate in stating ' that the owner receiveth for everie pann singulis annis but only 561. 8 Dur. and Nortbumb. in the year 1635, Chet. Soc. I ; MS. in private library. 295 A HISTORY OF DURHAM appointment of the new official, the ' Monopoli- taine Measurer,' would lead to further diminution of profits, for he was to be paid 8^. for measuring each wey, the owner to pay for each pan 28*. 8d., it is easily credible that the suggestion was not received with favour. Even the salt- worker did not escape 'and which were more lamentable, he should receive 6s. 8d. per annum out of the poor salt makers waiges.' Incidentally the document throws much light on the northern salt trade as a whole. The greatest number of salt pannes in these coun- ties lye partly on the mouth of the River Weare, where the Bishopp of Durham hath the Mannor and jura regalia, and cheeflie in the mouth of the River Tyne, where on the south side the Deane and Cha- piter of Durham hath the Mannor and the Bishop hath/an; regalia. In these manners are yearly chosen 8 persons or a competent number of sworne men of the most substantial! and expert to see to the measures and measuring of salt, who make due execution thereof. The Halmote Court Roll for 1 667 gives a list of the names of these measurers, fifteen in number. Three of them had to be present at the measur- ing, it was also their duty to see that all new bowls or tubs for measuring salt corresponded to the brazen pattern measure and were duly sealed with the seal of the town. In case the cooper delivered the bowls or tubs to the owners before they were certified as correct by the mea- surers, he was fined 3*. 4^.28 The petitioners point out with reason that when a fleet arrived in the Tyne anxious to buy salt and get away within the shortest possible time, the trade would be greatly hampered by their having to wait for the measurer, who single-handed could not cope with the emergency ; the direct result would be to discourage the English and encourage the Scotch trade. But the local market did not take up all the salt : the owners of salt-pans sent quan- tities by sea along the coast to seek a wider market, and the absurdity of the measurer measur- ing the salt to the owner of the salt was manifest. But the greatest sufferers would be the poorer class of salt-makers, who have nothing else to live on, they sell and utter it usually to the cuntry and in the markets there- aboutes by small quantities as they can wynn it. The cuntry are well pleased, and when they come to their markets within the land at Durham, Newcastle, Alne- wick, Barwick, Morpeth, Hexham and such places, the Lords and Maiors of these marketts have the Rule of their measures. But Tobias Matthew writes on 3 1 May, 1605, in still more condemnatory manner of the scheme : That devised monopolie of salt measuring, an office absurde in itselfe, inconvenient to that trade of Salting, injurious to the makers, more chargeable to the buyers, 83 Unfortunately this roll is now missing from the treasury at Durham ; I am indebted to Mr. Robert Blair, F.S.A., for a transcription made some years ago. and much more subject to diverse corrupcons and abuses in those new measurers and their servants then the auncient accustomed maner of measuring heertofore alwaies used can justly be charged withall. " In another account given in a letter dated 30 May, 1605, to the earl of Northumberland, the salt owners of the neighbourhood point out that whereas in London, Lynn, Yarmouth, Hull, Norwich, and other port towns, the bowl only contained sixteen gallons, their bowl con- tained nineteen. As for the officers at other ports, who measure the salt, ' who will bribe them most, buyer or seller, so shall he fynde his measure skant or full.' Another correspondent, Mr. Robert Beckwith, meets the charge that those who traded with the north-country salt owners were cheated at all points and their trade ruined with an emphatic denial, and even evokes the supernatural to prove his case : Whereas they hazard stock and life to losse, if some of them doe soe by reason of their newfanglenesse that they will be of all trades and lavish expences, yet verie manie trade therein and live honestly in that trade not overstudying to overthrowe it as these men doe, knowing that the salt making is made by the Industrie of manie poore men, and by God's providence of the two elements of fier and water. And for such like lycence (for measuring salt) granted in Germanic, the water refused to yield salt untill the people prayed, the lycence being taken awaie, and then and untill this daie God is pleased to afford salt of the fires and elements. Thomas Riddell, mayor of Newcastle, was appointed by the Privy Council to get together evidence either to substantiate or rebut the charges brought against the Shields Salters, and in a long letter he successfully disposes of the charges.30 Unfortunately there is no description of the working of salt at Shields as early as 1605, but probably the circumstantial account given by Sir William Brereton, written thirty years later, applies to the earlier salt-works. I took a boat about twelve o'clock and went to Tinemouth and to Sheeldes and returned about seven o'clock ; Here I viewed the salt works, wherein is more salt works and more salt made than in any part of England that I know, and all the salt here made is made of salt water ; these pans which are not to be numbered, placed in the river mouths and wrought with coals brought by water from Newcastle pits. A most dainty new salt work lately here erected, which is absolutely the most complete work that I ever saw ; in the breadth thereof is placed six ranks of pans, four pans in a rank ; at either outside the furnaces are placed in the same manner as are my brother Boothes, under the grate of which furnaces the ashes fall and there is a lid or cover for both ; and by the heat of these >9 Duke of Northumberland's MSS. Collectanea Warburtoniana, Syon House. 30 Ibid. Letter of mayor of Newcastle, 30 May, 1605. 296 INDUSTRIES ashes, there being a pan made in the floor betwixt every furnace, which is made of brick, for which also there is a cover, there is boiled and made into lumps of hard and black salt, which is made from the brine which drops from the new made salt, which is placed over a cistern of lead, which cistern is under the floor of the store-house, which is in the end of the building ; These great lumps of hard black salt are sent to Col- chester to make salt upon salt, which are sold for a greater price than the rest, because without these at Colchester they cannot make any salt. These twenty- four pans have only twelve furnaces and twelve fires, and are erected in this manner, all being square and of like proportion. They are placed by two and two together, one against the other ; the six pans in the highest rank, the bottom equal with the top of the lower. The highest pans are twice filled and boiled till it begins to draw toward salt, then a spiggot being pulled out, the brine thus prepared runs into the lower pans, which brings it to a larger proportion of salt than otherwise ; gains time and saves fire, because it must be longer boiled in the other pans, and would spend fire, which is saved by reason of the heat which derives from the furnace of the upper pan, which by a passige is conveyed under the lower pan, which passage is about half a yard broad in the bottom, and is, at the top, of the breadth of the pan, which rests upon a brick wall, which is of the thickness of one brick at top, and this concavity under the lower pans is shaped slopewise like unto a kiln, narrow in the bottom and broad at the top ; and this heat, which is conveyed under and makes the lower pans to boil, comes to- gether with the smoke which hath no other passage, under these pans through loop-holes or pigeon-holes, which is conveyed into a chimney, (a double rank thereof is placed in the middle of this building) be- twixt which is a passage for a man to walk. In the middle of every these chimneys is there a broad iron- plate, which is shaped to the chimney, which, as it stops and keeps in the heat, so it being pulled out abates the heat." He estimates the salt produced in all the pans to be worth £1,500 a y«.r, and the clear annual gain £505. The workmen received 14*. a week, three men and one woman did the work. Lead pipes connected the various pans with the sump where the brine was stored, the sea water flowing into the brine pit at high tide. Stone walls surrounded the pans, and a roof of boards protected them. The size of the pans probably varied, those seen by Sir William Brereton were made of iron and were 3^ yds. broad by 5 yds. long, and J yd. deep.11 In 1630 the exportation of salt from the Shields district was prohibited. From 1635 to 1639 the North and South Shields salt-pan owners, acting with some Londoners interested in the trade, made a determined effort to obtain the monopoly of salt for the whole kingdom. They induced Charles I to give them a charter. The king prohibited the erection of new salt-works on the sea coast between Berwick and Southamp- " Sir William Brercton, op. cit. " One of these salt-pans is still to be seen in the garden of the Old Bent House, South Shields. ton by anyone except the Shields Company, and Nicholas Murford and Christopher Haworth, of Yarmouth, upon pain of demolition ; the sole right of manufacturing salt for the port towns was put into their hands. In return for these privileges the company agreed to make sufficient good and merchantable salt for both home con- sumption and fishing expeditions, and at no time to allow the price to exceed £5 the wey for home use, and 501. for fishing expeditions. They also entered into a contract to pay a duty of I0f. a wey to the king for the former, and y. \d. a wey for the latter. But the charter could be annulled at the end of three years in case a better way of making salt were discovered.** But the affair was a fiasco ; these seventeenth- century promoters came from London, bought out some of the pan owners, coerced others to join the enterprise, though a third, in spite of royal pressure, refused either to join the company or to stop manufacturing. It was not until the promoters had spent ,£14,000 buying pans, build- ing houses, and organizing the trade that they realized in what a precarious position they were. A rival scheme had been got up by Murford, backed by the London fishmongers, and Charles was playing off one company against the other in order to obtain better terms for himself; Sir Robert Heath, however, gave his decision in favour of the northern salt owners. But Yar- mouth refused to fetch the salt from Shields, declaring that the plague there rendered its im- portation a menace to life, and when the company sent the salt to Yarmouth by their own em- ployees, the men were seized and so seriously ill-treated that they appealed to the council for protection. Nor was outside competition the company's only trouble ; they owned 157 pans, but George Harle, James King, Cuthbert Hunter, Margery Harle, and Katherine Roe, who owned among them forty-five pans in Shields, refused to pay the king's duty, and were, therefore, able to undersell the company. By 1639 the company had resigned their patent and were being threat- ened with prosecution by the attorney-general for non-payment of arrears of duty amounting to £13,000." Misfortune dogged the footsteps of the Shields salt-pan owners. They had expended much capital in removing the rocks and stones before they could erect their wharves and staithes ; they even claimed to have improved by this means the navigation of the Tyne. As soon as their pans were erected the dean and chapter claimed the site as spare church lands and forced them to take leases. During the Civil War, the Scots destroyed the pans, as belonging to royalists, " P.R.O. Doc. Chas. I, 23 Dec. 1635, 16 ; Orig. R. 1 1 Chas. I, 75 ; 12 Chas. I, 156. 14 S.P. Dom. Chas. I, 1635-6, vol. 312 ; 1636-7, vols. 335, 344; 1637, vol. 362; 1639, vol. 441, No. 56. 297 A HISTORY OF DURHAM malignants, or popish owners. No sooner were they rebuilt than in 1648 the Commonwealth offered for sale all church lands, and the unfor- tunate owners had to buy their own property at a high rate. Then the friendly relations between England and Scotland during the Commonwealth led to the increased importation of Scotch salt, which ruined the Shields trade. As the petition for an imposition on Scotch imported salt urged, the encouragement of the Scotch salt trade meant the overthrow of them (the Shields owners) and their ffamilyes, who have spent their Estate in bringing such a Native and good Manufacture to perfecon, and another Nacon now like to enjoy the bencfitt of their said Purchase and industry. That in South and North Sheels, Sunderland, Blith, there are above 100 owners of salt woorks who will be utterly undone together with their Families and many thousand Labourers, that depend thereon to inrich some in Scotland, for the Salt woorks there are in very few hands." But the salt industry was not settled at South Shields without much opposition. A crisis came in 1617, and the salters were summoned to Durham to defend themselves against various charges of destroying the vegetation and render- ing the place uninhabitable. The plaintiffs' case was stated with much eloquence ; their complaint was that the dean and chapter had let to the defendants some land upon which waist grounds, they the defendants and many others have builded and erected a great number of houses and buildings wherein they have placed salt- panns for making of salt, and thereby have sett up a new trade for making and boyling of salt of salt water, wherein they use great and extraordinary fires made of sea cole, and thereupon doe raise of every pann to themselves an annuall and yearly benefitt of forty or fifty pounds at the least by reason of which new- erected saltpans, used to the purpose aforesaid, such abondance of thicke smoake doth rise from the said panns as all or the most parte of the grasse growing upon the ox-pasture within twenty score yards of the topp of the said banke next to the said panns is alto- gether burnt up and waisted, as not one greene grasse feild doth grow of all that parte of the said pasture adjoyning to the said panns, and all the residue of the said pasture is by the same smoake also soe corrupted, poysoned and decayed in the spring season, when the grasse is tender and should begin to grow, as that the plaintiffs and presedent farmers usually keeping eight oxen for every farme to depasture, and to be well fed and kept, can keep now but foure oxen at the most, for every farme, and that very leane and scarce able to worke, and that likewise, whereas a part of that pasture was preserved for meadow whereupon every of the said farmers had yearly three loads of hay, for releife of their oxen in the winter season, now the same is soe corrupted and burnt up with the said 55 B.M. Lansd. MSS. cclviii, fols. 252-261. (Printed in Richardson's Rare Tracts, iii) Newcastle Hostmen's Books. Petition, 19 Dec. 1654 ; Hunter MSS. Dean and Chapter Lib. Dur. No. 1 1, fol. 59, ' Reasons for ye Preservation and Encouragement of ye Manu- facture of Salt at Shields.' 298 smoake, as noe meadow at all will grow upon the same, as also that their hedges are soe consumed with the said smoake, as noe green leafe will grow therein, and the quicke hedges there be dryed up, and also their corne yearly growing in the said fields is thereby soe decayed and impaired as the plaintiffs are scarce able to pay their rents. A committee was appointed by Sir Richard Hutton, keeper of the great seal for the County Palatine, consisting of Mr. Francis Burgaine and Mr. Peter Smarte, prebendaries, and Thomas Chambers and Thomas Palleson, gentlemen, who were to call witnesses before them and then settle the amount of compensation due to the plaintiffs. The award was given 25 March, 1618, and the defendants had to pay an annual sum of £13 6s. 8d. to the tenants of Westoe.36 Nor was this picture of the horrors of the smoke in the neighbourhood of Shields exagger- ated ; every writer dwells on it with astonishment. There is an old story that the wife of Patrick Wall, incumbent of South Shields in 1666, on riding down Churton Bank, where they got their first view of Shields, reproached her husband ' for bringing her from Norham, frae the bonny banks o' Tweed, to Sodom and Gomorrah.' 37 Marma- duke Rawdon writes in 1664 that the salt trade causes such ' a smooke that one would thinke the town were on fire.' 38 Thoresby, Defoe, and Dibdin all dwell on the volumes of smoke seen arising from the salt and glass-works miles away from the town itself. The salt-makers seem to have been a some- what godless set of men ; even in the rollicking days of the Restoration they incurred the dis- pleasure of those in authority. John Cook, Saltmaker, for working at his panns ordinary in the lord's day in time of service and being reproved by churchwardens he did abuse and work several days after. Cook appeared and submitted and confessed his crime before the minister and church- wardens.39 Nor was John Cook a solitary offender. The July previous it had been considered necessary to legislate on the subject, for the Salters of South Shields, as usually upon every Lord's Day follow their ordinary Labour at working at their Panns about the making of salt, to the great dishonour of God and the constant profanation of the Lord's day.40 It was accordingly ordered that the salters should not work upon the lord's day and that their fires about the Salt Panns may soak upon every Sunday from six o'clock in the morning till six o'clock at night, and that they shall not draw their panns, nor burn lime, nor put in coles. " Cosin's Lib. Dur. Mickleton MSS. 91, 26. 17 Brockie, Hist, of Shields, 76. 58 Life ofMarmadukc Ravidon of York (Camd. Soe.), 1863, p. 143. 39 Dur. Book of Acts, 6 Oct. 1664. 40 Court of Quarter Sessions for the county of Dur. 13 July, 1664. INDUSTRIES After the Restoration the trade flourished, though the number of pans fluctuated. In 1667, izi pans were at work „ 1668, 107 „ „ 1669, 122 „ „ 1671, 119 „ „ 1672, no „ „ 1673, 112 „ „ 1674, "9 » » 1677, «33 » „ 1688, 119 „ „ 1694, 139 „ „ 1701, 143 „ The salt-works near the Mill Dam had a some- what disastrous history. Originally in the hands of John Waller in 1708, they were sold to Sir William Coles, who leased them from the dean and chapter for twenty-one years for a rent of 401. for the land and 101. for each salt-pan. Sir to buy the salt-works at the valuation made by Edward Fairless, who had apparently continued to work them. Fairless valued the property at £610, but claimed so much for repairs that a clause was inserted in the final agreement that Robert Blunt should not be held answerable for any claims advanced by Fairless. Eventually the three daughters of Sir William Coles only re- ceived £150 for their share of the inheritance. Isaac Cookson bought the property from the executors of Robert Blunt — William Carr, of the city of London, powder-flask maker, John Carr, of the city of Dublin, John Wilkinson of Horsley, John Simpson of Ovington Hall, and Ruhumah Chicken of Ovington for £<)OO. In 1745 he renewed the lease of the salt-works from the dean and chapter. Possibly the salt- works were continued to provide flux for the newly-erected glass-works.4* TMC STRUT IS THIS IN LOITH 6« VARO& TOOM YC S'.W TO VC N ; E. ! :srts£«* 7 i Trf 2 t J 1 /THIS YI BUMP IN LtNTM KB VAKOI ANO IM BRIO 8 YARDS r~ 5 ? .- I ( »s •-;' '.: n i TT- i 7- i SiS 1 r- ^ L, 1 r 3 | n L > ^ % fl ! I z m - ; ij i L • 0 c « _ j t 1 ? I 2 s C > ' * ONE. PAN • s - 8 i r, c 1 1 1 i 5 £ I * H IM - k X I 0 c **» ill 1 " UT ut H ^ PLAN OF MILL DAM SALT WORKS William Coles, who spent most of his time in London, appointed a manager, Charles Atkinson. On the death of Sir William in 1717, Dame Elizabeth, his widow, to whom the salt-works were bequeathed for her life, refused to prove the will as, according to Atkinson, only £40 had been made during the previous nine years. Edward Fairless, disregarding the lack of legal title, took a lease of it for seven years for ^96. On the death of Dame Elizabeth the heiresses, Sir William's three daughters, Alice Brown, (Catherine Cowlans, and Margaret Coles, put a mortgage on the salt-works, which was taken by Robert Blunt. In 1726 Robert Blunt offered 41 Minute Book of the Ancient Vestry of St. Hilda's Church, South Shields. I am indebted to Mr. Robert Blair, F.S.A., for the use of his transcription of the MS. The rentals in the treasury cannot always be relied upon, but according to them as late as 1791 there were nearly two hundred salt-pans at South Shields, by 1827 the number had decreased to fifty, and for all practical purposes by the end of the first half of the nineteenth century the Shields salt trade was at an end, although salt-pans were still worked as late as 1880 by Mrs. Cassidy in West Holborn, but the brine was obtained from rock salt,43 not from sea water. Various reasons, 0 From deeds in the possession of Mr. N. C. Cookson and copies of leases in the Dur. Treasury. The plan of the salt-works was attached to one of the Cookson Deeds, 1708, and probably represented the property as it existed at the end of the seventeenth century. "Cheshire rock salt was first brought to Durham about 1825. 299 A HISTORY OF DURHAM none entirely satisfactory, are given for the col- lapse of the Shields salt trade ; probably the discov- ery of rock salt and the fact that the owners of the salt-pans, who were often identical with the owners of the collieries, found another use for their inferior coal, when the demand for coke in- creased, had a prejudicial effect on the trade. Still the marvel is not that the trade ceased when it did, but, considering the long and tedious process employed, that it continued as long as it did. Before the trade was quite extinct, an import- ant discovery had been made, 1858-62, by Mr. John Vaughan (Messrs. Bolckow,Vaughan & Co.), who, while boring for water, discovered on the Yorkshire side of the Tees near Middlesbrough a bed of rock-salt. No practical results followed from the discovery ; and although Messrs. Bell Brothers found salt on the Durham side at Port Clarence in 1874 at a depth of 1,127 **•> 'l was not until 1882 that the actual business of making salt was begun. Three years later the Newcastle Chemical Co. started works in connexion with their chemical works on the Tyne, and about the same time the Haverton Hill Salt Co., the first to make salt for domestic purposes, began work, and later the Greatham Salt Co., the most north- erly of the works, started at Greatham. Once started the development of the trade was rapid ; in 1882 Durham only produced a little more than 3,000 tons of salt ; ten years later, including the North Ormsby and Lackenby Works, 231,060 tons were being produced. The salt district ex- tends over an area of 20 square miles on either side of the Tees, and is estimated to contain 2,000,000,000 tons of salt, the average thickness of the bed being from eighty to ninety feet. Cheshire with its rock-salt near the surface has a great advantage over Durham, where the bed is at a depth of about 1,000 ft. ; on the other hand the proximity of coal and a navigable river to a certain extent counterbalance this disadvantage. o For the great quantity of coal used is a serious item in the expense of working salt. Originally the boring down to the rock-salt was done by the diamond boring process ; but the substitution of the drilling system, as used in the American oil districts, of derricks and free falling 1 string of tools,' has been the means of saving time and expense. The tube which is inserted is per- forated three times, to admit the water from the sandstone ; then when the salt bed is reached to allow the water to flow over the rock-salt, and again at the bottom of the salt bed so that the brine can get admission to the inner pump tube. The brine is then pumped to the surface, con- veyed in pipes to the filter, and thence to large pans, in which it is evaporated. The substitution of iron and steel for lead pans is the only change that has taken place in this part of the process during the last 2,000 years. The vacuum process, which decreases the con- sumption of coal by fifty per cent, and does away with the necessity of blocking and grinding, is probably the method of the immediate future as far as the works for the manufacture of fine salt are concerned. The utilization of the surplus heat from the blast furnaces decreases the expense of those works in their neighbourhood, but only the coarser salts can be made in this way. The salt-works at Clarence, where this method is adopted, originally belonged to Messrs. Bell Brothers. They are now worked by the Salt Union. The waste heat from the blast furnaces is conducted in flues under the salt-pans. The gases from the furnaces are burnt under boilers to raise the steam required to actuate the blowing machinery, and the results of combustion pass away from the end of the boilers at a high tem- perature, circa 1,400 Fahr. Between the chimney which draws the gas from the furnaces under the boilers and the boilers themselves, arrangements are made to place the shallow salt-pans, and in this way the heat which would otherwise be lost is utilized. The temperature obtained is not high enough nor under sufficient control to permit the manufacture of the various kinds of salt ; what is called technically chemical salt is the chief product ; still a small quantity of fishery salt is also obtained.44 The United Alkali Company have two sets of salt-works on the Tees, one near Bellingham, the other near Clarence, and both in the Haverton Hill district, and the Tees Salt Company also work salt at Haverton Hill. The fineness of the grain depends upon the temperature at which the brine is evaporated.48 By a curious coincidence, Greatham, near West Hartlepool, where in the fourteenth century the best English salt was made, is now the site of the extensive Cerebos Salt Works. The business was begun in 1894 for the manufacture of a very fine table salt ; the invention is due to Mr. George Weddel, the present managing director of the company. In order to replace the phosphates lost when food is cooked, he conceived the idea of mixing in a definite proportion certain phosphates with the salt. The invention met with phenomenal success, and enlarged premises soon became necessary. In 1901 offices and works were erected in Elison Place, Newcastle, where the salt manufactured at Greatham is put through the final refining processes. The phos- phates, the addition of which differentiates Cere- bos from all other salt, are here added, the salt is put through various mills, sieves, and ovens, weighed by automatic scales, and finally emptied by automatic fillers into the cases, some of the labour-saving devices in this department being due to the ingenuity of Mr. Patterson, director of the 44 1 am indebted to the courtesy of Messrs. Bell Bro- thers for this account of the Clarence Salt Works. " Middlesbrough Salt Industry, by Richard Grigg. Minutes of the Proceedings of the Institute of Me- chanical Engineers, 2 Aug. 1893. 300 INDUSTRIES works. The weighing and filling are in the charge of girls wearing the neat uniform supplied by the company, scrupulously clean white aprons, blouses, and caps. But during the whole process the salt is never once touched by the hand. Modern labour-saving machines worked by electricity, by which all the nails required to make one box are driven in by one blow, make all the boxes required for packing on the premises. A glance at the company's books at once re- veals the enormous area covered by their trade operations. They have customers in every coun- try of Europe, do an extensive American trade, and have clients in the centre of Africa and the north of Queensland. But an important change is to take place shortly. In 1903 the Greatham Salt and Brine Works were purchased by the company for ^33, 5°° » they were held under a lease for forty years from the trustees of the Greatham Hospital from 1887, and the company have now decided to move from Newcastle to Greatham, so that the whole process from the initial pumping up of the brine to the final packing and dispatch of the salt will take place in future at Greatham, thus a great saving in transit is effected. It is sometimes asserted that the first reference to chemical works, other than salt, on the Tyne is found in an account of the examination in 1638, before the attorney-general, of a certain John Cornelius, who was accused of trying to entice workmen from the Tyneside Alum Works to begin the industry in Denmark.4' It is probable, however, that the works referred to were in the North Riding of Yorkshire. But if the Northumberland Alum Works existed, the site is unknown, and it was not until nearly a century later that Mr. John Cookson started works at South Shields on the spot still called Alum House Ham. Possibly the works were run in connexion with the Saltwich Alum Works near Whitby, for the alum liquor which was crystallized into alum was brought in specially devised vessels fitted with tanks from Saltwich,47 and Ralph Carr, one of the partners in the Salt- wich Works, into which he put ,£4,000 in 1758, appears in 1762 as the owner of the Alum House at South Shields. If the welfare of the two businesses were interdependent these early alkali works were not a success, for after losing money for thirty years the Whitby Alum Works were closed in ij8<).u Until the end of the eighteenth century alkali was made from Scotch kelp or barilla ; but Mr. William Losh, who was living in Paris at the time of the French Revolution, observed the methods used by Leblanc, by which soda was "S.P. Dom. Chas. I, 16 Sept. 1538, voL 398, No. 90. 47 J. Salmon, South ShitUi : Its Past, Prttent, and Future (1856), 19. 41 Carr Family, iii, 68. obtained by decomposing salt by sulphuric acid. He returned to England and, helped by the earl of Dundonald, began a series of experiments which resulted in a patent being taken out in 1795 for treating neutral salts to obtain alkalies, and the English alkali trade was begun by the establishment of a manufactory of soda at Walker-on-Tyne (Northumberland) in 1806. But the new industry soon crossed the Tyne ; in 1822—3 Mr. Cookson established a manu- factory at Templetown (Tyne Docks), and later built furnaces and chambers at South Shields on a plan given to him by Mr. Doubleday. Messrs. Doubleday and Easterby had as early as 1808 established works at Bell Quay, and the repeal of the salt duty in 1823 produced a sudden expansion of the trade. John Alden began at Felling Shore in 1827-8, A. Clapham at Friar's Goose in 1829, C. All wood at South Shore in 1830, Mr. Bell at Jarrow in 1836, Mr. R. Imeary also at Jarrow in 1839, five years after the foundation of the historic firm of Pattinson and Co. at Felling.4' In the early days the gas which was thrown off during the process of manufacture escaped into the air and destroyed all vegetation round the works. Messrs. Cookson especially were subjected to constant and wearing prosecution. They had however, the most enthusiastic support of their workpeople. In a lengthy address they not only recall the fact that many of the Cookson works had existed for more than a century, and express the utmost contentment with the rewards they enjoyed in return for their labour,*0 but offer to relieve the firm of expense in any defence they might be called upon to make, being as they say Quite satisfied that the continuance and prosperity of the works is more a matter of interest to us than to you. Our subscriptions though separately small will '* W. Gossage, History of the Alkali Manufacture ; R. C. Clapham, 'The Commencement of the Soda Manufacture,' Trans. Nttecastle-upon-Tyne Cbem. Sot. 1,43- *° We consider it impossible that any persons can have joined in such proceedings, who are at all acquainted with the vast importance of your works to the town or who have reflected on the incalculable mischief that must arise to the working classes by any interference with the peaceful working of those manu- factories, the suspension of which would bring ruin and misery upon hundreds. We have ever reflected with pleasure on the spirit and enterprise with which you have conducted your various works within the Borough, and when we call to mind that some of these works have existed for a hundred yean and have been the support and comfort of our Forefathers, we cannot but regard your Families and Connections as the working man's Best Benefactors, and feel compelled to express our most earnest hope that in spite of all vexatious Persecutions, your establishments may continue to benefit the poor man for generations yet to come. 301 A HISTORY OF DURHAM be collectively large, and we shall be proud to under- take the defence of the works against what we must deem an unprovoked attack on the dearest interests of the working man.51 In spite of this support, in 1843 Messrs. Cookson ceased to manufacture alkali, and in 1844 the works were acquired by the Jarrow Chemical Company. Under the management of James Stevenson they rapidly increased, until they became the largest in the North of England. In the great Exhibition they exhibited a minia- ture of the Arctic regions in crystal soda, which weighed 2 tons and measured 6 ft. In 1858 the Friar's Goose Works united to the Templetown concern, and the amalgamated works were then the largest in the kingdom, employing nearly fifteen hundred men. The United Alkali Company acquired the whole concern in 1 89 1.63 The Templetown Works, generally known as the Tyne Dock Works, were closed and later pulled down, but the Friar's Goose Works still continue, though not in full work. In October, 1886, the chemical firm of Pattinson & Co., founded seventy years before at Felling, closed their works, and more than fourteen hundred men were thrown out of work ; the magnificent buildings still stand un- occupied. The Hebburn Works, once owned by Charles Tennant and partners, are now worked by the United Alkali Company, whose most extensive works are in the borough of Gateshead, and were formerly under the control of the New- castle Chemical Company.63 The chemical works founded by H. Lee Pattinson in 1837 at Washington, and bought in 1872 by Mr. Newall, still continue. But the chemical industry was not confined to the Tyne. As early as 1772 copperas works were started at Deptford by Messrs. Taylor and Inman. Pyrites for the purpose was obtained from Lyme in Dorsetshire, a ton costing 305. On the death of Inman, the remaining partner, in 1780 the works were bought by Mr John Bliss and managed by him for seven years ; his son succeeded to the business and took Mr. Bernard Ogden into partnership. The works were enlarged and the manufacture of Glauber's and Epsom Salts begun. Mr. Ogden became the sole proprietor in 1820, and six years later a further extension of business took place. Pyroligneous retorts were installed and the manu- facture of acetate of soda begun. Dr. Ogden succeeded his father, in 1831, and extended the manufacture of acetate of soda and acetic acid, until the works became one of the largest of the kind in the world. From 186910 1892 Mr. John Maude Ogden, his younger brother, was manager. His executors carried on the business, but sold the whole estate to Doxford & Sons, and in 1902 every vestige of these chemical works, and the old Deptford Hall, which Mr. Inman the founder of the firm had built, was swept away to make room for the extension of the Shipbuilding and Engineering Works.54 SHIPBUILDING Shipbuilding is the most characteristic and im- portant industry in the county of Durham, and Durham is the most important shipbuilding county in the United Kingdom. Four hundred and sixty-eight ships above 1,000 tons were built in the British Isles during 1905 ; of these 175 were built in this county. Durham accounts for 589,944 of the 1,808,771 tons that represent the total tonnage of England, Scotland, and Ireland. Taking England, exclusive of Durham, as the standard of comparison, the pre-eminent position of Durham is still clearer, for England turns out only 465,460 tons, so that Durham with its output of 589,944 tons exceeds the total English output (exclusive of Durham) by 124,484 tons. Nor can this great industrial development be traced to any natural advantage ; the Wear is 81 From a copy of an address to Isaac Cookson and William Cuthbert, esqs., from their workpeople, agreed to at a meeting held in South Shields Market- place on 22 Jan. 1832, kindly lent to me by Mr. N. C. Cookson. a Chemical Trades Joum. 1890, pp. 32, 33. the only exclusively Durham river, for Northum- berland and Yorkshire claim the lion's share of the shipbuilding of the Tyne and the Tees, and it has been rightly said that man has done every- thing for the Wear, nature nothing. Sunderland is often spoken of as a mushroom growth of the mid-seventeenth century, but its shipping had a history long anterior to that period. Among the Mickleton MSS. is a document com- piled in the early part of the seventeenth century, which contains a list of all the rolls then in existence which dealt with Sunderland shipping. They cover a period from 1183 to 1609. In many cases the date of the document only, no- hint of its contents, is given. The first one quoted is dated 1 9 Edward III, and runs, ' Thomas Menvil held a certain place called Hendon for building of ships and paid yearly for the same 61 1 am indebted to Mr. Alfred Allhusen for many of the details of the Durham Alkali Works. 64 From a manuscript description of the Deptford Copperas Works in possession of the Sunderland Antiquarian Society. 302 INDUSTRIES 2f.'1 A more comprehensive entry follows, headed : Diverse copies of Rolls of Accts showing ye Bishopps to have ye Passages and Feery Bootes at Sunderland and account for making new Bootes allowed upon ye accounts 1345, 1406, 1457, 1494, 1502, 1508. The bishop's rights were not always undisputed. To a copy of a patent granted by Tobias, Bishop of Durham, to one Evans Witting for the anchor- age of Sunderland, is added the pregnant sen- tence, ' The master of Trinity House preuved him to have a Patent from ye King and ye Bishop will not allow it.'1 Probably these copies of rolls bearing on shipping were compiled for the use of the bishop in his admiralty jurisdiction, for the admiralty court was an important part of the administration of the county palatine.* The episcopal jurisdiction does not seem to have fostered or developed the trade of Sunder- land ; the Report of the Commissioners for the care of Ports and Havens within the Bishopric of Durham, presented in 1565, says of Sunder- land : There are neither ships nor boats and only seven fish cobbles that belong to the town occupying 20 fisher- men. This town it in great decay of building and inhabitants.' 4 By 1626, according to the return made to the Privy Council, Sunderland, where the coal trade is one-fourteenth that of Newcastle, ought to pay a fourteenth of the charge of setting out two ships for the king's service, but the traders of Sunderland deny to yield any contribution. Ten years later Sunderland was assessed at £20 for ship-money, Gateshead paying £50, and Darlington £25.* But its development was very slow until the out- break of the Civil War, when, as Royalist New- castle refused to send coal to Parliamentary London, the metropolis had to rely upon Sunder- land and Blyth for the supply. An ordinance dated 12 May, 1643, ordered that there should be free and open trade in the port of Sunderland. The jurisdiction of the bishop abolished, no trade or gild restrictions to hamper its development, supported by the government, Sunderland forged ahead with almost incredible rapidity. Coal was only found in the higher reaches of the river ; a local industry, the building of keels to convey the 1 R. Surtee», Durham, i, 256. ' Cosin's Lib. Durham ; Micldeton MSS. No. 10, fol. 362. ' Diverse copies of Rolls to prove that ye Bishop of Durham hath ye Borough of Sunderland and Rents for ye fishing ; which ye Prior had there, and yt ye Bishop had a place therein in ancient time for arrival of ships paying a rent.' 1 G. J. Lapsley, The County Pal. of Dur. App. ii, 3 1 7. 1 S.P. Dom. Eliz. Add. 26 Nov. 1565, vol. 12, No. 86 (i); W. Cunningham, Growth of Engl. InJutt. and Commerce, i, 66. 'S.P. Dom. Chas. I, March, 1636, vol. 317, No. 96. mineral to the harbour where it was shipped, was already begun. But the development of the coal trade increased the keelbuilding trade ; men ac- customed to building keels found little difficulty in dealing with the small wooden vessels so much used at the end of the seventeenth century ; when, therefore, there was an increased demand for ships in the eighteenth century, a race of men were at hand on the banks of the Wear with an inherited manual dexterity brought to its utmost development in the satisfactory training school of voluntary apprenticeship. The woods of Dur- ham, which the Petts had ransacked early in the seventeenth century to get timber for The Sovereign of the Sea, building in the naval dock- yards at Woolwich, had diminished so rapidly that the men of Sunderland could not rely on their own county for their needs, but they were favourably situated for commanding an inex- haustible supply from the forests of the Baltic regions.' Early in the eighteenth century several shipbuilders were on the Wear, though the average size of the vessels was only 135 tons. In 1753 only about 190 ships belonged to this port ; 7 four ships are mentioned as going annually to the Greenland Sea, but whether they were locally built it is impossible to say.8 Bailey gives the table of the ships built in Sunderland which was presented to the House of Commons in 1807 : Year* 1790 '79' 1804 1805 Number '9 6 5' 36 Average Tonnage 144 202 '63 163 Tonnage of Largest 312 356 349 337* Surtees gives statistics of the number of ships building at various dates, which taken in conjunc- tion with the previous list shows that the trade fluctuated considerably : Date December, 1810 November, 1 8 1 1 November, 1812 March, 1814 Number 37 32 37 31 Tonnage 8,410 8,O2O 8,437 6,693 He adds, within the port of Sunderland there are twenty shipbuilding yards.10 The Napoleonic wars are supposed to have given an immense impetus to Sunderland ship- building, but the evidence given before a select committee of the House of Commons in 1833 does not support this theory. The evidence ' M. Oppenheim, AJminiitration of the Navy, 261 ; F. W. Dendy, ' Extracts from Privy Seal Dockets,' Arch. AeRana, xxiv. ' 'Letter from Sunderland, 13 June, 1755,' Gent. Mag. xxv. * Brit. Univ. Dir. 1792. • J. Bailey, op. cit. 299. " R. Surtees, op. cit. 264. 3°3 A HISTORY OF DURHAM brings out the facts that of thirty-four or more shipbuilding yards on both sides of the Wear, nineteen had been started since the peace ; that ships were built cheaper at Sunderland than else- where ; that every place where a ship could be built was a yard ; and that the smaller ship- builders, who undersold the larger shipbuilders, were generally carpenters who clubbed together and started business in the hopes of getting better wages for themselves than when they worked for others.11 These builders without capital were often the tools of the timber merchants, who advanced the timber, and who, in case the builders were unable to meet their claims at the end of the nine months for credit given, seized the vessels and put them on the market in a hastily finished condition. In many cases where the builders were working on contract, a quarter of the value was advanced. Over-production followed, and as a writer in the first number of the Northern Tribune, in 1851, says : Until about ten years ago the character of the vessels built on the Wear was considered sloppy and the capital of the town had somewhat of a papery reputa- tion. In fact, ' Sunderland Barley Barrells,' as at one time the Wear-built vessels were called, were synonymous with vessels built to enrich the owner and drown the crew. In 1840, 251 ves- sels were built on the Wear, with 64,446 gross tonnage ; in 1843, only eighty-five, gross ton- nage 2i,37y.12 But the Irish famine, emigration to Australia, and the Crimean War, restored the prosperity of Sunderland shipping. In 1850,158 vessels of 51,374 gross tonnage were built ; this number was never exceeded, although the tonnage in 1853 was increased.13 This was the high- water mark of wooden shipbuilding, although as late as 1857 there were seventy-one wooden- shipbuilders, and the industry lasted until 1875, when William Gibbon built the last wooden ship. In 1852 the first iron sailing-ship built on the River Wear was launched. It was the Loftus, built by Mr. Clark, during 1851, for Mr. George Forster of the Consett Iron Works, to carry Cleve- land ore from Yorkshire to the Tyne.14 The Amity, from the shipyard of James Laing, was the second Wear-built iron vessel. The firm of Sir James Laing & Sons is the oldest firm on the River Wear ; the founder was Mr. Philip Laing, who in 1793, in partnership with his brother John, started shipbuilding on the Monkwearmouth shore, where the Strand Ship- way Company have their works. The partner- 11 Evidence of Mr. Henry Tanner of Sunderland, given 10 July, 1833. 13 Lloyd's Reg. 1840. 13 Mr. T. Ray of Ryhope, to whom I am indebted for many details of early Sunderland shipping, saw eight ships launched on one day in January, 1850. 14 Ref. of Mech. Engl. March, 1885 ; Lloyd's Reg. 1851. ship was dissolved in 1818, Mr. Philip Laing then buying the Deptford Yard, where the busi- ness is now carried on.16 The firm have still a MS. volume containing an account of all the ships built by them since the inauguration of the trade. The Horta, tonnage 248, was the first ship built ; it was for Captain Forster of Whit- burn. The receipt for the building of the Polly for Captain Wheatley, who paid £5,426 14*. as purchase-money, dated I December, 1814, is still extant ; her tonnage was 283^. Sir James Laing succeeded to the business on his father's retirement in 1843 ; of course all the ships built were of wood, but Sir James introduced the use of East India teak to supplement the use of oak, and he imported the first cargo of Moulmein teak into Sunderland. The firm took an active part in the emigrant shipbuilding in the forties and fifties. A number of Scotch emigrants from Glasgow, accompanied by their pastor, went over to Dunedin in 1 846 in the Philip Laing, the bell of which ship was given to the Dunedin church to supply the place of the cracked bell then in use. The ill-fated Dunbar, built in 1853, was a large ship, more than 200 ft. in length ; she was wrecked at the entrance to Sydney Harbour, and, except one old man, all, both crew and emigrants, perished. In 1855 the La Hague, the biggest ship built in the north up to that date, 221 ft. long, was launched.16 But as early as 1853 Sir James had begun the building of iron ships, his first iron ship being the Amity. The firm have always been celebrated for their first-class work- manship, and have built for the P. and O., the Royal Mail, Union, West India and Pacific, British India, Beaver Line, and for the Japanese line Toyo Kisen Kabushiki Kaisha of Tokio. The building of oil boats, which require the utmost nicety of finish, is also a specialty of the firm. The Tuscarora, one of the largest oil steamers afloat at the time of the launch, was built for the Anglo-American Oil Co. A new type of trunk deck steamer was introduced by * Sir James Laing & Sons a few years ago for carrying grain, ore, and other general cargo in bulk, where self-trimming is indispensable. The shipyard covers an area of 17 acres, with six berths. The most interesting ship launched lately from the yard is more like a floating dock- yard than an ordinary vessel ; it was built for the Government in 1906 to accompany the fleet, so that in case of accidents the repairs can be done at sea ; it contains all the machinery neces- sary for repairing on the most extensive scale. The extensive brass-works belonging to the same firm not only supply their own ships, but also enable them to fulfil contracts with the Admiralty and the War Office. A propeller foundry was added in 1902. 15 Hue and Cry, I z Dec. 1 8 1 8. 16 lllus. London News, \ I Aug. 1855. 3°4 INDUSTRIES Messrs. Doxford, of Sunderland, in 1905 secured the blue ribbon for the largest output of tonnage in the world ; they built twenty ships with an average tonnage of 4,332 tons. The firm was started in 1840 by Mr. William Dox- ford, father of the three senior members of the present firm, who began as a wooden-shipbuilder at Coxgreen ; he left Coxgreen in 1857, and started iron shipbuilding at Pallion near the site of the present works. In 1878 an engine-build- ing department was added; in 1891 the firm became a limited liability company. The rapid development of the firm is unparalleled, and is chiefly owing to their having introduced the turret steamer in 1892. The main idea of the turret steamer is a combination of strength with lightness, a maximum carrying capacity with a minimum net register. With the exception of the space devoted to machinery and water ballast, the entire hull is used for cargo, and the holds are free of all obstruction. The hold beams during the last year (1905) have in some cases been en- tirely dispensed with, and vessels of this type are increasing in popularity. In 1895 a new method of rolling ships' plates with joggled edges was adopted. The great advantage of the innovation was to reduce the weight of the vessel by abolishing packing, which was no longer necessary as the joggled edges of the plates fitted into each other. In 1892-3 the output was about 2,000 tons ; in 1902 it was 43,780 tons. In 1905 the firm turned out the three largest single-deck turret steamers afloat,17 when the output was 8 7,000 tons. For the Clan Line alone Doxfordshave launched thirty turret-decked steamers, of from 6,000 tons to 8,OOO tons capacity ; and they have also built for the P. and O. and the British India, and for America, Spain, Italy, Holland, Norway, Sweden, and Denmark. The most novel feature of the building slips is the arrangement of overhead gear ; above each vessel, resting on columns and beams, are tracks along which the hoisting trollies travel. These tracks overlap the vessel both on the shore and river ends, greatly facilitating and accelerating the bringing of the necessary material to the place where it is wanted. The startling fact that the establishment launches a vessel a fortnight is partly due to the extraordinary rapidity with which the slips can be cleared and the materials for the erection of the new vessel got into place. Another old and important firm on the Wear is Messrs. J. L. Thompson & Sons near the mouth of the river, founded in 1846. For the first twenty-four years of their history the firm were occupied solely with wooden vessels ; in 1871 the first iron steam vessel was built; in 1898 their gross tonnage launched amounted to 40,815 tons; from 1885 to 1902 they fifteen times headed the annual output of tonnage on the Wear ; for three successive years they held the " The Quiloa, Qturimba, and QueJa, each 1 2,000 tons dead weight. fourth position in the annual output for the United Kingdom, and in 1905 were the eighth on the list with thirteen vessels and 48,009 gross tonnage. Messrs. Short Brothers, Pallion, begun in 1849 by Mr. George Short, is now carried on as a limited liability company; in 1905 they built nine vessels with a gross tonnage of 27,805 tons. Messrs. Osbourne, Graham & Co. started busi- ness in 1 872 at North Hylton ; the second steamer launched in 1877, the Chillingham Cast/e, of 1,613 tons, attracted great attention, for at that date it was considered to be of enormous size. The first vessel lighted by electricity built on the Wear was the work of this firm. John Priestman & Son was established in 1882 at Southwick by Mr. John Priestman. In 1894 he patented his self-trimming trunk vessel. The Southwick yard has turned out some large vessels especially adapted for the cattle trade. Another old-established shipbuilding yard at Southwick is that of Messrs. Robert Thompson & Son. William Pickersgill & Sons, John Bulmer & Co., S. P. Austin & Son, turned out six vessels during 1905, the average size of the first firm's vessels being nearly 4,000 tons, of the last, 1,215 tons. John Crown & Sons with three vessels, total tonnage 3,377 tons, the Sun- derland Shipbuilding Co. with eight vessels averaging nearly 2,000 tons, and Bartram & Sons, bring up the total number of Wear-side ship- builders to thirteen, the total tonnage of the Wear to 306,759 tons in 1905. On the Durham side of the Tyne, Jarrow, South Shields, and Hebburn are the shipbuilding centres. The Jarrow works were founded in 1851 by Charles and George Palmer ; where the town of Jarrow, with its 70,000 inhabitants, now stands, there was then but one house. They are the only shipbuilding works in the world where it is possible to watch all the processes through which an amorphous heap of iron-stone passes before it emerges as a seaworthy vessel. The shipyard covers an area of about 100 acres, and is on the site of an old yard where wooden frigates had been built early in the century for the British government. It has a river frontage of nearly three-quarters of a mile. Within this area there is a shipyard, graving dock and slipway, engine and boiler works, steel-works and blast furnaces. There are five blast furnaces, and in the steel- works there are eight smelting furnaces and cog- ging, sectional, sheet, and plate mills. The works are completely self-sufficing, having their own forge and rivet works, fitters', plumbers', joiners', and cabinet-makers' shops. The engine works are capable of turning out thirty-four sets of engines and boilers in one year. When the shipyards are at their busiest, about eight thou- sand men are employed. There arc about eight 3°5 39 A HISTORY OF DURHAM miles of railway within the works, and twelve locomotives are constantly at work conveying materials from one department to another. The competition of the newly opened-up Midland coalfields was seriously affecting the staple industry of Northumberland and Durham when Charles Palmer opened his shipyards, and in order to counteract this new competition he designed an iron screw steamer, the John Bowes, having a carrying capacity of 650 tons, which, although launched on 30 June, 1852, is still afloat under the name of the Transit, and is owned by a Swedish firm. It is, however, chiefly as a builder of warships that Palmers' Company is noted. They launched their first warship, H.M.S. Terror, during the Crimean War ; she had a displacement of 2,000 tons, was three-decked, and mounted twenty guns of the largest calibre. She was built in three months, 900 men being employed, for the government would brook no delay. The substitution of rolled for forged plates accounts for the short time in which the ship was built. The firm have built sixty-nine warships for the government, consist- ing of a troopship, the Jumna ; ten battleships, Terror, Defence, Cerberus, Gorgon, Swiftsure, Triumph, Resolution, Revenge, Russell, Lord Nelson; ten cruisers, twelve gunboats, twenty-five torpedo boat destroyers, and ten torpedo miners.18 The Lord Nelson is the largest battleship yet launched in the north of England. Length, 410 ft. ; beam, 79 ft. 6 in. ; draught, 27 ft. ; displace- ment, 16,500 tons ; horse-power, 16,750; speed, 1 8 knots ; maximum coal capacity, 18,000 tons ; primary guns, four 12-inch and ten 9'2-inch ; cost, ^1,616,083. It was launched on 4 Sep- tember, 1906. At Hebburn on Tyne Messrs. R. W. Haw- thorn Leslie & Co., a firm celebrated for their Russian connexion, have their shipbuilding yards. Of their first seventeen vessels, eleven were built for Russia. They make a special feature of tank steamers for the carriage of oil in bulk, and their vessels for the Australian and New Zealand chilled-meat trade are well known. In 1905 they launched six vessels of an average gross tonnage of 4,809. In the report to Queen Elizabeth, three ships are given as belonging to South Shields, called the Uswen, the Edward, and the John of Shields, belonging to John Bowmaker, William Lawson, and Edward Kitchin. In addition there were six boats, or cobbles, all occupied in fishing.19 The shipping of South Shields was long hin- dered by the repressive policy of Newcastle,20 but early in the eighteenth century Robert Wallis successfully defied the authority of Newcastle 18 Palmer Rec. Oct. 1 906. 19 S.P. Dom. Eliz. Addenda, loc. cit. w R. Gardiner, England's Grievance Discovered, 1655. and opened shipyards there.21 Fryer's map of 1773 gives only two shipyards. Hutchinson, writing in 1787, says that forty years ago not more than four ships belonged to the town, but that in 1781 eleven ships were built and launched there.22 Bailey, writing in 1809, says there were four shipbuilding yards with docks adjoin- ing, one shipbuilding yard without a dock, and seven boatbuilding yards.23 The petition to the queen asking for incorporation in 1850 says that South Shields possessed graving docks and patent slipways capable of accommodating twenty-three ships at one time for repairs, and in addition fourteen yards for the building of ships. Mr. Marshall was the pioneer iron shipbuilder at South Shields. In 1839 the Star, apparently the first iron Tyneside vessel, and certainly among the first twenty iron vessels in the world, was built by him. It was intended for the pas- senger and towing trade on the Tyne. He also built the first iron screw steamer in the north of which there is any official account.24 The vessel was built to the order of the Bedlington Coal Company, in order to convey loaded coal wagons from Blyth to the colliers in Shields harbour. It failed to fulfil the purpose for which it was built, and was turned into an ordinary cargo vessel. The Russians sank it in the Baltic during the Crimean War. It is owing to this lack of success that the Q.E.D. screw steam collier, built by Mr. Coates at Walker's Quay, and fitted with a 20 h.-p. engine by Hawthorn, is known as the first vessel of this class. The arrival of the Q.E.D, at Rotherhithe caused an amount of excitement which certainly warrants the idea that it was a pioneer. The Illustrated London News contains a long account of it, and the description ends with the confident hope ' that the time is not far distant when our ships of the line will be fitted with engines and screw in a somewhat similar manner.' 25 South Shields early entered the steamship building trade, but the boats were of small size, about fifty tons ; by 1844 twenty-eight of these were afloat ; as the total number of steamers owned on the Tyne then only reached 135, South Shields had evidently done yeoman service in this pioneer trade.26 When Mr. Marshall retired, this early ship- building yard was taken over by Mr. J. Read- head about the middle of last century ; he had been engineer to Mr. Marshall, and in partner- ship with Mr. John Softley, another employee, took over the business. The firm stopped work- ing during the great depression in shipbuilding, but Mr. Readhead reopened the yards without 81 G. B. Hodgson, Borough of South Shields, 320. " W. Hutchinson, Hist, of Dur. ii, 483. 18 J. Bailey, op. cit. 295. " Lloyd's Reg. 1843. " lllus. Lond. News, 28 Sept. 1844. 16 Lloyd's Reg. 1843-4; cf. G. B. Hodgson, op. cit. 324. 306 INDUSTRIES Mr. Softley, and the trade developed so rapidly under his sole management that by 1881 exten- sions in the yard became necessary. In 1905 the firm, J. Readhead & Sons, turned out eight vessels of the average size of 3,530 tons. J. P. Rennoldson & Sons, who started the first engineering works at South Shields in 1826, are also shipbuilders. Their special line is tugs of 200 or 300 tons. They built seven of these during 1905. J. T. Eltringham & Co. are another ship- building firm at South Shields, but they are better known as makers of marine boilers. South Shields was the birth-place of the life- boat. To settle the exact question of the man to whom the invention was really due is almost impossible. Greathead is described as the inven- tor on his tombstone in Saint Hilda's churchyard. He received a parliamentary grant of 1,200 guineas, 100 guineas from Trinity House, 60 guineas and their silver medal from the Society of Arts, and a diamond ring from the Emperor of Russia for his work. But many people defend Mr. Woulhave's claim, and still more think that the invention was really due to suggestions from various sources. Many facts in connexion with the building are fortunately in- controvertible. It was built at South Shields by subscription, under the inspection of a committee of whom Nicholas Fairies was chairman, by Mr. Greathead, to whom the idea of a curved keel was entirely due. The terrible catastrophe, the wreck of the Adventure at South Shields in September, 1 789, at the entrance to the harbour, when the men dropped from the rigging, exhausted by cold and hunger, into the sea before the eyes of thousands of helpless spectators, was the imme- diate cause of the effort to build a boat that would live in the stormiest sea. It was first used on 30 June, 1790, when several sailors were saved. Whatever doubt hangs over the real inventor, no one has ever disputed that South Shields was the home of the invention.*7 In the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries Hartlepool was the best-known port on the north-east coast. In the list of the fleet before Calais drawn up in 1346, 'Hartilpole has con- tributed five ships and 145 men."8 In 1565 it possessed one ship, the Peter, belonging to John Brown and George Smith, also three five-men boats and seventeen small cobbles.1* As late as 1614 it is spoken of as the only port town within the county of Durham, although some twenty years later the three travellers from Norwich allude to it even then as only interesting on account of its antiquity. every twelve howers. This hath been formerly a brave stately and well fortifyed Towne, now only a sea land habitation for Fishermen." But Hartlepool is completely overshadowed by West Hartlepool, an entirely nineteenth-cen- tury growth. When Queen Victoria came to the throne, a mill and a farm-house were the only buildings where the populous town now stands. Ralph Ward Jackson founded West Hartlepool, as some say, with the idea of having a port in Durham to rival Liverpool. The docks were begun in 1845 in connexion with the Stockton and Darlington Railway, and though it has not grown with the rapidity some of its promoters expected, it is now an important ship- building centre with a total gross tonnage of 128,898 tons. The oldest firm, Messrs. William Gray & Co., was begun at Old Hartlepool by Mr. William Gray, in partnership with Mr. Denton, who had opened a shipbuilding yard there in 1836. In 1864 the new firm, Denton, Gray & Co., launched their first iron steamer. Five years later the firm removed to the yard in West Hartlepool that had been worked since 1853 bX Pile Spence & Co. When in full work about six thousand men are employed. The firm have six times headed the list with the greatest output in the United Kingdom ; the last time they held the blue ribbon was in 1900. In 1901, although their total tonnage, 82,262, was a few hundred tons greater than in 1 900, they were beaten by a Belfast firm and have not yet regained their supremacy. In 1883 it was determined to add an engineering department ; the marine engine works were opened in 1885 ; they have since been extended, and now cover almost ten acres of ground. Another enterprising shipbuilding firm at West Hartlepool is that of Messrs. Furness, Withy & Co., who were the first to adopt the use of electricity as a motive power throughout their shipyard. They have built to the order of the Wilsons and Furness-Leyland Line, the Chesapeake and Ohio S.S. Co., the Hamburg- American and Allan Line. In 1905 they built ten vessels, average size 4,459 tons. The chair- man, Sir Christopher Furness, is also chairman of Irvine's, the third shipbuilding yard at West Hartlepool. Bishop Pudsey, fired with the desire to go on the crusades, had, according to Hutchinson, a large vessel built either at Hartlepool or Stock- ton," but he did not carry out his intentions. In the history of the Exchequer the further career of the ship is narrated. Likewise that ancient decayed Coast Towne wch it surrounded some halfc a mile with the maine Sea 17 J. Salmon, op. cit. I f-i 5. " R. Hakluyt, rtjagti, i, 124. " S.P. Dom. Eliz. Addenda, loc. cit. 3°7 Et in reparatione Magnae Navis quae fuit Epis- copi Dunclemensis xij£ xv/. iijV. ob. . . . Et in 10 'A Relation of a Short Survey of 26 Counties, 1634.' Lansd. MSS. 213, fol. 320. Printed, Stuart Sfr. vii. " Hutchinson, Hist. e/Dttr. i, 175. A HISTORY OF DURHAM Custamento ducendi praedictam navem Londiniam xl, per idem breve, et Roberto de Stockton qui duxit eandem Navem xiiy. \\i\d. pro servitio (?) suo, per breve ejusdem.38 But if Stockton were of sufficient importance to be the building-place of the vessel it had sunk into complete insignificance as a port, by the reign of Elizabeth, for the report of the Eliza- bethan commissioners treats it in a somewhat slighting manner. There is also a creek called Tees Mouth, three miles from Hartlepool, but no town nor habitation until Stockton 10 miles distant where ships may come near the shore and boats may come on land.33 But in the seventeenth century Stockton was more flourishing; a report drawn up in 1638 says of the Tees that the effect of the tide was felt as far as Yarm, and that ships 'of 60 tons come into the river many at a time that bring corn from Dantzic.' 34 So important had the Baltic trade at Stockton become by 1671 that the Eastland merchants thought it necessary to ap- point a surveyor there.36 There is a local tradi- tion that the revival of shipbuilding in the middle of the eighteenth century was due to a Mr. Chap- plelow, a government agent, who coming to get timber for the royal dockyards, stayed there to work up the inferior wood available in great quantities, but too small to be worth transporta- tion to London. The Headlams, who migrated to Gateshead as early as 1750, were the first shipbuilders, but the names of the Humphreys, Haws, Mellanbys, and Markhams are all con- nected with wooden shipbuilding at Stockton during the later eighteenth century. Mr. Haw built sixty-one vessels between 1782 and i8oo.36 In 1779 the Be liana , a fine frigate, was built for the government ; it was unfortunately wrecked in the Texel.37 It is difficult to associate the small town of Yarm, miles from the mouth of the river, with a shipbuilding industry, but there is no doubt that the increased prosperity of Stockton was due to the decay of Yarm as a- port. At the end of the 32 Madox, Hist, of the Exch. i, 714. 33 S.P. Dom. Eliz. loc. cit. "' Ibid. Chas. I, 1638, vol. 409, No. 189. 35 Ibid. Chas. II, 8 Mar. 1671, Entry Book 25, fol. 194. 36 H. Heaviside, Ann. of Stockton, 58. sr J. Brewster, Hist, of Stockton, 155. eighteenth century there were two shipyards at Stockton where vessels of 800 tons could be built.38 The unnavigable nature of the Tees militated against its development as a shipbuild- ing centre; between 1838 and 1857 no less than eighteen vessels had been totally wrecked and sixteen stranded at the Tees mouth.89 The first iron shipbuilding yard was on the Yorkshire side of the river, but Messrs. Pearce, Lockwood & Co. started building iron steamers in 1854 on the Durham side. They met with immediate success, and by 1861 were building for the Indian government. The Talpore was built for conveying troops on the lower Indus, was fitted with 800 berths, and could, in case of urgent necessity, accommodate 3,000 troops. The following year they received another order for a large vessel for the same government. In 1888 the yard was taken over by Mr. Ropner, a West Hartlepool shipowner of German origin, in partnership with his son, Mr. Robert Ropner. The firm devotes itself specially to producing vessels with a great cargo-carrying capacity. In 1895 Mr. R. Ropner patented a- new model, the trunk steamer, which soon achieved great popu- larity. In 1892, and again in 1894, the works were at a standstill for a considerable time on account of disastrous strikes of thirteen and four- teen weeks. In 1900, by their output of 42,263 gross tons, they secured the sixth place among the shipbuilding firms of Great Britain. In 1905 they built nine vessels of nearly 4,000 tons. When in full work they employ about 1,500 hands. Unlike many of the Durham firms, Messrs. Ropner & Son do not build their own engines, but are supplied by Messrs. Blair & Co., whose works immediately adjoin the shipyards. This engineering firm is on the site of some old works started by Messrs. Fossick and Hackworth in 1839 ; here the first pair of marine engines were built in 1853 ; later Mr. G. J. Blair became first assistant, then manager, then owner of the works. The total production of new shipping from the several shipyards on the River Tees for the year 1905 was forty vessels, representing 138,577 tons,40 but only nine of these vessels, with a tonnage of 33,560, can be claimed for the county of Durham. 33 British Universal Dir. 1792. " J. S. Jeans, Notes on Northern Indust. 48. 40 Ports of the River Tees, compiled by the Secretary to the Tees Conservancy Commissioners. 308 INDUSTRIES GLASS WORKS There is no evidence to support the theory that glass was manufactured in England during the Roman occupation, but the first glass made of which we have any authentic information was certainly manufactured at Wearmouth. When Benedict Biscop's church and monastery at Wearmouth was approaching completion, he sent to Gaul for workers in glass, who were unknown in Britain, to glaze the windows of his church — more than this they taught their art to the English.1 Not only window glass, but glasses for domes- tic uses were manufactured there; but by 758 the art had completely died out, for at that date the abbot of Jarrow was sending to Mayence for a man who could make vessels of glass.* There is a blank in the history of northern glass-making for many centuries, but the glass- makers from Lorraine soon found their way to the Tyne, and Sir Robert Manscl, who in 1615 obtained a patent for making glass with coal, according to his own evidence given in 1624, after trying to start works in London, the Isle of Purbeck, and Milford Haven, was enforced for his last refuge contrary to all men's opinion to make triall at Newcastle upon Tyne where after the expence of many thousand pounds that worke for window-glasse was effected with Newcastle Cole.' The fact that the register of All Saints* Church contains upwards of six hundred entries of mar- riages and burials of Henzeys (Hennezels), Til- lorys, and Tyzacks, shows the extent of the French settlement of glass-makers, beginning early in the seventeenth century.4 How soon this new Tyneside industry crossed the river to the Durham side it is impossible to say with certainty. Salmon, writing in 1856, refers to a mixing book of plate glass made in South Shields in 1650, a letter written by John Cookson from his glass-works at South Shields in 1690, and the ancient books of the South Shields plate and crown glass-works of 1728,35 being then extant.' A lease, dated 22 November, 1 Bede, Hist. Eccl. (ed. 1722), 275 ; cf. Micklcton MSS. 10. ' Epistolae Bonifacii, cxiv. ' S.P. Dom. Jas. I, 1624, vol. 162, No. 63. 4 ' Rise of the Art of Glass Making on the Tyne,' by James Clepham, Arch, Aeftana, viii. S. Graze- brook, Colle.tion for the Genealogy of the noble families of Henzley, Tyllery, and Tyzack, Stourbridge, 1877. (Privately printed, a copy in the Newcastle Free Library). * If any of these are in existence, they have eluded a somewhat persistent search, nor have I been able to find anyone who has ever seen them. The Cess Book of St. Hilda's from 1660 to 1 7 14 throws no light on the subject, and so far the Durham Treasury has yielded no earlier lease than one of 1737. 1737, refers to the building of two glass-houses on the south bank of the Tyne. The dean and chapter lease all that their parcel of ground set lying and being on the south side of the River of Tyne nigh South Sheles aforesaid containing in breadth six and twenty yards or thereabouts whereon two glass houses now in the tenure or occupation of the said John Dagnia his undertenants or assignc* were lately erected to the said John Dagnia.8 There is no positive evidence as to the site, but the expression ' from the top of the Bank there on the South to the low water mark of the River Tyne on the North,' together with the known fact that the river frontage on the east of the Mill Dam was in other hands, points to the site of John Dagnia's works being either where Altringham's works now stand near the Mill Dam, or higher up Holborn where Moore's glass-works arc situated. Fortunately there is no doubt as to the site or history of the celebrated crown and plate glass works of Messrs. Cookson on Cookson's Quay. On ii March, 1737, Isaac Cookson leased the property from the administrators of the will of Robert Blunt for £900, and the following year John Cookson, his son, and Thomas Jeffreys, of Snow Hill, London, entered into partnership, the one putting in £3,750, the other £2,250, as manufacturers of crown and plate glass, each swearing that he would not at any time make known or reveal any of the sccrett or secretts relating to the mixing of mctalls for the making of the said crown and plate glass. Jeffreys undertook the management of the Lon- don warehouse, and travelled for the firm, as he already ' as merchandizing in Hairs travelled the principall towns between South Shields and the Land's End.' The London warehouse was in Old Swan Lane, Upper Thames Street, the lease being granted by the Worshipful Company of the body of Christ of the Skinners of London, for ninety-nine years at £40 ; on the renewal of the lease it was raised to £1,000 a year. John Cookson managed the South Shields branch. The business increased rapidly; by 1746 the firm consisted of John Cookson, acting partner, Thomas Jeffreys, Richard Jeffreys, Sir John Delange, James Dixon, and Joseph Cookson. Thomas Jeffreys retired from the firm in 1748, and transferred his share to Richard, who also bought out Sir John Delange. But in 1776 John Cookson bought all his ten shares for * For an interesting account of the Dagnia family see ' John Dagnia of South Shields,' by C. E. Adam- son, M.A., Arch. Aehana, 1894. 3°9 A HISTORY OF DURHAM £8,000 ; thus only Dixon and Cookson were left in the firm. John Cookson died in 17837 The extensive foreign trade done by the firm is shown by an old day book, 1745-47,* in which 'adventures' to Hamburg, New York, Rotter- dam, Copenhagen, Dantzic, Lisbon, Edinburgh, and Rhode Island are of frequent occurrence. As John Dagnia appears as a purchaser in this day book, the popular idea that he was a partner in the Cookson firm is disposed of. The Cess Books of St. Hilda's from 1760 to 1797 contain each year returns of the payment of the Cookson glass-houses; in 1760 Cookson and Deer paid £i os. 3^., John Cookson 15*. 6d., but by 1766 Cookson and Deer were paying at £i Js.y John Cookson had become Cookson & Co. and was As Deer was a son-in-law of Dagnia, his con- nexion with the glass trade is easily explained. Apparently these were the old glass and bottle works in East Holborn ; unfortunately all the books and papers concerning these works were destroyed a few years ago, and the works having been carried on by a limited liability company were then taken over by Lamberts and eventually closed in 1873. In 1823 Mackenzie says that they employed about IOO men. Perhaps nothing can give a more vivid impression of the extent of the glass trade in the north than the description given in the Newcastle Courant of 2O September, 1823: On Friday last the flint glass makers employed in the houses on the Tyne and Wear walked in proces- sion in this town, and the elegant and magnificent display of workmanship exhibited on that occasion evinced the perfection this art has attained, as it may safely be affirmed that in the number of objects, the variety of the forms, the excellency of the workman- ship and the difficulty of their execution it has seldom been equalled. The men all wore sashes, and glass stars suspended from their necks, by chains or drops of variegated colour, the great majority of them had glass feathers in their hats, and each individual carried a glass ornament in his hand. The men from six glass houses composed the procession. South Shields, flag ; large cut glass upon pillars, supported by two swords ; bugle ; wind mill ; a fort mounted with seven cannon; violin and bow; the men wore white sashes trimmed with blue. Sunderland, Wear. Silk banner with " Wear " and the arms of Messrs White and Young ; large cut vase and cover ; two chandeliers with branches, ornamented with coloured button drops ; bearing cut decanters, wines &c. and a wind mill at work, at the top ; 2 goblets with an engraving from Burns' song of ' Willie brew'd,' &c. ; a bible lying open with 2 verses from Proverbs ; a glass case containing a ship, the Henry, mounting 64 guns ; a curious tube representing by means of the action of different fluids the circulation 1 From deeds kindly lent me by Mr. N. C. Cook- son, and leases in the Durham Treasury. 8 In the possession of Mr. N. C. Cookson. 9 Cess Books of St. Hilda's, South Shields ; i, 1690- 1716; ii (missing), 1716-60; iii, 1760-97. of the blood in the human body .... 3 glass cases, one containing a Coss.ick ; another a gentleman driv- ing a gig, with his dog fol!owing him ; and the third a representation of his infernal majesty. The men had pink sashes trimmed with blue, with the word " Wear " upon them, the cutters had a cut rose, thistle and shamrock supporting the feathers in the cap. Durham, flag. Gateshead arms on on: side ; Dur- ham and British Pint glass works in the circle, and " By honourable exertion " in the garter on the other. Large Prussian lamp ; obscured and painted figure of Justice stained ; 28 words; crown gilded glass, with 2 tassels, supported by 2 persons carrying white wands ; 2 cut candlesticks, mounted with spangles and icicles ; crown borne by a person wearing a glass hat, with the Motto " Industry and Unity " ; a representation in stained, painted and engraved glass of Samuel declaring the judgements of God upon Eli's house ; 2 variegated pedestal lamps with painted shades. The men of these works had blue silk sashes trimmed with orange, with the letters D. G. W. on them and all cut rosettes below. But the glass-works on the east side of the Mill Dam, where blown plate glass was manu- factured, continued to flourish ; in 1833 Mr. Isaac Cookson, in evidence given in to a Govern- ment Commission of Inquiry sitting at Newcastle on the glass trade, stated that the eighteen glass- houses at Sunderland and South Shields paid in all £133,196 in duty out of £680,004 Pa'd in- all England, and five years later Mr. Shortridge, himself a South Shields glass-maker, in giving evidence before a Royal Commission says that he thought the firm had been in existence for about a century and a half and that they were the largest glass-makers in the kingdom.10 The works re- mained in the hands of the Cookson family until the year 1845, when the returns of the excise duty show that there was more plate glass made at South Shields than at any other manufactory in the kingdom.11 Possibly these were the original Cookson glass-works. The Cooksons then re- tired from the trade ; the firm became R. W. Swinburne & Co. In 1858 a syndicate took over almost all the plate glass manufactures of England, the managing director was R. W. Swinburne of South Shields ; many of the works were stopped, but the South Shields were kept at full work; in 1862 they were paying £30,000 in wages annually. In 1868 the syndicate dis- solved, and the limited liability company who took over the works failed in 1891. Another important firm established in 1797 was that of Shortridge & Co.12 Possibly these early works were the flint glass-works in West Holborn, but later the firm had crown and bottle works near the Mill Dam. In 1827 the glass 10 Rep. from the Select Com. on Church Leases, 1838, p. 123 ; Evidence of Richard Shortridge. 11 R. Swinburne, 'Glass,' Industrial Resources of Tyne, Tees, and Wear, 198. 11 St. Hilda's Cess Book, iii. 310 INDUSTRIES manufacturers were Isaac Cookson & Co., crown and plate, at Cookson's Quay ; Cookson, Cuthbert & Co (bottle), in East Holborn ; and Shortridge, Sawyer & Co., flint glass-works." A great deal of glass was also manufactured in Sunderland and its neighbourhood. In 1751 the numbers of ships employed in carrrying not only coals and salt but glass and other merchan- dize to diverse parts of the kingdom as well as abroad makes it a fine nursery of seamen." In 1772 there were three green bottle-houses and one flint glass-house there. Thomas Wilson, who died in 1776, and was buried in Bishop- wearmouth Church, was a glass manufacturer at Ayre Quay. In 1818, 1,543 cwt. 2 qrs. 24 Ib. of bottles, 1,296 cwt. i qr. 19 Ib. of crown glass, and 463 cwt. oqrs. 13 Ib. of flint glass were ex- ported from this port. In 1827 the trade was flourishing ; two glass- works at Deptford, one at Southwick, and three in Sunderand proper were not only supplying local needs but exporting largely. The Ayre Quay Bottle Works, the oldest on the river, were then managed by John Candlish ; Philip Laing and Sir James Laing were partners in the firm. Pemberton's Bottle Works were also at Ayre Quay, but were closed many years ago. There were also two large establishments at Deptford, the Wear Flint Glass Works in the hands of Mr. Booth, and Featherstonhaugh's or the Wear Glass Bottle Works. Later the bottle- works engulfed the flint glass-works. In Sunder- land proper, Fenwick & Co. had crown glass and glass bottle-works in Low Street, and Hilkiah Hall bottle-works at Bridge End." Ten years later Dibdin visiting Sunderland was much struck by the development of the industry. My daughter was delighted with what she saw. An order had come down that morning for a thousand dozen of gin glasses. The ordinary wine or beer bottle is the prevailing article of commerce, but decanters, tumblers, and wine glasses, vases with their accompani- ments, are manufactured in a style of surprising beauty and in endless variety.16 11 J. Salmon, op. cit. 22, 23. " England's Gazetteer, 1751. 14 White and Parson, op. cit. i, 343, 360, czxxii. " Dibdin, Tour in the Northern Counties of England, At one time the glass cutters were quite a feature of the Sunderland glass trade. Sailors in search of local novelties to take away as presents were their chief patrons. Glasses with Sunder- land Bridge cut on them, decorated with the initials or names of the buyers, found a ready sale ; these goods were not only manufactured in the works, but the trade was carried on as a domestic industry. Early in the nineteenth century Thomas Buller and Robert Pile, Low Street, Robert Greener in High Street, and Robert Haddock, Low Quay, were experts in the art. In 1877, except the Ayre Quay Bottle Co., all these glass-works which fifty years before had been giving remunerative employment to many men were closed.17 Occasionally in going over the shipyards a site is pointed out as being the locality of the old glass-works, but few traces still remain. This is not, however, so astonishing as the total collapse of the celebrated works of James Hartley & Co., for, comparatively speaking, they are a modern firm. They were begun about 1842, and gained a world-wide reputation on account of the invention by James Hartley of a new kind of plate glass called rolled plate, some- thing like unpolished plate glass, but not so heavy, and of the greatest utility for roofing and other purposes, where translucency only is required ; in 1863 Mr. Hartley stated that one-third of the English-made sheet glass used in England was made in these works, and some idea of their output may be gained from the fact that their account with the North Eastern Railway Company for the month of March 1865 was ,£692 15*. id. These works covered an enormous area on the Hylton Road, where Hartley's Buildings now stand, and at one time employed 700 men, but the works were closed and dismantled in 1896." The Stockton Gla?s Works at one time did a very flourishing bus:ncis, but they are on the Yorkshire side of the river. Glass, at onetime one of the leading industries of Durham, is now represented by the Ellison Glass Works at Gateshead, Moores at South Shields, three firms in Sunderland, and one in the neighbourhood of Gateshead. " Taylor Potts, op. cit. 162, 163. " From a bill in possession of Mr. Williamson, Hylton Road, Sunderland. A HISTORY OF DURHAM POTTERIES The manufacture of white earthenware was introduced into the county of Durham between 1730 and I74O.1 The pottery was begun by Mr. Warburton at Carr's Hill near Gateshead ; some of the original buildings still remain in a dilapidated condition, and a small brown-ware pottery is still carried on there. The initial stage once passed, the development was rapid, and soon four potteries were at work on Gateshead Fell.2 White clay, a prime necessity in the production of fine pottery, was cheap and abundant, as it was brought by the Devonshire and Cornish vessels fetching coal from the Tyne as ballast. The Newbottle Pottery was started as early as 1755, and, in spite of its isolated position, managed in the hands of the Scotts, Fairbairns, and B rod- ricks to do a considerable trade for the first six decades of the nineteenth century. The trade, however, concentrated itself chiefly on the banks of the Wear, and early in the nine- teenth century in one year the export numbered 292,042 pieces. This export trade was princi- pally with North-East Europe. Norway took Denmark „ Prussia Germany Holland Guernsey Jersey British Northern Colonies 16,000 pieces 5.95° 47,000 4.30° 145,092 I4.550 15,800 43,350 292,042 » The favourite purchase of the many sailors who frequented the port of Sunderland was a set of Sunderland jugs or a gaily painted glass rolling- pin. The principal firms were Antony Scott, founded in 1788 at Southwick ; a rice dish with the mark AS and date in a circle is in the Sunderland Museum, and also a curious smoker's companion, a pagoda-like erection consisting of spittoons, ash-dish, candlestick, and extinguisher fitting into each other. The firm celebrated their centenary in 1888, but stopped working, and the works were dismantled and sold in 1896. Their best-known pattern was views of Haddon Hall, Derbyshire ; at one time the Haddon Hall pattern rivalled the Willow pattern in the North of England in popularity. The Wear Pottery at Southwick was founded by Brunton in 1789, but taken over by Samuel 1 Jewitt, Ceramic Art of Gt. Brit. 1 J. Bailey, Gen. View of the Agric. ofDur. 3 T. Potts, Hist, of the Town, Port, Trade, and Com. of SunJeHand, 165. Moore in 1803 ; it did an extensive continental trade at one time, but falling into the hands of inexperienced managers the trade decreased and it was dismantled. The excellent specimen of what is known as Sunderland pottery, probably made about 1820, in the British Museum, is stamped Moore & Co. The plate has in the centre the favourite design of a steamship, trans- fer printed ; the sea is washed with colour, the sides and rim decorated with pink lustre, the rim moulded with a shell and scroll design. The firm got their supply of flint from near Beamish, where they leased the Poctrerley Flint Mill ; * there was another flint mill neat Whitehill, and a third near Fencehouses ; all these were kept employed supplying the Wearside Potteries. It was, however, at Hylton that two of the best- known potteries were situated ; the earliest was founded at North Hylton in 1762 by John Maling, whose great-grandchildren now carry on the largest pottery in the North of England at Newcastle, to which place the works were re- moved in 1817.' But the finest buildings and the best-conducted pottery on Wearside was that of John Dawson at the Low Ford Pottery, South Hylton ;6 unfortunately the works have been dismantled, but an interesting document was discovered when the flint mill chimney was taken down in 1896 : John Dawson, Esq. Hylton Lowford Pottery Charles Frederick Dawson William Dawson William Trotter Agent [A list of the workmen employed in building the chimney follows.] This building was erected A.D. 1840 by Jno- Daw- son for the express purpose of grinding Flint. Colour. Engineer, R. Hawthorne, Esq., Newcastle-on- Tyne. Engine, 27^ Horse Power. Mr. J°°- Dawson aged 80. C. F. Dawson aged [no age given]. W. Dawson aged 15. Nachdem Charles F. & William Dawson ihre Erziehung in Deutschland bekommen hatten kam der erste in seinem l6ten & der letzte in seinem 15 ten Jahre nach England zurtlck um in dem Frabrika ihres Gross-vaters das Steinzeug Geschaft fortzusetzen unter dem Aufsichte ihrer Vormunde der Herrn 4 Beamish Estate Office ; ' Messrs. Smith, Moore & Co. held Poctrerley Flint Mill on a 1 4 years lease from April 5, 182710 1841 ; then SamuelMoore & Co. took another 14 years lease from April 5, 1841.' 8 White and Parson, op. cit. i, 55. 6 Ibid, ii, 263. 3I2 PLATE II : SUNDERLAND POTTERY INDUSTRIES Ed"4 Lawrey J. Vint Tho* Gales. Johann Hichtenschield ist jetzt unser Reisender lebt mit seinem Familien in Hamburg thut den Aufsicht ubcr unserer Lager in Hamburg. CHARLES F. DAWSON. WILLIAM DAWSON. Have generally 6 Glost Kilns drawn every week. employ about 200 hands in the Factory George Chambers Foreman George Naisley Warehouse 1840 Building commenced April about 150 ships of large dimensions are build- ing in the Wear.7 The mill was capable of grinding 2O tons of flint a week. But John Dawson died in 1848,* and although the pottery continued in the hands of trustees, who at one time refused ,£9,000 for it, until 1864, no purchaser could then be found, the plant was sold by auction, the moulds and copper plates commanding a ready sale. About 1 830 Da wson's pottery produced the best earthen- ware and had the largest output of any pottery on the Wear. One reason for his success was the encouragement given to the workpeople to bring their minds to bear on their work ; they were encouraged to make new designs, and these were passed through the oven for them without question or delay. They were especially success- ful with their blue willow ware. Whether Dixon & Austin took over the North Hylton works when the Malings migrated to Newcastle it is impossible to say with certainty ; a John Phillips, whose identity is difficult to establish, hovers over the Hylton and Sunderland potteries, the marks John Phillips, Hylton Pottery,9 J. Phillips, Sunderland Pottery,10 and Phillips & Co. still existing. Possibly he worked the pottery at Hylton before Dixon & Austin took it over. But leaving the region of hypo- thesis, the Sunderland, or as it was called by the workpeople, the Garrison Pottery was established by Robert Dixon & William Austin in 1807, in a building that up to that time had been used as a whiting factory ; Pottery Buildings now occupy the site. Later they were joined by Thomas Henderson ; and then Alexander Phillips, the nephew of John Phillips, who acted as clerk to the firm, was taken into partnership.11 As early 'The document is in the possession of Mr. William Ball of Deptford Pottery, to whom I am indebted for many local details concerning the Wearside potteries. " He was buried in the family vault in Hylton Church. 'A specimen in the Victoria and Albert Museum has this mark. " Mr. Ritson has a finely printed mug in his collec- tion with the mark J. Phillips, Sunderland Pottery. " From information supplied by Mr. Dixon ot Brisbane, Queensland, once partner in the firm. as 1827 the firm consisted of Robert Dixon, William Austin, Thomas Henderson, and Alexander Phillips, though it traded under the name of Dixon, Austin, Phillips & Co.11 The firm carried on the Hylton and Sunderland works simultaneously. They did a large export trade, and were especially noted for their pink lustre ware. At one time the firm turned out excellent work even from the artistic point of view ; the following description of a jug gives a typical example of their work about 1830. Sunderland globular Jug of white earthenware, 1 1 in. high, i o in. from tipofspout to curve of handle. Decora- ted with band of leaves and flowers in colours round neck and with borders of dark purple lustre round the top and bottom of neck and the base of jug and on the spout. The body of the jug is decorated with purple lustre splash and designs in black transfer printing filled in with red, blue, green, and yellow, as follows — On front of jug — Below spout a shield with anchor on it ; supporters two sailors bearing colours ; crest full-rigged ship. Below shield is motto — ' Deus dabit vela,' and below is inscribed — ' Mariner's Arms,' Above this design is the address — ' Battle Bridge, Hawk ' ; below, the name ' Henry Chatters.' On one side is the well-known design of the Wearmouth Bridge surmounted by inscription giving dimensions and date. On the other side is a design inscribed below ' Chelmsford Road 1822' and shewing a gig of marvellous construction out of which apparently two men have been thrown on to a high road. Further on in front of a screen of bushes is the figure of a man in dress of naval officer 1 8th or early igth century together with woman and two children all in lachrymose attitudes and with ship of war at sea in distance and boat waiting in foregrounJ. Under this is the name of the engraver. Below this design is this inscription — The orders giv'n, the signal gun is fir'd And the last mo- ment of my stay expir'd In haste the deck I mount.compar'd with me The storm knows rest & peace the raging sea. In the middle of which is the name of the firm of potters, ' Dixon Austin & Co., Sunderland,' in an oval. An extremely popular product of these works was the lion ; the photograph is from a specimen in Mr. Ritson's collection. It is of finely potted white earthenware with lustrous white glaze. The height is 9 in. and the length 10 in. ; it has the mark Austin, Dixon & Co. impressed on top of base. Date c. 1825." There is much difficulty with regard to the borough of Sunderland Pottery. Jewitt, whose assertions deservedly carry great weight, states "From agreement in the possession of Mr. Ritson ; White and Parson, op. cit. i, 359. "I am indebted to Mr. V. R. Ritson for the descriptions and the photographs. (PI. II.) 3'3 40 A HISTORY OF DURHAM that the Sunderland or Garrison Pottery was founded by J. Phillips but Mr. Dixon, who as a later partner in the firm had exceptional oppor- tunities of knowing the truth, affirms that his grandfather was the founder. Chaffers, whose statements about Sunderland pottery are open to question, makes confusion worse confounded by writing of two potteries, one the Garrison and the other the Sunderland, whereas the Garrison was only the workmen's name for the Sunderland pottery. In addition to these well-known potteries there were a number of smaller firms, whose aggregate output reached a considerable total. A pottery was begun at Seaham by Captain Plowright in 1 836, but he worked it for only a few years; then it was taken in hand by the workmen as a co- operative enterprise, but quickly abandoned ; again reopened by R. C. Wilson it was finally closed in 1852. At one time it manufactured a willow pattern in blue of exceptional excellence. Of all these numerous and flourishing potteries two only remain : — Ball Brothers, the Deptford Pottery, founded in 1857, wmcn still manufac- tures some brown ware, but is principally employed as a factory, doing considerable trade in German ware ; and Messrs. Snowdon & Co., founded in 1 840 by Thomas Rickaby at Sheepfolds. It is possible that Francis Place, the celebrated painter and potter, may have carried out some of his pottery experiments at Dinsdale, a few miles from Darlington. A few years ago some fur- naces were discovered there ; they were of brick with iron gates, and were at first supposed to be of Roman origin ; further investigation, however, pointed to a much later date, late seventeenth or early eighteenth century. As Place lived at Dinsdale before he went to the Manor House at York, where he had furnaces built and pursued many interesting experiments in the manufacture of pottery, the Dinsdale kilns may have been used by him.14 At one time a con- ', siderable amount of pottery was manufactured at Stockton-on-Tees ; Thomas Ainsworth had two glost kilns and a bisque kiln ; he started in 1850 in partnership with his brother William; the firm continued until 1901, the site being then bought by Colonel Ropner for the enlargement of his shipyards. William Smith had a pottery in the same neighbourhood, but removed to Hartlepool about 1896; he was unsuccessful and soon retired from the business. But the better-known firm of William Smith & Co., which started in 1826, is on the Yorkshire side of the river, and still continues. The Tyne or South Shields Pottery was estab- lished in Waterloo Vale by Mr. Robertson in 1830. In 1841 the business was bought by Mr. John Armstrong, who worked it success- fully until 1871, when Isaac Fell and George Young purchased it. They confined themselves to manufacturing ordinary brown ware and Sunderland ware ; if any Sunderland pottery was manufactured it was small in quantity and fur- nished no good specimens. The works were closed in 1890. TEXTILE INDUSTRIES The textile industries belong entirely to the south of the county, and date from the end of the seventeenth century. Spinning and weaving were carried on as a domestic industry from the earliest times, but there is a complete absence of reference to early textile industries in the county. Darlington dyers are alluded to in Boldon Book, and at the close of the thirteenth century ' Madersgarthis,' the place where the dye was grown, is mentioned as belonging to the Wai- worth's. Dyeing would hardly be carried on to any great extent unless cloth was manufactured in the district, but all accounts of the trade seem to have escaped record. Glovers figure frequently in the history of Darlington, but they were makers of leather not cloth gloves. In the city of Durham the woollen industry was sufficiently developed to admit of an influential gild of weavers. Fuller1 makes no allusion to Durham in enumerating the centres of early woollen industry. In 1647 and ^55 silk weavers occur in the register of St. Cuth- foert's at Darlington, but these are isolated 1 T. Fuller, Ch. Hist. (ed. 1665), iii, 112. examples, and left no mark on the industrial history of the town. It is true that as early as 1531 the flax cultivated to a considerable extent in the neighbourhood of Houghton-le- Spring was spun in the district, for a note is added to the value of the tithes as given in the parish books, ' We have a bundle of lyne or flax mostly spun by the women, dame Hakford the smith's wife of Newbotill and others.' 3 Gates- head, too, had a reputation for its woollen and linen goods,3 but these are exceptions. The county of Durham is especially exempted from the provisions of the Act of 1557-8, that cloth-making should not be carried on outside corporate towns or market towns where the manufacture had been carried on for the last ten years,4 which seems to point to the fact that the woollen industry was either non-existent or 14 1 am indebted to Mr. J. P. Gibson of Hexham for this interesting suggestion. * ' Rec. of Houghton-le-Spring,' by R. W. Ramsay in Engl. Hist. Rev. Oct. 1905. 3 ' Old Gateshead,' by J. Clephan, Arch. Ael viii, 228. '4 & 5 Phil, and Mary, cap. 5, sec. 22-6. INDUSTRIES in such poor case that the government felt that special legislation was necessary to foster it. Probably the report on the salt trade correctly represented the condition of affairs in the county about 1605. It is to be noted that in the Countyes of Durham and Northumberland there be no great trades as clothing and suchlike used, by which the poorer sort are sett on Worke and relieved from begery saving only the trades of Colyery and Salting.* But by the end of the century the industry had made some headway in the south of the county, and though Bishop Auckland, Barnard Castle, and Castle Eden as manufacturing centres had brief and fluctuating careers, Durham carpets retained their reputation until within the last few years, and Darlington had still worsted mills of great importance. Ralph Thoresby,when passing through Barnard Castle in 1694, mentions leather as its chief industry,6 ' now chiefly famous for bridles there made,' but some forty years later 'a great woollen manufactory of stockings' was carried on there.7 According to Bailey, whose authority as a native of the county and an observant man can- not be disregarded, the trade was lost owing to the manufacturers trying to undersell each other, and producing inferior goods. The customers were drawn away and the unfortunate employees forced to seek work in Durham, Darlington, and the neighbouring counties.8 But the popularity of Barnard Castle carpets continued after the other worsted industries were lost. The waters of the Tees were supposed to be peculiarly well adapted for producing brilliant colouring from the dyes ; before the introduction of chemical dyes, this was a matter of the utmost importance. By 1827 there were five carpet factories in the town, manufacturing Dutch, Kidderminster, and Brussels carpets, and employing several hundred hands. The majority of these firms did not spin, but imported their worsted and yarn from York- shire ; the largest of the factories, however, Messrs. Monkhouse & Whitfield, did their own spinning. At one time they employed more than 200 men, and the closing of their works in 1870 was the final blow to the prosperity of the town. The last carpet factory, that of Smith, Powell & Co., was closed in i888.» The flax mill, which was started in 1760, is still work- ing,10 and is one of the largest shoe-thread mills in the country, doing an extensive export trade with Spain, Turkey, and the Colonies. All the flax is imported from Belgium, Ireland, France, and Russia. The mill is worked by Messrs. 'Duke of Northumberland's MSS. Collectanea Warburtoniana. * R. Thoresby, Diary, i, 279. 'Camden, GougA'i Additions, iii, 112. *J. Bailey, op. cit. 294. ' I am indebted to Mr. Vincent Ord of Barnard Castle for information about the carpet trade. " The mill is on the Yorkshire side of the river. Ullathorne, descendants of the original founders of the business. The firm has branch establish- ments in Melbourne, Paris, and London. About 100 men and 100 women and children are em- ployed. In addition to shoe-thread, a certain amount of twine and rope is made, in order to utilize the yarn which is not of sufficiently satisfactory quality to be made into shoe-thread. In 1 792 a manufacture of corduroys and sail- cloth was begun by Mr. Burdon at Castle Eden ; about 200 boys and girls besides men were em- ployed in spinning and weaving. A row of houses called the Factories, where the overseers of the works used to live, still remains and gives some idea of the extensive nature of the enter- prise. All traces of the square where the factory was have disappeared, but in the coal-house of a cottage, still called the Bleacheries, there are the ovens of the bleaching ground ; a great quantity of sail-cloth was manufactured here. But the enterprise was not successful. The industry was removed to Durham in 1796, and the building where the transferred business was carried on being burnt down, it was never re-established.11 Darlington from the earliest time was associa- ted with spinning and weaving. Boldon Book alludes to the dyers of Darlington, and the Cursi- tor's records constantly refer to the mills on the Skernc. But no records giving the exact date when the corn mills changed into woollen or flax mills have yet been unearthed. Darlington was noted for its linen manufacture long before it won a reputation as a worsted industrial centre. Thoresby says that the linen manufacture was settled at Darlington owing to the influence of the late Queen Mary ; possibly he meant that the linen trade developed considerably under William and Mary throughout England, not that Queen Mary interested herself specifically in Darlington.18 In 1690 three linen corporations for England, Scotland, and Ireland were formed as joint-stock companies, to introduce the im- proved French methods of linen and damask weaving. In England and Ireland they were organized on the basis of buying up existing undertakings ; the discovery in a book of modern newspaper cuttings of three documents in a late seventeenth-century handwriting points to some connexion between Darlington and the newly- established King's and Queen's Corporation of Linen Manufacturers. 'Darlington the 28th £ 96. 300 : = : = Six days sight of this my bill be pleased to pay to Jno. Grainger three hundred pounds as per advise of your friend ROBERT TRUEUAN. The Committee of Linnen Manufactory Old Affrican House in Trogmorton Street London.' " J. Bailey, op. cit. 293. "R. Thoresby, op. cit. ii, 430. A HISTORY OF DURHAM The second document is similar, but dated ye 17"" £, 1696, and for £500. The third is fuller. London 26 June 1696. ST. Pay under John Grainger for the account of Robert Trueman, the sum of Five hundred pounds, being in part, for his bill of Six hun- dred pounds, the 7th of Aprill 1696 for the use of the King and Queen's Corporacon for the Linnen Manufacture in England and for your so Doing this shall be your Warrant. PAUL DOEMINIQUE, Dpty. WILLIAM SHEPHERD, THOM. MORICE, WM. LASCOE, JOHN BLACKLER, SAM. ONGLEY, PHIN. BOWLER. Apparently John Grainger was a banker, Robert Trueman the manager of a weaving or flax- supplying concern at Darlington. The King's and Queen's Corporation had bought goods from or through Trueman, or (supposing there was a weaving factory owned by the corporation there) it had ordered goods produced there to be sent to London. Payment was made by Trueman drawing a bill of exchange on the corporation which was accepted by the corporation. As all three documents deal with round numbers, possi- bly there was a continuous series of transactions between Trueman and the corporation.13 The Universal Magazine in its descriptive account of Darlington says : — It is the most noted place in the whole world for huckabacks, being made from half an ell to 3 yards wide. The price varies from "]d, to l8/., the broad sort being made nowhere else.14 Early in the eighteenth century the linen trade was chiefly in the hands of Quakers, and this fact gave Harley an opportunity for a gibe at the sect. Describing Darlington he says : — The Skerne runs at the bottom, and there is a navi- gable river eight miles off, which is a great promotion of the trade of the town, which lies chiefly in Hucka- back. I bought a coarse piece of it for towels, and that I might be sure to be imposed upon with great brevity (sic) dealt with Dobson a Quaker.15 The study of the registers of St. Cuthbert's throws considerable light on the industries of Darlington. By the end of the eighteenth century there is ample evidence that a great pre- 13 I am much indebted to Professor Scott of St. Andrews for elucidating these documents for me. Cf. W. R. Scott, ' The King's and Queen's Corpora- tion for the Linen Manufacture in Ireland,' Royal Soc. Antiq. Ireland, xxxi. 14 Universal Mag. Oct. 1749, p. 147. 15 Portland M SS. (Hist. MSS. Com. 1899), v, 100. Journeys in England of Lord Harley, afterwards second earl of Oxford, 3 May, 1725. ponderance of the people worked at one or other of the textile industries. Of the sixteen people buried in the month of April, 1797, nine were weavers or wool-combers. The list comprises weaver, taylor, husbandman, wool-comber, black- smith, weaver, weaver, weaver, skinner, wool- comber, weaver, wool-comber,husbandman,weaver, husbandman, spinster.18 Still, a great deal of the linen sold was not woven in Darlington, but in the surrounding villages. At Hurworth many of the sheds built at the back of the houses, where the weaving used to be carried on, are still to be seen, and some of the oldest in- habitants can recall the days when the road to Darlington was kept busy by weavers either carrying their linen in packs on their backs or driving donkeys laden with it to sell at the fac- tories. The high-water mark of Hurworth linen-weaving was reached early in the nine- teenth century ; of the forty-three people who had their children baptized in 1813, thirteen were weavers ; ten years later only ten out of thirty- nine, in 1833 nine out of forty-two, in 1843 s'x out of fifty-two, and in 1853 only two out of thirty-six.17 In some cases the merchants bought the linen in an unbleached state, and the earliest map of Darlington has a large space marked as bleaching grounds ;18but the eighteenth-century newspapers, especially the Newcastle Courant, are full of ad- vertisements of owners of bleaching grounds seeking clients ; so evidently bleaching was car- ried on as a separate industry.19 Defoe, who had an intimate knowledge of the north, says that Darlington was noted for its successful bleaching of linen, so that quantities of the mate- rial were brought from Scotland to be bleached there; but as early as 1773 the trade had decreased so seriously that the inhabitants pre- sented a petition to the House of Commons on the subject. A petition of the Huckaback table linen manufac- turers of Darlington in the County of Durham was presented to the House, setting forth that Petitioners are informed that a committee is appointed to enquire into the present state of the Linen Manufactory of these Kingdoms, and representing to the House that the Linen Manufacture in that part of the Kingdom has within the last few years past greatly declined, and that the manufacturers are at present in a most distressed situation and the trade and manufacture there in danger of being lost which Petitioners appre- hend is owing to the increased importation of Foreign Table Linen." 16 St. Cuthbert's Parish Registers, 1653-1797. These registers have not been published, but are full of interesting matter. 17 Hurworth Parish Registers under date. 18 The original map is in the possession of Mr. Edward Wooler. 19 Newcastle Courant, 1750-1800. 80 Com. Joum. 19 Mar. 1773. 316 Fie. i — SWALWIU. Tmi-GcN FlC. 2. COATHAM Ml'NDIVILLE MlLL PLATE III INDUSTRIES But the case was not so desperate as the petition represents for, thirty years later, 500 looms were employed in Darlington manufacturing hucka- backs, diapers, and sheeting." Arthur Young attributes the decay of trade to the idleness of the Darlington poor. At that town is a considerable manufacture of Hucker- back Cloths, in which the workmen earn from \od. to 2/. 6J. a day. -nd women and children propor- tionately. One Master Manufacturer employs about fifty looms and asserts that he could easily set many more at work and employ numerous women and children if the idle part of the poor would be per- suaded to turn industrious ; but numbers of hands, capable of working, remain in total indolence ; and that in general, there need never be an unemployed person in Darlington. They make their cloths up to iff. a yard." Brewster, too, an observant man, writing about the same time, draws attention to the indolence of the people of Stockton, and attributes it to the want of manufactories.33 John Kendrew owned a flax mill on the Skerne as early as 1788 ; ** he was an inventor of great ingenuity ; Bailey says He was the first that invented the mode of grinding optical glasses of a true spherical form by machinery. He neglected to get a patent, and it was meanly stolen by some person of superior capital near Sheffield, who engrossed nearly all the demand by having riders to take in orders in every part of the Kingdom.1* The spectacle mill adjoined Mr. Backhouse's woollen mill. But it is in connexion with the application of machinery to flax-spinning that John Kendrew's inventions are of the greatest importance.*' In partnership with Porthouse he became the first spinner of flax by machinery in the world. On the dissolution of the partner- ship Kendrew went to a mill at Haughton-le- Skerne. The mill still stands, a large and imposing building, with the date 1782 on it. According to the evidence of the church registers early in the nineteenth century almost the whole village worked in some capacity at the mills. They were then in the hands of Edward Parker & Sons, who, some thirty years ago, removed their business to Ireland.*7 Among the Hurworth parish registers there is an interesting MS. account of parish apprentices, where Edward Parker is spoken of as a woollen manufacturer, but this " J. Bailey, op. cit. 194. " A Young, Six Month? Tour through the North of Engl. 1769, ii, 427. " J. Brewster, Hut. of Stockton, 103. 14 Darlington Leases. ** Bailey, op. cit. 294. * Specification of Patents, 1787, No. 1613. 17 Registers of Haughton-le-Skerne, 1 80 1 -5 2 ; White and Parson, op. cit. 238. is probably due to the carelessness of the parish authorities. 1 804. Elizabeth Rickaby female 1 2 bound to Edward Parker woollen manufacturer Haughton for four years. (No fee is mentioned.) 1805. Edward Scarr male 9 bound to Edward Parker woollen manufacturer for 5 years, fee £i 1 6,. 1815. Richard Gouldborough male 1 1 bound to Edward Parkerwoollen manufacturer Haughton four years £2 2/." The Coatham Mundeville Mill had a disastrous history ; it was successfully worked as a shoe- thread mill for many years by Porthouse, then by Gibson, who removed to Selby about 1 840 ; it then became a flour mill and was burnt down. (PI. Ill, fig. 2.) The I'Ansons, the Backhouses, and the Peases were all connected with the Darlington linen industry." The Peases came to Darlington early in the eighteenth century ; the earliest document pre- served amongst the leases of the manor of Dar- lington relating to the family is the copy of a plan and valuation ' of a water corn mill, bark mill, &c., in the parish of Darlington. Mr. Joseph Pease lessee for 3 lives. Sherburn 10 May 1793.'* These mill buildings had been bought from Edward Stamper by Joseph Pease in 1781 for £890." Mr. Backhouse seems to have made a determined effort in 1795 to get complete possession of the Skerne from his own mill as far as Mr. Pease's (i.e. from the present Leadyard Mill to the Priestgate Mill). But the bishop's surveyor interfered ; he writes that there is a mill for the spinning of wool and a mill for the grinding of spectacle glasses, the former a spacious Building and the latter a very convenient and useful one. One must be of the value of at least £60 p. ann. for the uses at present put to, but having been built only seven years Mr. Backhouse assures me they are rated the poor at no more than £16 p. ann. He gives his opinion very emphatically that Mr. Backhouse's request should be refused : — I do not think the Bishop ought to grant Mr. Back- house the river Skern between the Spinning Mill and Mr. Peas's Mill; nor do I see what use it can be of to him, if he raise his spinning mill dam, it will naturally injure Mr. Peas's Mill by checking the stream and causing Logg or Backwater ; and also it may be prejudicial to the See by preventing similar erections. The spinning mill is turned by steam and at present has a dam or head no more than 1 8 inches high. Lowes a Tanner and Locking a stone cutter " Register Book of Parish Apprentices. 19 Richley, Hist, of Bishop Auckland ; ' Romance of Commerce,' in The Friend, 21 Oct. 1898. 10 These leases are kept at Durham in the office of the Halmote Court (to which I had access by the courtesy of Mr. Wall of Darlington). " H. D. Longstaffe, Hist, of Darlington, 284. 317 A HISTORY OF DURHAM both incroached upon the river the former by Tan- pitts and the latter by a stone cutter's yard, and Mr. Peas (tic) appears to be encroaching upon the wastes at X. ARTHUR MOWBRAY. Sherburn 20 Sept. I795-3' The mills mentioned in the documents are doubtless worsted mills ; it is said that the spin- ning and weaving of worsted goods was begun by the Peases in 1752 ; 33 they claim to be the oldest manufacturers of this class of goods in the kingdom. In these days of cut-throat competition it is almost impossible to believe that a Pease from Darlington used to meet the senior partner of the Bradford Spinning Mill, and that between them they used to fix the prices for the ensuing six months. Spinning worsted by machinery was begun about 1796, the machinery being obtained by the Peases from Buck of Settle. But in the early part of the nineteenth century the Dar- lington mills were chiefly employed in spinning yarn to supply the West of England serge manu- facturers and the Scotch tartan manufacturers.34 At the opening of the nineteenth century there was a large worsted manufactory where spinning both by hand and machinery was car- ried on ; about 300 looms, I oo combers, and 5,000 hand-spinners were employed. But the workpeople in Darlington were not sufficient for the demand ; a considerable quantity of wool had to be sent into Scotland to be spun ; Mr. Pease alone paid £800 a year for spinning in Scotland.35 Some idea of the rapid develop- ment of the Darlington woollen trade may be gained from the fact that the terrible fire which occurred at the mill of Messrs. Edward and Joseph Pease in 1817 destroyed property to the value of £30,000, and threw 500 people out of employment.36 When, in 1825, the last grand septennial festi- val was held at Bradford of wool-combers, comb- makers, dyers, &c., in honour of Bishop Blaize, said to have invented wool-combing, William Clough of Darlington, who had enacted the part four times previously, was elected king. 37 In 1832 when a dinner was given to the workmen of Darlington to commemorate the passing of the Reform Bill, a procession repre- senting the leading industries of the town was organized : wool-combers, worsted-weavers, linen- weavers, bricklayers, and carpet-weavers were in full force.38 In 1838 the factory inspectors prepared a re- turn of all the worsted mills and factories in the 88 Darlington Leases. a The worsted business had been begun at Dar- lington before 1727 ; Defoe, EngL Tradesman, ii, 61. 34 J. James, Hist, of the Worsted Manufacture, 387. 35 J. Bailey, op. cit. 163. 16 W. H. D. Longstaffe, Hist, of Darlington, 318. 37 J. James, op. cit. 596. 38 W. H. D. Longstaffe, op. cit. 167. United Kingdom. In the county of Durham only two towns — Darlington and Gateshead — figure. Darlington had three mills with four steam-engines of 104 h.-p., and one water-wheel of 20 h.-p. Thirty-six children between the age of nine and thirteen and 194 youths and girls between thirteen and eighteen were employed, the total number of hands being 405. Gates- head had only one mill with one steam-engine of 12 h.-p., and employed twenty-seven hands.39 According to a similar report issued nine years later, the total number of people employed in the worsted trade in the county only reached 318 At one time the Peases had three sets of worsted mills in different parts of the town as well as factories near Clay Row. The North- gate or Railway Mills were built by the Fells, but came into the Pease family by marriage. These mills were employed principally in pro- ducing materials, merinos, alpacas, and mohairs j but they stopped working in 1880. The Lead- yard Mills are now used as an iron factory, but the Priestgate Mills still continue in active work, in spite of a disastrous fire in 1894, which did £20,000 worth of damage, and threw about six hundred people out of work. Early in the nineteenth century the Priestgate Mills were worked by Edward and Joseph Pease; the firm changed and became first Henry Pease & Co. and then Henry Pease & Co.'s Successors (i.e. Sir Joseph Pease, Mr. Henry Fell Pease, and Mr. Arthur Pease) ; the firm still retains the name, but is now a limited liability company. In 1886 the firm went in for producing dress materials, but weaving has now been entirely abandoned, though the wool which is obtained from Spain, Australia, and the neighbouring coun- tries is sorted, scoured, combed, and spun here. Between six and seven hundred hands are em- ployed, chiefly girls and women ; about one- third of the yarn is exported, but a great deal goes to Bradford and Scotland. At one time Darlington had a great many carpet manufactories, but the success of the Durham carpet industry threw Darlington into the shade, although in 1827 Francis Kipling & Son and William Thompson, both in North- gate, did considerable trade. Until within the last few years no carpets had a better reputation for durability and brilliancy of colour than Durham carpets. The rage for cheaper and flimsier goods, the failure of the American demand, and the tendency of manu- facturers to concentrate in one locality for con- veniences of sale, are the chief reasons for the decay of the trade. The initial impetus to the worsted in- dustry in Durham was given by a local charity. 39 Return of Worsted Mills In the United Kingdom, ordered by the House of Commons, printed 1838. 40 Return of Factory Operatives, 1847. INDUSTRIES In 1689 Mr. Thomas Cradock gave £500 to build a convenient house and work houses for the master and workmen, for the employing a stock for a woollen manufactory, for to set the poor of the county on work." But the works were not successful; in spite of the assistance lent by the charity, Mr. Starforth and Mr. Cooper failed to make the concern pay. In 1814 an advertisement appeared in the New- cattle Courant that the county justices would advance ,£400 to anyone willing to re-establish the industry, and able to give securities for the capital. Mr. Gilbert Henderson, a weaver from the parish of Merrington, was the successful candidate. Coming of frugal and hardworking stock, married to an enterprising wife, under him the business developed rapidly. On the early death of Mr. Henderson the business was carried on by his wife and eldest son. Later the youngest of Gilbert Henderson's sons was taken into partnership, and the firm attracted a great American trade ; even to-day people who were fortunate enough to furnish their houses with Durham carpets show them in excellent condition after ten or fifteen years' wear. The secret of the success of the firm was their early recognition of the necessity of putting in new machinery as it was invented, and adding new buildings as they were required. The factory was carried on by members of the Henderson family until 1903, when the goodwill was sold to Messrs. Crossley of Halifax, who did not, however, take over the buildings, part of which have since been let to Messrs. Mackey & Co., Ltd., who still carry on a carpet manufactory there. The capital advanced in 1814 was not repaid until 1876, when the attention of the members of the flourishing firm being called to what was then a small detail, the money was at once repaid. A considerable trade was done at one time in ropes and sail-cloth ; in Sunderland alone there were in 1827 nineteen ropemakers and twenty sail-makers, but the substitution of wire for hemp rope and of steamers for sailing vessels has materi- ally affected both trades. Webster & Co. at Dept- ford, Haggie & Co. and Craven & Speeding at Sunderland, and the Hepburn Rope and Sail Works supply many of the Sunderland shipyards. The first application of machinery to the manufacture of ropes in the world was made at the works of Messrs. Webster & Co. at Deptford. This historic firm obtained a patent in 1797 by which spinning machinery was introduced, the cumbrous way of making ropes at long rope- walks superseded, and the resistance power of the rope, according to tests made at Shields, Sunder- land, Liverpool, and London, doubled. The first idea of the invention is said to have occurred to Mr. Grimshaw, who, while helping a scientific lecturer, whose experiment had failed, to get his apparatus into order, was struck with the possi- bility of applying the same principle to rope- making. With the assistance of Ralph Hills, a clock-maker, the experiment was successfully carried out. Hills, however, did not derive much profit from his share of the undertaking ; he became a shipowner, had his ships seized by the French, and was forced to sell his share in the ropery, the original firm being Grimshaw, Webster & Co. When Dibdin was in Sunderland he visited the rope-works and thought that the most wonderful department in trade there was the rope manu- factory. The length and size of the ropes especially attracted his attention : one rope was 3J miles long without a single splice ; another of 4,900 yards long weighed 1 1 tons ; it was 6 in. in circumference, and valued at ,£450. The grand-nephew of the founder of the firm. Mr. Webster, still carries on the Deptford works. MINING It is so obvious a truism that the mining industries of any district depend first and fore- most upon its geological structure that a know- ledge of the geology of Durham may be pre- supposed in all who take an interest in the development of its mineral industry. As this •subject has already been treated in the first volume of this history it is only necessary here to recall briefly the more characteristic features. It will be remembered that the western edges of the county consist of Carboniferous or Mountain Limestone, forming the hilly region intersected with deep dales in which the Tyne, Wear, Tees, and their tributaries take their origin. This formation is traversed by numerous fissure veins 41 Will of Mr. Thomas Cradock, $ Feb. 1689, proved at York. carrying galena and at times also zinc blende ; the galena is argentiferous, but the deepest ores are, as is practically always the case, far poorer in silver than the oxidized lead ores — carbonates, sulphates, phosphates, &c. — of the outcrops. This phenomenon of the secondary enrich- ment of mineral veins is, of course, one that is well known in all mineral districts, the reasons for which to-day arc abundantly intelligible. In these veins, the gangue of the lead ore frequently contains spathic iron ore in smaller or larger quantities, and in the Weardale district this spathic ore becomes of considerable importance ; moreover, the limestone traversed by these veins is often changed locally into carbonate of iron by metasomatic action, whilst the carbonates of iron have in places been further converted into hydratcd 3'9 A HISTORY OF DURHAM peroxide of iron by the process of weathering. Both the brown hematites so formed and the original spathic ores have been mined, and have laid the foundation of an iron industry in that part of the county. The ores are nowadays barely worth working, and the amount of iron so raised is unimportant, but the ironworks originally founded to treat them survive in the form of important iron and steel-works, treating ores imported from the neighbouring counties or from abroad. Directly above the Mountain Limestone Series comes the Millstone Grit, which forms an irregular belt about five miles wide, running, roughly speaking, north and south across the county. This formation contains but little workable mineral ; some thin and usually unprofitable beds of coal occur in it, but they are of no practical importance. In the overlying Lower Coal Measures, which pass gradually into the Coal Measures proper, a bed of ironstone exists, a little below the Brockwell seam, and was for some time worked in the Derwent valley, its outcrop having been exposed in the valley of that river. This ironstone has not been worked for over half a century, but was the material from which sword-blades were made by German workmen, in the valley of the Derwent, a locality which at one time enjoyed a high reputation for this craft. The well-known Consett Iron Works (first known as the Derwent Iron Works) were founded originally to smelt these ores, and still exist as flourishing iron and steel-works, although not a pound of ore is mined in the district, the whole of the ores there smelted being imported from abroad. The greater portion of the north-eastern part of the county of Durham consists of true Coal Measures, within which numerous seams of coal are known. Some fifteen different workable seams are known to exist, with a total thickness of about 40 ft. of coal. In the southern and eastern portion of the county the denuded Coal Measures dip underneath the unconformable overlying Permo-Triassic rocks, but still exist at a depth which admits of their being worked to advantage. The area of exposed Coal Measures is probably about 250 square miles, whilst the coalfield continues underneath the newer rocks for a further area of about 200 square miles. Furthermore, it must be borne in mind that the coalfield is not bounded by the sea-shore, but exists underneath the sea, and is in places already worked there. It is generally supposed that it may be workable for a total distance of ten miles beyond the shore-line. Upon this basis the recent 1903 Coal Commission estimated that there were 4,401 million tons of coal remaining to be worked in the Coal Measures of the county of Durham up to the shore limit, and a further 870 million tons of coal could be won underneath the sea, making the total amount of coal capable of being won in the county of Durham 5,271 million tons. The Permo-Triassic rocks overlie the Coal Measures quite unconformably, there being evidence of considerable erosion of the upper portions of these Measures before the newer rocks were deposited. The lower member of the latter consists of a bed of yellow sand carrying an enormous quantity of water, which has proved to be one of the most serious obstacles to the working of the Coal Measures beneath these newer rocks. Thus in the magnificent sinking recently completed at Horden, Seaham Harbour, close upon 10,000 gallons of water had to be pumped per minute during the course of the sinking. Above this sand comes the Magnesian Limestone, which is frequently extensively fissured, and carries also very large bodies of water. This Magnesian Limestone is extensively quarried, but otherwise contains no minerals of commercial importance, although small lead-veins are known in it, and veins of copper have been met with in the quarries at Raceby Hill and Garmondsway, but not in workable quantities. The overlying or so-called Red Beds developed in the southern portion of the county are frequently known as the Salt Beds on account of their containing thick layers of rock-salt and gypsum, which have given rise to an important salt-producing industry in the neighbourhood of the River Tees. It is scarcely possible to write an account of mining in the county of Durham without continual reference to the operations going on in the adjoining counties, because neither geological structures nor mineral deposits are respecters of county boundaries. In coal-mining the question is further complicated by the facts that not only does the great northern coalfield extend over the adjacent counties of Northumber- land and Durham, but that the principal coal- exporting port, namely the River Tyne, is common to these two adjacent counties ; and, furthermore, the districts assigned to the Inspectors of Mines coincide neither with county boundaries nor geological structures. Such a history must in fact be the history of a coalfield and not that of the county or counties within which it may happen to lie ; hence, this article, especially in as far as it relates to coal, must be read in con- junction with that of the history of coal-mining in Northumberland. COAL Although lead ore has long been mined in the hilly district that forms the western portion of Durham, and although iron ore has been worked in several places within the county, these branches of the mining industry are reduced to utter insignificance in comparison with the enor- mous development of coal-mining, which may be said now to form the staple industry of Durham. Here, as elsewhere, the origin of coal-mining is lost in obscurity, and it is quite uncertain when 320 INDUSTRIES coal was first used as fuel.1 It is highly probable that the first coal used in this coalfield consisted of the rounded lumps of coal washed up on the beach from the seams that outcrop along the sea-shore in Northumberland, and that these were collected ' and used as fuel, just as they are used to-day by the poorer fishing folk along the Northumbrian coast. It could not be very long before the outcrops of similar material in the valleys of the Derwent and other rivers also attracted attention, and these coal seams would then have been attacked and gradually followed downwards, thus forming the commencement of the industry of coal-mining. It is probable that the coal picked up along the shores was originally known as ' sea-coal,' and that which was dug out of the ground as ' pit-coal,' the words ' sea-coal ' and ' pit-coal ' that so frequently occur in documents of the seventeenth century showing apparently that the two terms bore somewhat different meanings at one time, although the material described by them was also recognized as being identical. One of the difficulties of determining the real beginning of the use of coal lies in the indis- criminate use of the word 'carbo' to designate both charcoal and mineral coal. The notices preserved in the Boldon Book of the smiths at Wearmouth and Sedgefield and of the colliers at Escombe who in Bishop Pudsey's time were bound to provide coal (carboneni) for the making of plough-shares, relate more probably to charcoal fuel, as is certainly the case in the almost parallel though rather later record in the register of Worcester Priory of the holding of one John the collier who was to make each coke of coal for id.1 There is however no doubt that the rich and powerful bishops of Durham in their capacity as counts palatine favoured the development of coal-mining in their principality at a very early period, and it is to this fact that we owe the greater completeness of the records of the industry in this part of the country as compared with other portions of Great Britain. There is good reason to believe 4 that coal from the neighbourhood of Plessey in Northum- berland was shipped to London quite early in the reign of Henry III, and already in 1256 complaints were made that the approaches to Newcastle 1 For evidence of its use in Durham during the Roman period see Hodgson, Hist, of Northumb. (1812), ii, 17. 1 Galloway, Amah of Coal Mining, i, 21. Cf. the Charter of Adam de Camhous to Newminster Abbey about 1236. ' Et dedi et concessi eisdem monachis at capiant algam marls ad impinguendam eandem terrain, ct viam ad libcrc ducendum earn super praedictas terras, et ad carbonem maris capiendum, ubi inventus fucrit a praedictis terminis usque Blithe et versus mare quantum ad praedictas terras pertinct." Chart, de Novo Monasterio (Surtees Soc. Izvi), 55. ' Galloway, op. cit. i, 14, 15. ' Ibid. 29 et seq. were rendered dangerous after nightfall ' by derelict or unfenced coal-workings. In the next reign it was found by inquisition * that the pros- perity of the same town had during the past century been enormously increased by traffic in coals. For the working of coal in the Palatinate during the thirteenth century there is less evidence, probably in great measure owing to the reckless destruction of the archives of the see, but as early as 1 243 we find an entry on a roll 7 of Pleas of the Crown before the justices appointed by Bishop Nicholas Farnham that in Darlington ward, Ralf the son of Roger Wlger had been drowned 'in quodam fossato carbonum man's* probably a derelict coal-pit. The use of the term fouatum is worth notice, and probably indicates an open-cast working. In northern England, as in the Forest of Dean, open-cast workings and bell-pits marked the first development of mining, though in Northumberland and Durham the pit and adit stage had been reached in certain localities by the middle of the fourteenth century, if not before. It is hardly probable that the coal- mining industry of Durham during the thirteenth century was comparable in extent with that of the neighbouring county of Northumberland, to which the history of the early export trade un- doubtedly belongs, but with our fragmentary sources of information no exact estimate can be formed. It is not until the year 1274-5 that a specific reference to the profits of the bishop's coal-mines is found in the accounts of the See. References at a much earlier date to mines generally may have covered mineral coal as well as lead and iron, but as to this no certainty is attainable. During the vacancy however con- sequent upon the death of Bishop Robert Stichill, the accountant who answers for the issues of the bishopric of Durham from 20 August 2 Edward I to 12 November of the following year includes £34 Js. $d. from the farm of the fisheries, with the mines of coal and brew-houses (bracinagiis) for the same time.8 Rather more than twenty years later we learn from the Greit Roll of Receipts of Bishop Anthony Bek that a regular profit was being derived from a coal-mine in the ward (quarterio) of Chester,9 while the increasing recognition of the value of the new fuel is probably indicated by the composition of 1303 made by the same bishop with his great manorial freeholders when he was obliged to confirm to them the right of taking certain minerals in their several lands.10 ' W. Page, Aitlzt R. Northumb. (Surtees Soc. bncxviii), 34, 103. ' Misc. Inq. Chan, file 40, No. 25. ' Assize R. (P.R.O.), 223, m. 4. ' Pipe Roll, 2 Edw. I. 1 Two payments of 1 ^t .6d. at two terms are entered. See Boldon Bk. (Surtees Soc. xrv), App. p. xxviii. 10 • Et que chescun preigne mine de charbon [et] de ferre en la terre severale.' Reg. Pal. Dun. (Rolls C \ •** £ ocr.), in, 62. 321 A HISTORY OF DURHAM The early use of mineral coal was undoubtedly for industrial rather than domestic purposes, lime- burning in particular, and probably the working as distinct from the smelting of iron. But early in the fourteenth century the introduction of the iron chimney probably made the use of mineral coal less open to objection, and it may be noted that in 1310 the monks of Jarrow had n two iron chimneys in their hall (aula) ; thus it may be no coincidence that in the earliest of their accounts extant,12 those for 1313, we find men- tioned a purchase of nine chaldrons of sea-coals 13 (carbonum maritinorum}. We are unable to fix the exact date when coal-mining began on the southern bank of the Tyne at Gateshead and Whickham, and there is little doubt that the men of Newcastle-on-Tyne did everything possible to hamper the develop- ment of the industry, but probably coal was being worked in this neighbourhood and possibly shipped in vessels moored at the wharves on the southern side of the river in the early years of the four- teenth century. It is certain that by 1356 the industry had become well established at Whick- ham, as Bishop Hatfield in that year granted14 to Sir Thomas Gray, knt., and John Pulhore, rector of Whickham, five mines on lease for twelve years at a yearly rent of 500 marks, an enormous sum for the time. Some conditions of this lease are deserving of careful attention. It is agreed that the bishop shall not allow new mines to be opened in the neighbourhood which might depreciate the value of the privileges of the lessees. As to the mines of Gateshead, which were then already open and at work, the bishop promised that none of their output should be carried or sold to ships, while the holders of the Whickham mines should be allowed the option of acquiring the lease of the Gateshead mines also at the expiry of the term then existent. As to the management of the Whickham mines, the lessees were obliged to work them as far as they could with five barrow-men, according to the view and oath of the master forester and the viewers, the rate of output being fixed at not more than one keel 15 of coal per day. The master forester on his part was bound to furnish a reasonable amount of timber not only for the timbering of the pits, but also for the staiths or wharves. It is significant however that any damage done to the bishop's tenants in Whickham either by mining operations or the carriage of coals had to be made good by the lessees. 11 Invent, ofjarrow (Surtees Soc. xxix), 3. 11 Ibid. 8. ' " Perhaps more correctly sea-borne coal. The origin of the term carbo marts was being forgotten. 14 Dur. Curs. No. 30, m. 1 1 d. 15 About twenty tons. A measure taken from the carrying capacity of keels which plied between the riverside wharves and the sea-going vessels below Newcastle Bridge. It is probable that the lessees of the Whickham mines did ultimately acquire a lease 16 of those at Gateshead, at least for a time, but the shipment of the coals from this neighbourhood was not effected without strenuous opposition from the burgesses of Newcastle, and the appeasement of the quarrel required the intervention of the king.17 In connexion with a grant of mining rights at Gateshead about 1364, we find the first specific reference in this district to the use of the ' water- gate ' or tunnel for the draining of the pit.18 In respect to the working of the Tyneside mines after the Black Death, it may also be mentioned that in 1373-4 John de Belgrave and Nicholas Cooke were authorized 19 to seize workmen and coal-bearers with in the liberty of Durham to supply the lack of labour at Whickham and Gateshead. Another important colliery in this district was in Winlaton, held by Lord de Nevill of the bishop of Durham. In 1366-7 no less than 576 chaldrons of coal were purchased here by order of Edward III for the works at Windsor Castle,20 while at about the same time the earl of Northumberland was holding the manor21 of Fugerhous with a coal-pit for which he paid a yearly rent of £26 13*. 4^. The importance of the mines along the south bank of the Tyne during the fourteenth century give them the first claim to attention, but coal- working activity was not restricted to that dis- trict. At Ferryhill, Hett, and Lanchester we hear23 of coal-pits before 1350, and in this year some interesting technical details are preserved in Hatfield's Survey23 of the opening of a fresh mine at Coundon, when ropes, scopes, and wind- lass were bought for the work, and the total expense was 5*. 6d. Furthermore the monks of Durham were leasing a mine in the township of Ferry24 at least as early as 1354, and in 1361 they possessed a coal-pit at Rainton.88 From the Bursar's Roll26 for 1376-7 we find them paying £6 6s. 6^d. ' in sinctatione unius putei ' at He- worth, together with the making of the necessary picks, buckets, and ropes (cordis). Another pit also was sunk there to a depth of 6 fathoms at 16 Dur. Curs. No. 31, m. 7 d. 17 Pat. 41 Edw. Ill, pt. i,m. 19. Later, in 1384, Richard II granted a charter to Bishop Fordham for the mooring of ships and the loading of coals on the south side of the Tyne ; Galloway, op. cit. i, 50. 18 Pat. 38 Edw. Ill, pt. 2, m. 26. It had cer- tainly been used earlier in the colliery of the prior of Tynemouth at Elswick, and also about 1354 in a mine rented by the prior of Durham at Ferryhill or its neighbourhood ; Surtees, Hist, of Dur. iii, 285. 19 Dur. Curs. No. 31, m. 5 d. K Galloway, op. cit. 49. " Hatfield 's Surv. (Surtees Soc. xxxii), 93. " Galloway, op. cit. 52. 83 Ut supra, 219. " Surtees, Hut. of Dur. iii, 255. 15 Hiit. Dur. Scrift. Tres (Surtees Soc. ix), App. p. 136. 26 Dur. Acct. R. (Surtees Soc. xcix-ciii), 585. 322 INDUSTRIES a cost of 6s. a fathom, with an additional 6J. for some extra. Finchale too owned a mine at Lumley in 1348-9, and in their inventory for 1354 figure two coal-picks and two wedges of iron (ytgesftrris).*1 Their most important venture however was at Softley. This repaid them well from about 1362 right on into the next century, yielding a steady annual rent of £6 131. \d. The Vavasours possessed a mine at Cockfield before 1375, and a colliery was being worked at Evenwood*8 in 1383-4, and probably earlier. The amount of material available for the his- tory of the Durham coal-mines during the fif- teenth century is so abundant that a rigorous selection is necessary, and all that can be done here is to supplement with a few particulars, hitherto unpublished, the valuable account fur- nished by Mr. R. L. Galloway in his Annah of Coal Mining. That writer emphasizes the im- portance of the lease of South Durham mines, described as the 'mines of coal and of iron ore under the coal ' in ' Raby, Caldehirst, Hertkeld, Hethereclough, otherwise Tollawe and Wol- lawes,' and in the barony of Evenwood, first granted to Ralf de Eure, and renewed in 1424 to William dc Eure for a term of nine years at a rent of £ 1 1 2 1 31. \d. per annum," and later still renewed to him and other parties on many occasions with certain variations and intermis- sions. In all probability this lease M put an end to the profitable working of the Finchale mine at Softley and affected adversely other mining specu- lations on a small scale in southern Durham. From the chief forester's account ll for the years 1-2 Bishop Neville (about 1 440) we obtain a clear idea of the considerable part played by the episcopal coal-mines in the economy of the Pala- tinate. As to the farm of £ 1 1 2 1 31. 4^. due from the mines of Raby, Caldehirst, and Hethere- clough, the account makes no return, because this was rendered by Thomas Buk,M appruator tarundem minerarum. He does however return a sum of 401. received from the lessees of coal- mines at Chester with ' Les Scamelyng.' Nothing was forthcoming from the farm of the coal- mine of Cholden, which usually amounted to jC6 13*. 4