George William Fisher.

Annals of Shrewsbury School online

. (page 15 of 56)
Online LibraryGeorge William FisherAnnals of Shrewsbury School → online text (page 15 of 56)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


rebuilt at the cost of ^"14 iSs. He carefully records the names of the knaves who
built the wall. 2 See school register.

3 The document is thus worded :

"Charles Rex.

" Trusty and well beloved we greet you well. Whereas ye have, out
of your good affection to our present service and towards the supply of our
extraordinary occasions, lent unto us the sum of .600, being a stock belonging to
your school founded by our royal predecessor King Edward the Sixth, in this our
Town of Shrewsbury. We do hereby promise that we shall cause the same to be
truly repaid unto you whensoever ye shall demand the same, and shall always
remember the loan of it as a very acceptable service unto us. Given under our
Signet at our Court at Shrewsbury this nth of October, 1642.

"To our trusty and well beloved Richard Gibbons, late Mayor of our Town
of Shrewsbury, and Thomas Chaloner, Schoolmaster of our Free School there. "

4 Thomas Betton and Robert Betton were both "familiar friends" of Chaloner.
The latter was Mayor in 1643-44. Their father had served the office of Bailiff in
1629-30, and was Mayor in 1639-40.



THOMAS CHALONER 141

executors of the late Robert Betton, the senior alderman
at the time of the loan, who, with Richard Berrington, the
senior member of the Town Council, also now dead, had
charge of the four keys by which the school-chest was un-
locked, for misappropriation of the school funds. On
December 24th, 1646, the plaintiffs' bill, together with the
defendants' answers and the plaintiffs' exceptions to the
same, came before the Master of the Rolls, who ordered that
Mr. Edward Rich, one of the Masters of the Court, should
examine the various documents, and that, if he did not
consider the answers sufficient, the defendants should be
ordered to make more perfect answers. The next time we
hear of these legal proceedings is on July 23rd, 1650, on
which day a petition was presented by the Corporation to
the Lords Commissioners of the Great Seal, praying for
sequestration against the estate of Richard Gibbons, unless
he should duly answer the plaintiffs' bill. The Court ordered
that sequestration should issue in compliance with the peti-
tioners' request, unless Richard Gibbons or his clerk in court
should, after due notice given them, show cause to the
contrary. Thomas Chaloner had, it appears, put in a more
perfect answer to the Corporation bill of complaint, in com-
pliance with the order made by the Master of the Rolls on
December 24th, 1646; but no second answer had been
furnished by Richard Gibbons.

On October 4th, 1650, Mr. Dolbye appeared as counsel for
Richard Gibbons, and showed by affidavits that he had of
late years suffered imprisonment in Shropshire, and that
"since he came forth of prison he had been constrained
to absent himself from his place of abode," and that he
was " very much impoverished " as well as " very aged and
infirm." The Court thereupon ordered that the conditional
order of sequestration should be discharged. 1 Subsequently
the High Court of Chancery appointed Commissioners 2 to

1 Richard Gibbons, the "old humorous fellow," who was offered knighthood
by the King before he left Shrewsbury, had been for many years a member of the
Corporation, and was Bailiff of the town in 1619-20, and again during part of the
year 1628-29.

2 The Commissioners were Richard Smith, John Hughes (?), William Cheshire,
and Richard Taylor, gentlemen.



142 SHREWSBURY SCHOOL

take sworn depositions at Shrewsbury in reference to the
allegations of the Corporation on behalf both of plaintiffs
and defendants. The Commissioners met on April 2ist,
1652, at the house of Mr. John Hughes, vintner. The
witnesses called for the plaintiffs were Mr. Robert Forster, 1
stationer, aged sixty-four ; Mr. Rowland Tench, gentleman,
aged fifty-one, and three others, whose evidence was
absolutely of no moment at all. From the depositions
of the two first named, and the two answers of Mr. Chaloner,
with which they are in substantial agreement, we can arrive
with tolerable certainty at the true history of the loan. Lord
Falkland, 2 on hearing from Dr. Babbington of the large
amount of money in the school-chest, sent to the Mayor,
asking that it should be surrendered for the King's service.
The consent of the Corporation, or of the great majority
of its members, having been obtained, 8 an officer was sent,
either by the King or by some of the Privy Council, to
demand Chaloner's key, the Mayor, senior alderman, and
senior councillor having already surrendered theirs. This
demand, Chaloner says, he did not venture to refuse; but
whether he sent his key, or took it, he did not remember.

Rowland Tench was the only witness who spoke from
personal knowledge of what happened in the Exchequer on
the day when the money was taken out of the school-chest.
He says that all the four keys were produced, but that the
Mayor was the only one of their custodians whose presence
he remembered. He was sure that Chaloner had either
brought or sent his key, but he had no knowledge as to
who sent or brought the other keys. He saw the money
taken out of the chest and given to some that came from
the King. Robert Forster was not in the Exchequer when

1 Mr. Robert Forster, who had been School Bailiff at the time of the loan,
seems to have known very little about the transaction. He guarded carefully
nearly all his answers with the phrase, "As I have heard."

2 Robert Forster is the authority for Lord Falkland's connection with the matter,
and both Forster and Chaloner for Dr. Babbington's.

8 Chaloner makes this assertion as to the general consent of the Corporation on
the strength of a declaration made by Mr. Timothy Turner, the Recorder, at a
public meeting in the Town Hall.



THOMAS CHALONER 143

all this was going on, but was in the Town Hall subsequently,
when he saw some strangers " telling money, which they said
was the school money." The money, according to Tench's
statement, fell short of 600, and he mentions his belief
that Forster made up the deficiency. Forster says nothing
about this in his evidence, and the fact that nearly 50
was lent to the town at the same time that the loan was
made to the King is almost conclusive proof that Tench
was in error on this point. The record of the royal loan,
which Chaloner wrote in the school register at the time of
the November audit of 1642, was subsequently torn out.
As the register remained in Chaloner's possession after the
capture of Shrewsbury and during his subsequent wander-
ings, it seems probable that, for some reason or other, he
thought it desirable to get rid of this bit of contemporary
evidence at the time of the Chancery proceedings. More
than a year elapsed, after the depositions of which we have
spoken were taken, before the Lords Commissioners of the
Great Seal gave their final judgment, and it was not till
Wednesday, May nth, 1653, that the Court, after hearing
counsel on both sides, decided that it " saw no cause in equity
to give the plaintiffs any relief upon their bill," and ordered
" that the matter of the said bill should be from henceforth
clearly and absolutely dismissed." 1

Mention has been frequently made on the last few pages of
the Mayor of Shrewsbury. Bailiffs now belonged only to the
past history of the town. A new Charter had been granted

1 Both Hotchkis and Blakeway deal with the question of the loan transaction,
as well as with the legal proceedings that followed it. But the account of the
matter which is given in the text is mainly based on documents preserved among
the municipal records in the Town Hall. The Corporation bill is drawn up with
somewhat unnatural virulence and malevolence. Probably there was some private
spite at work. The younger Bettons, e.g. , are accused of having joined the other
defendants in a fraudulent and dishonest plot to carry out certain corrupt and
baleful designs, on the alleged ground that their father was in the habit of
consulting them both in private and public matters. Chaloner's "answers" are
chiefly interesting as expressing his manifest and, no doubt, erroneous belief that
he was not, under the ordinances, in any way responsible for the proper use of the
school monies when once paid into the chest, and also his knowledge that at
various times, both before he was master and when he was master, the school
money had been used by the Corporation for illegal purposes.



144 SHREWSBURY SCHOOL

to Shrewsbury on June i6th, 1638, under which a Mayor
was henceforth to discharge the duties which previously had
appertained to the two Bailiffs jointly. 1

The change in the system of town government was in-
directly the cause of considerable expense to the school ; for
not only the Head Master and the School Bailiff, but also
the Master of St. John's College, had to attend before the
Council when the town Charter was in question, and their
expenses, which from first to last amounted to 30, were
borne by the school and not, as they ought to have been,
by the town. 2 A little before the time when the Charter
was granted the Council seems to have settled two matters
of greater interest to the school. 3 In the first place per-
mission was given for an increase in the stipends hitherto
paid to the schoolmasters. Such an increase had been
originally suggested by the Bailiffs on March loth, 163^,
and they now proposed to increase the Head Master's
annual income by 10, and that of the second and third
masters by $. The college having given its assent to
this proposal on September 7th 5 1638, the new arrangement
was carried into effect on October 3rd, i638. 4 The other
matter with which the Council dealt in 1638 was the amount
of stipend to be paid from school funds to the Vicar of
Chirbury. This had originally been 9 6s. %d. y but disputes
on the subject had been pending for many years. In 1608
the Bishop of Hereford, in a high-handed way, had made
a grant to Mr. Lawrence Jones, who was then Vicar of
Chirbury, of all the small tithes of Chirbury, and of the
tithes of corn, grain, and hay, and all other tithes in the
township of Winsbury, in the parish of Chirbury. By what
title the Bishop imagined he could dispose of these tithes,
which were expressly given to the school by the indenture



1 See OWEN and BLAKEWAY'S History of Shrewsbury.
8 See Hotchkis MSS.

3 The Council issued their decree from Whitehall on March 3oth, 1638. It is
given in full in the school account-book.

4 A copy of the deed of augmentation, executed by the Bailiffs, and duly
witnessed, may be found in the same account-book.



THOMAS CHALONER 145

of Elizabeth, it is hard to say ; and he does not seem to
have been able to make good his grant. 1

The next we hear of the matter is in 1627, when Arch-
bishop Laud wrote strongly to the Bailiffs about it, averring
that " God and men wold cry shame vppon vs, if there
be not care taken that some honest portion, to wytt, 40
a yeare, at the least, be allowed." The Archbishop's letter
was forwarded by the Bailiffs to St. John's College, 2 and
Meighen, the Head Master, was commissioned to negotiate
with the Archbishop and the college authorities on the
subject. Next came a Commission of Enquiry, of which
Neile, the Archbishop of York, and Lord Keeper Coventry,
were members. The master and seniors of St. John's
College, writing to them on January i8th, 163!, express a
hope that an increase of the poor stipend of the Vicar
of Chirbury might be effected without breach of oath, or
any essential alteration of the school statutes and ordinances,
affecting other things of much importance. From certain
expressions of thankfulness in this letter for favour shown
to the college in matters connected with Shrewsbury School,
it is evident that the Commissioners were dealing with other
business besides the application of the Chirbury tithes. 2
No immediate result came from this Commission, and some-
time in the year from November, 1635, as we learn from
the school account-book, a bill in Chancery was exhibited
by the Vicar of Chirbury against the Bailiffs and Head
Master, praying for better maintenance. The Vicar's suit
was " referred " by consent of all parties to referees to be
appointed by the Archbishop of Canterbury ; and this
reference seems to have led to a formal ratification by the
Archbishop, sometime in the year 1636, of the Bishop of
Hereford's grant. 3 The school authorities subsequently
represented to the Council that, if the Bishop's grant were
confirmed, it would cost the school more than 6$ over

1 It is stated in the school account-book, under the year 1637-38, that the
Bishop's "instrument was overthrown by course of law."

2 See BAKER'S Hist, of St. John's College.

3 It is stated in the school account-book that the Bishop's grant was ratified in
1636 by Sir Nathaniel Brente, by authority of the Archbishop of Canterbury.



146 SHREWSBURY SCHOOL

and above the g 6s. Sd. which they had hitherto paid
annually to the Vicar of Chirbury, and that it would be
impossible, under such circumstances, to carry out the
school ordinances ; but that they were quite willing to
increase the Vicar's stipend to 50 per annum. This
payment was accordingly authorised by the Council in their
decree of March 3Oth, I638. 1 An account has already been
given of the long delay which took place before a suitable
provision was made for Mr. Ralph Gittins at the time of
his proposed resignation. A somewhat similar question, as
to the amount of pension which should be paid to the
Rev. Ralph Jones, who had resigned the third-mastership
as long ago as 1627, was decided in March, 163^, by the
Court of Requests at Westminster, which awarded him 50
down, and an annuity of io. 2

The settlement of the Chirbury dispute was soon followed
by a similar agitation about the stipend of the curate of St.
Mary's, Shrewsbury. In August, 1639, a letter was sent from
Archbishop Laud, the Lord Keeper, and Mr. Secretary
Windebank, to the Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry,
Timothy Tourneur, Esq., Recorder of Shrewsbury, and
others, pointing out that, though the value of the tithes had
much increased since the time of Edward VI., the curate of
St. Mary only received his original stipend of 20, and stating
that the Council expected it to be raised to a full quarter of
the tithes received by the school from St. Mary's parish. 3

But we must return to the time of the King's visit to
Shrewsbury in 1642. Gloomy as the prospects might look,
it was then still possible to pray, as Chaloner did pray,
" Deus pacis pacem indulgeat" But a year later all hope of
peace was at an end, and in November, 1643, we find him
appealing not to " the God of Peace," but to " the Lord of
Armies." " rf l\a6i Kvpte o-TpaTev/uLarcov." Chaloner's spirits,
however, were still pretty good. He was even able to make

1 See school account-book.

2 See school account-book. The ^50 was paid in separate sums of 10, the
first payment being made on March 8th, 163!-, and the last on April 5th, 1637.

3 See a letter from the Recorder in BAKER'S Hist, of St. John's College.



THOMAS CHALONER 147

some fun out of the misfortunes of his loyalist friends, noting
that the people of Denbighshire had not been able to " hold
their Holt," 1 and he records, with manifest satisfaction, that
there was a dinner on November I3th, after the audit was
ended, instead of the customary banquet.

During the two years which followed the King's visit town
after town in Shropshire and North Wales fell into the hands
of the puritans. But the inhabitants of Shrewsbury, re-
inforced as they were by many of the county loyalists who
had taken refuge within their walls, were for a long time able
to hold their own against all attacks, until, through the
treachery of some puritan sympathisers in the place itself,
the garrisons of Wem, Moreton, and other places in the
neighbourhood were able to effect an entry during the night
of February 22nd, 164^, and to gain possession of the town. 2

More than two years had passed since the arrival of the
King in Shrewsbury, and although during this time loyalists
must have met with constantly increasing difficulties in
entering the town, seventy new boys were admitted in the
year from November, 1642. Two of these boys came from
the north, George Savile and William Savile, sons of Sir
William Savile, Bart., of Thornhill, Yorkshire. George
Savile, afterwards Marquis of Halifax, familiarly known to
readers of Macaulay's History of England as "The Trimmer,"
was undoubtedly one of the most sagacious and prudent
statesmen England has seen. 3

1 Holt Castle was captured by Sir William Brereton and Sir Thomas Middleton
in 1643. The Royalists recovered it in February, 164!, but they had to surrender
it again in the following April.

3 See OWEN and BLAKEWAY'S Hist, of Shrewsbury.

3 Sir George Savile, Bart., Marquis of Halifax, was born about November lith,
1633. His mother was Anne, daughter of Lord Keeper Coventry. His father,
who was a strong loyalist, was governor of Sheffield Castle at the time of his
death on January 24th, 164-2% The castle surrendered on August nth, 1644,
when it was stipulated that Lady Savile and her family should be allowed to return
unmolested to Thornhill. George Savile settled at Rufford, and was married
before 1656. In 1660 he was elected M.P. for Pontefract ; created Baron Savile
of Eland and Viscount Halifax on January I3th, i66|. In 1672 Lord Halifax was
made a Privy Councillor, and sent on a mission to Louis XIV. Was opposed to
the execution of Lord Stafford, and also counselled lenity later on in respect
of Lord Charles Russell and Algernon Sidney. In 1682 he was made Marquis of
Halifax, and in 1685 he wrote his celebrated tract called The Character of a



148 SHREWSBURY SCHOOL

Two of Chaloner's own sons, Samuel and John, were
promoted this year from the accidence school. His eldest
son, Thomas, had entered Shrewsbury in 1637, soon after his
father's appointment to the head-mastership, being then a
little under ten years old.

Sons of Sir John Weld of Willey, 1 of Henry Bromley,
Esq., Shropshire, and of Sir Paul Harris, Bart, of Boreatton,
were also admitted about the same time. Next year the
number of entries fell to twenty-two. But in the list we find
the names of two Littletons, 2 from Pillaton Hall, Stafford-
shire, and of Walter Wrottesley, eldest son of Sir Walter
Wrottesley, Bart., of Wrottesley, in the same county.

A boy named Lutwich was entered in 1644, paying
apparently a fee of 6s. 8d., who was subsequently called
to the Bar, and having filled in succession the offices of
Serjeant -at -Law, King's Serjeant, and Chief Justice of
Chester, was in 1686 made a justice of the Court of
Common Pleas. 8

Trimmer, though it was not printed till 1 688. After James II. came to the
throne Halifax refused to support the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts, and
was struck off the list of the Privy Council. Soon after the accession of William
III. he was made Lord Privy Seal. Pie died April 5th, 1695. He was twice
married ; first to Dorothy, daughter of Henry Spencer, first Earl of Sunderland ;
and second to Gertrude, daughter of the Hon. William Pierrepont of Thoresby.
(Diet, of Nat. Biog.}

1 This was Sir John Weld the younger. He and his father were both knighted
while Charles I. was in Shropshire. Both of them were in Shrewsbury at the
time it was captured, and were made prisoners in the same room. (OWEN and
BLAKEWAY.) Of the two boys, George Weld filled the office of Lieutenant of
the Tower in the reign of Charles II. and represented Much Wenlock in several
Parliaments, and John Weld became a merchant.

2 Edward Littleton and Walter Wrottesley both succeeded to the title and
estate of their fathers, and the former married his schoolfellow's sister. Another
Shrewsbury schoolboy of this time, Francis Wolrych, who also succeeded to his
father's baronetcy, married a second sister of Wrottesley, who in turn married
a sister of Wolrych. (WOOTTON'S Baronetage.}

3 Sir Edward Lutwich was son of William Lutwich, Esq. , who belonged to an
old Shropshire family. He was born in 1634. Student of Gray's Inn, 1652 ;
called to the Bar, 1660 ; Ancient, 1671; Serjeant-at-Law, 1683; King's Serjeant,
1684, and knighted the same year ; Chief Justice of Chester, 1684-86 ; Justice of
Common Pleas, 1686. Deprived of his judgeship on the abdication of James II.,
and resumed practice at the Bar. Fined at the York Assizes in 1693 for refusing
to take the oaths. Died in London in June, 1709, and buried at St. Bride's,
Fleet Street. (Foss's Lives of the Judges.}



THOMAS CHALONER 149

It is pleasant to learn that, during the dismal days of the
siege, Shrewsbury was not entirely given over to melancholy
reflections, and that Chaloner found a little relaxation after
his school labours in the company of some of the loyalist
gentlemen who occupied the town. In a shutt (the local
term for a narrow lane or passage) leading from St. Chad's
Church to the High Street there stood in those days an inn
called " the Sextry." This inn was the accustomed place of
meeting of " a knot of company keepers," as Chaloner calls
them, or " a Club of good fellows," as they are described by
Sir Thomas Bushell, the Master of the Mint, in a letter
which he wrote from Oxford on January 6th, 1645, to Sir
Francis Oatley. 1 Their names have been preserved by
Chaloner. Among the party were Sir Francis Oatley, Mr.
Richard Oatley, Sir Michael Ernley, Sir Thomas Lyster, Sir
Richard Lee, Sir William Vaughan, and Mr. John Needham.
But Chaloner had also many valued friends of lower rank in
life, whose memory he delighted to recall in after years,
when far away from the scenes of his Shrewsbury labours
and pleasures. First in the list of Chaloner's familiar friends
comes the name of David Evans, the second master, " Black
David " as he was called by his intimates, or perhaps by the
boys, an old school-fellow of his, and also a member of the
same college at Cambridge. Then follow the names of three
or four of the most prominent loyalists among the parochial
clergy, including Peter Studley, 2 the author of The Looking-

1 See OWEN and BLAKEWAY.

2 Peter Studley was third son of Mr. Thomas Studley of Shrewsbury, draper.
Baptised at St. Alkmond's October i6th, 1585. Promoted from accidence
school December i6th, 1594. Matriculated at Gloucester Hall, Oxford, in
1610, as gen. fil. of Salop, having previously gone through his apprenticeship to
Mr. Robert Bretton, glover, and been made a freeman of the Mercers'
Company. His age, which was really twenty-five when he went up to Oxford,
is given as twenty-two in the Oxford lists. B.A. in January, i6if, and M.A. in
1617. After taking holy orders he seems to have become assistant curate at St.
Chad's, Shrewsbury ; and from 1620 he was probably in sole charge, though
he did not receive his formal appointment as curate till Dr. Sampson Price
had resigned. In 1633, on July 5th, a young farmer named Enoch ap Evan,
who lived at Clun in Shropshire, and who seems to have been a religious maniac,
cut his brother's throat because he had received Holy Communion kneeling, and
afterwards murdered his mother for screaming when she entered the room and



i5o SHREWSBURY SCHOOL

Glass of Schism, a book which had excited the vehement
indignation of Shropshire puritans a few years before, who
had recently resigned the vicarage of St. Chad ; and Richard
Poole, the chosen candidate of the Bailiffs for the head-
mastership of Shrewsbury at the time when Meighen
resigned, who had succeeded Studley at St. Chad's. Mr.
Roger Owen of the Council House, the existing represent-
ative of the Condover Owens, was another of Chaloner's
special friends.

We also find in the list the name of Simon Weston, the
Bailiff of 1636-37, who disapproved so strongly the opposi-
tion of the majority of his colleagues of the Corporation to
the election of schoolmasters by St. John's College. Other
friends mentioned are Robert Forster, a Shrewsbury book-
seller, who filled the office of School Bailiff for many years,
but was deprived of it on the capture of the town ; Joseph
Baynes, 1 the son-in-law of Thomas Owen the Herald-at-
Arms, who completed the illumination of " the Arms of the
Bailiffs " and presented it to the school library ; Andrew
Griffies, 2 one of the Shrewsbury aldermen, who filled the
office of Bailiff in 1633-34; Mr. Thomas Bromhall 3 of

saw what had been done. Enoch ap Evan confessed all this to Mr. Studley,
who visited him in the Shrewsbury prison on July loth, and made a similar
confession in court at the Shrewsbury Assizes in August, adding then that he had



Online LibraryGeorge William FisherAnnals of Shrewsbury School → online text (page 15 of 56)