a 
161 
and the next—doubtless during the Doctor’s illness and the interval 
between his death and the collation of his successor, John Mor- 
land. 
The loyalty of the Penrith churchwardens was enormous ; the 
expression of it being limited only by their ability to procure church 
money for ‘“‘ale at the cross” and “‘tar barrels” for bonfires, and for 
“spending at night”; and during the second quarter of the 18th 
century no occasion was lost for a display of exuberant spirits in 
this way. 
A few years ago it will be remembered we were a little startled 
by observing a new sign board erected in the Penrith market-place 
defining the premises to which it was attached as a “bibulous 
emporium”; whereupon much discussion arose as to the signifi- 
cance of the novel term. Nobody then seemed to know that it 
was only an old hereditary disease breaking out afresh with a slight 
change of symptoms—for had not Penrith market-place been a 
veritable 18th century “ bibulous emporium ?” 
Of course the 5th of November was the great orgie of the year, 
when ale at the cross and tar barrels were in greatest force ; and 
probably that accounts for the strong traditional feeling in the 
popular mind for fiery demonstrations on that day, which have of 
late years given the police authorities so much trouble. About 
thirty years ago an attempt to suppress the practice produced 
something like a riot. 
The old bibulous propensities received a mild check in 1750, 
when there appears for the first time in the churchwardens’ book 
a minute apparently of a vestry meeting, although it is not so 
stated. It runs: “Penrith, July 9, 1750. It is hereby agreed 
that no sum or sums of money expended on the usual rejoicing 
days be for the future charged on account of the parish, except 
the expenses of the bonfire and the ringers and the ale which shall 
be then drunk at the cross.” To this thirteen signatures are 
attached. The exception, however, allowed in the agreement was 
so fully taken advantage of, that little difference can be observed 
in the cost of rejoicing days ; perhaps there was less “spending at 
nights” charged in the book afterwards. 
1l 
