A HISTORY OF NORFOLK 



the views of any religious party, the lightness of his punishment suggests not 

 only great forbearance on the part of the vicar, but even the possibility that 

 he may have thought it unw^ise to inflict a severer one, considering the state 

 of public opinion in his parish. 



The number of puritan deprivations in the see of Norwich in 1605 was 

 only five,^ which says much when the extreme views of many of the clergy 

 there are remembered. 



The wages of the ministers of the city of Norwich were the subject 

 of a petition to Parliament from them in 1605, and an order of Council 

 was directed to the mayor and city, requiring them — 



to enter into the due consideration of the estates and abilities of all the inhabitants of 

 the said parishes, and from time to time to set down a proportionable tax on every one of 

 them, such as shall be competent for the maintenance of the said ministers respectively, to 

 be yearly paid them according to their difference in guifts, sufBciency, and diligence in their 

 function. — 15 Feb. 1606. 



Blomefield says — ' 



And thus the ministers' wages used to be raised for some time, till Matthew Wren, 

 bishop of Norwich, in 1638 procured His Majesty King Charles I to declare his royal 

 pleasure under the great seal that if any person within the said city of Norwich should 

 refuse to pay according to the rate of 2s. in the pound, in lieu of the tithes of houses, unto 

 the minister of any parish within the sayd city, that the same should be heard in the Court 

 of Chancery, or in the consistory of the bishop of Norwich, and that in such case no 

 prohibition should be granted against the bishop of Norwich, etc., which by reason of the 

 succeeding troubles, never took effect ; 



notwithstanding which, this was made the ground of one of the articles 

 of impeachment against Bishop Wren. 



In 1605 also an action was brought against the city of Norwich by the 

 dean and prebends,^ concerning the charging the inhabitants in their precinct 

 for the poor with the rest of the city ; the dispute was not settled until 16 14, 

 when the precinct was exempted from paying to the city poor and obliged 

 wholly to maintain its own. 



In 16 1 5 Thomas Tunstall, a priest, was hanged, drawn, and quartered, at 

 the gallows beyond Magdalen gates. He confessed that he was a Benedictine 

 friar by vow but not by act.* 



Bishop Jegon is said to have been unpopular in his diocese because of his 

 insistence on conformity, and because he did not exhibit a liberality in money 

 matters at all in proportion to his great wealth. Archbishop Whitgift wrote 

 to Sir Robert Cecil that he considered himself greatly abused by the bishop's 

 having procured the mastership of Corpus Christi College for his brother 

 Thomas at his resignation. He made the same brother archdeacon of 



Will, servant of Robert Fisher, and Simon Bullocke of the said towne, did profanely and disorderly behave them- 

 selves in this sort, viz. uppon Christmas daie last in the time of evening prayer, they came into the parish church 

 of Upton aforesaid, with a great whalles bone upon their shoulders, and with y birdes, a robin redbreast and a 

 wrenne, tied by a thridde and hanging upon the said bone, the said William making a great and a roring noyse 

 all waie of his coming, and they went staggering to and fro in the mid allie in a scoffing and a wild profane 

 manner, by the minister's seate (the sayd minister being reading divine service) they fell downe as though they 

 were hevely or grevously loaden, and then and there the sayd Wicked Will in such wild and profane and lewde 

 maner as befor, knellng uppon his knees he praid for the sayd Mr. Deyrton and his wife and for his great 

 dog, to the dishonor of Almightle God, profanacion of the place, and evil example of others. Sexto 

 Aprilis, 1612.' His punishment was to acknowledge his fault in the face of the church. 



' Stephens, Hisf. of the Engl. Ch. v, 321. ' Blomefield, iii, 361. 



' Ibid. 60. • Ibid. 366. 



278 



