A HISTORY OF SURREY 



church seating, which probably went on in many other places too, for 

 there is no reason why this country parish should be singular, whereby 

 the men and women sat in different seats. All the seats of the church 

 were apportioned by the churchwardens, so many for the men, so many 

 for the women of all the different farms and houses, but with the men 

 and women in different parts of the church, the women behind the men 

 on both sides of the church. The arrangement was made in 1619 when 

 Andrewes was Bishop of Winchester, but continued in the eighteenth 

 century apparently.^ It must have originated with Andrewes. No one 

 else can be credited with such combined zeal for and knowledge of anti- 

 quity as to introduce a practice from the third century Didascalia.^ 



It is somewhat characteristic of the age that the most eminent in- 

 cumbent of a Surrey living in the earlier eighteenth century was not 

 great as a clergyman, though there is no evidence that he was a bad one. 

 This was John Flamsteed, who was Astronomer Royal during Sir Isaac 

 Newton's lifetime without being clearly the wrong man for the place. 

 He was rector of Burstow from 1684 to 17 19. His eminence seems to 

 go beyond that of Thomas Herring, who was rector of Blechingley from 

 1 73 1 to 1737, and afterwards Archbishop of York and Canterbury suc- 

 cessively. Edmund Gibson, archdeacon from 1710 to 171 5, the trans- 

 lator of Camden, and Hugh Boulter, archdeacon of Surrey 171 5—9, 

 Archbishop of Armagh 1723-42, who was the leader of the tolerant 

 party in Ireland, are more notable perhaps than Herring for personal 

 eminence. 



The standard of what was expected from the clergy in the eighteenth 

 century was pitched as low as might be, in accordance with the neglect 

 of their duty by the bishops of that age.'' The much abused Restoration 

 period had seen more vigorous efforts to encourage clerical duties, but 

 not always with success. Dr. Morley had concerned himself with the 

 laxity of his clergy, and had attempted to remedy it in some cases. 

 But the result shows the general supineness of the times. Morley left ^^o 

 a year to augment the livings of Holy Trinity and St. Mary's, Guildford, 

 on condition of their being united, stipulating that the incumbent should 

 reside in the united parish and do the duty ; a necessary proviso^ as of the 

 last two rectors of Holy Trinity, one also held St. Nicholas, Guildford, 

 and thd other Hambledon, ten miles away, where he died. Sir Richard 

 Onslow added jCzoo as a capital sum for the same purpose. Whereupon 

 in 1699 the livings were united by Act of Parliament, with z proviso ior 

 sermons and presumably services in the churches alternately. Similarly 

 at Farnham, Morley augmented the vicarage, on condition that the vicar 

 should reside, say daily service and catechize the children on Sundays. 

 In 1 8 10 he did not reside, there were no daily or holy day services, and 



1 Churchwardens' books, Ockley. The plan is copied out into an eighteenth century book. 

 Didascalia, bk. ii. ch. 57. See Wordsworth, The Minislry of Grace, p. 36. 



' An exception must be made in favour of Richard Willis, bishop from 1723 to 1734 He was 

 of course a Whig, but he was a careful bishop and a great promoter of the Society for the Promotion of 

 Christian Knowledge. 



44 



