The History of Lynn, Vol. 2 [of 2]Richards, William
History
The History of Lynn, Vol. 2 [of 2]
Richards, William
Fens, The (England); King's Lynn (England)
“Now this daie one of the said Committee, named Thomas Hugins, (the
other two being lately dead,) doth make report unto us, that
notwithstanding they oft made request unto the mayor and burgesses to
treat about the same, they commonly did refuse to meet, and the
bridge being much in decay the country did indyte the mayor and
burgesses and inhabitants of South Lynn at the country Quarter
Sessions held in Lynn 16. January 1671. We traversed it against the
mayor and burgesses, and then and there by verdict of the Jury the
mayor and burgesses, were found guilty, and the court did set but a
small fine upon them of 3_l._ expecting they would forthwith repair
it. But they still continued refractory, and said they would try it
at the assizes: Whereupon we prepared for tryal, and I Thomas Hugins
did attend at the next assizes held at Thetford, 12. March 1671, 2;
with five witnesses, and did retain three counsels, and was at the
charge of two copies of the charter of K. Edward VI. and one of Q.
Mary to the mayor and burgesses: and notwithstanding their former
word, that they would try it there, and Henry Bell alderman, and Mr.
Farrow their recorder, and Mr. Francis Rolph (Rolfe) their town-clark
were there, they did then refuse to try it, nor did not but put us
and themselves to further cost and charges; The Bridge being more and
more in decay, the country did still complain, and in the month of
July, 1672, the mayor and burgesses did appoint a committee to treat
with us, and we did meet at the house of Mr Samuel Barron, but still
they did wholly refuse to be at any cost or charge, notwithstanding
we did offer them that if a rate were made for the repair thereof
through the whole borough, of which we are part, that we of this
parish would willingly have paid our proportion, which would have
been a fourth part, if not more; and this they would not accept of
neither: And then it was proposed to refer it to four men in the
country, two for them and two for us; and when they had nominated two
for them and accepted of by us, all the gentlemen in the country
would not afford two for us that they would accept of; but they had
always something or other to object against them: so jealous were
they of the men, and indeed of their cause.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account