Kitabı oku: «The Fleet. Its Rivers, Prison, and Marriages», sayfa 14

CHAPTER XXV

IN a Return of the number of persons in the several Gaols of England, confined for Debt, ordered by the House of Commons to be printed, May 13, 1835, we have an "Account of the Number of Persons confined for Debt in the Fleet Prison during the following Years:

And the amount of the debt and costs for which each party was so charged varied from £2 to £18,017.

I look in vain in the Times for the paragraph to which the Warden alludes in the following letter:

"The Warden presents his compliments to the Editor of the Times, and begs to state, that a paragraph having appeared in the paper of this morning, stating that the Fleet Prison is very full, and that a guinea and a half a week is paid for a single room, and that four, five, and six persons are obliged to live in a small apartment.

"The Warden, not being aware of this, should it in any case exist, and which is contrary to the established regulations against any person so offending, the prison not being so full as in former years, there being considerably less, on an average, than two prisoners to each Room, and being also exceedingly healthy.

"The Warden has also to add, that the rest of the paragraph relating to the Fleet is totally without foundation.

"Fleet Prison, March 7, 1836."

In the outside sheet of the Times, February 21, 1838, occurs the following advertisement: "One Hundred Pounds Reward. – Escape. – Escaped from the Fleet Prison, on the evening of Wednesday the 14th day of February instant. Alfred Morris, late of 22 Dean Street, Tooley Street, Southwark. The said Alfred Morris is about 30 years of Age, about 5 feet 6 inches high, dark complexion, and of a Jewish Caste, prominent Nose, somewhat flat pointed, dark, irregular whiskers, stout figure, and rather bow legged," &c., &c.

Anent this escape, the Times of February 16th has a paragraph such as we can hardly imagine ever could have appeared in a paper so steady and sober, as the Times now is: "The Warden of the Fleet – (From a Correspondent). Yesterday a gentleman of some misfortune and of great appearance, for he wore a wig, moustaches, and a Spanish Cloak, was introduced as an inmate of Brown's Hotel, so called from the Warden having a license to sell wines, beer, and ale to his prisoners, through the 'patent never ending always improving Juddery spigot and fawcet tap,' &c. In about half an hour the said bewhiskered gentleman leaves cloak, wig, and moustaches in the room of a Mister Abrahams, a prisoner, and walks quietly out, very politely bidding the turnkey 'good morning.' At night the excellent crier of the Prison, Mr. Ellis, made the galleries echo, and the rooms re-echo, with his sometimes very cheering voice (when he announces to those who wish such things as a discharge, for it is not all who do), in calling, altissimo voce, 'Mr. Alfred Morrison! Mr. Alfred Morrison! Mr. Alfred Morrison!' but as no Mr. Alfred Morrison answered to the interesting call, every room was searched in the due performance of the crier's duty, but no Mr. Alfred Morrison was to be found. And the Worthy and excellent warder, the keeper of so many others in, is himself let in to the tune of £2,600; some say more, none say less.

 
'Go it, ye cripples! crutches are cheap!
W. Brown is no longer asleep!'"
 

In a leading article in the Times of November 13, 1838, upon juvenile crime, and the incitors thereto, we read the following: "The Traders in crime do not wholly confine their seductions to the young; they often find apt scholars among the unfortunates of riper years, especially in the debtor's prison. Mr. Wakefield¹⁶² says he knows many such victims; and he particularizes one 'Who was not indeed executed, because he took poison the night before he was to have been executed, who told me he had been, (and who I firmly believe was) first incited to crime when a Prisoner in the Fleet for debt. The crime into which he was seduced was that of passing forged Bank of England Notes. He was a Man of very showy appearance, and he had been a Captain in the Army; a man of good family. He said this crime was first suggested to him by persons who were Prisoners in the Fleet; but he afterwards discovered, having been a Prisoner there more than once, that one of a gang of Utterers of forged Notes lived constantly in the Fleet, and for no other purpose but that of inducing reckless young men of good appearance, who could easily pass notes, to take Notes from them, and to dispose of them in transactions. I could hardly believe that that was true, and I got some inquiries to be made for the person whom he had pointed out to me as one of a Gang, and I found that that person was constantly in the Fleet. The Gang committed a robbery upon a Bank in Cornwall, and they were entirely broken up, and from that time forth the Person who had resided in the Fleet disappeared, though he was not one of the persons convicted, or suspected of that particular Crime. I never heard of him since, but the inquiries which I then made, convinced me that it was a fact that one of the Gang of what are termed 'family men,' that is, rich thieves and receivers of stolen goods, did reside continually in the Fleet, for the purpose of seducing young men into the commission of Crime. He was in and out of the Prison, but a Prisoner on a friendly arrest."

The time was coming, when imprisonment for debt was to be abolished. An Act of 1 & 2 Vict. cap. 110 had already abolished Arrest on Mesne Process in Civil Actions, so that no prisoners could be committed to the Fleet from the Courts of Chancery, Exchequer, and Common Pleas, and the Debtors and Bankrupts might as well be in the Queen's Bench. The Demolition of the Fleet was therefore confidently anticipated, as we find by the following paragraph from the Times, March 3, 1841. "Removal of Prisoners. On Saturday a deputation from the Woods and Forests, attended by the Marshal, visited the Queen's Bench Prison, preparatory to moving over the Debtors from the Fleet, which prison is about to be pulled down. By this arrangement the Country will save about £15,000 per annum, besides getting rid of an ugly object, and room being made for other contemplated improvements. It is supposed the Judges will find some difficulty in removing the Prisoners from the Fleet by Habeas Corpus, and that a short Bill will be necessary for that purpose. The expenses of the Queen's Bench Prison in its present profitless employment, is about £30,000 per annum to the Country."

This announcement was slightly premature, for the Act for its demolition (5 & 6 Victoriæ, cap. 22) was not passed until May 31, 1842. The Prisoners objected to the Transfer to the Queen's Bench, preferring their comparative liberty as they were, to the more stringent rules of the other prison: one clause in the new Act being: "And be it enacted, That after the passing of this Act, no Prisoner in the Queen's Prison shall be allowed to send for, or to have any Beer, Ale, Victuals or other Food, or to send for, have or use any Bedding, Linen, or other Things, except such as shall be allowed to be brought by them respectively under such Rules, to be made in the Manner directed by this Act, as may be reasonable and expedient to prevent Extravagance and Luxury, and for enforcing due Order and Discipline within the Prison."

I have before me the Original Subscription list of a scheme of

"Resistance

to

The Abolition of the Fleet Prison

April 9th, 1842."

The author of the Letter of "Fleta to the Lords, calling upon them individually to Oppose the Bill for transferring the Debtors in the Fleet to the Queen's Prison, respectfully calls upon all Parties interested in an Opposition to the said Bill, to render him such pecuniary assistance in forwarding his Object, as may be consistent with their Views or Convenience." A list of Subscriptions follows, but although 25/– was promised, only 15/– appears to be paid. They held meetings, a notice calling one of which is facsimiled; but it was of no avail, and they had to go.

One Philip Ball, a Chancery Prisoner, composed

The Last Days of the Fleet!

A melancholy Chaunt,

Written by a Collegian, on the occasion of the Queen'sPrison Bill receiving the Royal Assent

Air. 'The Fine Old English Gentleman.'

1

 
I'll sing to you a bran new song
Made by my simple pate,
About the end of the good old Fleet,
Which on us now shuts its gate.
It has kept confin'd the choicest lads
That e'er together met —
Of merry, jolly, rattling dogs,
A regular slap up set.
Of jovial Fleet prisoners,
All of the present day.
 

2

 
This good old pris'n in every room
Contains a merry soul,
Who for his doings out of doors
Is now drop't 'in the hole.'
But surely this is better far
Than your simple plodding way,
Get deep in debt, go through the Court,
And whitewash it all away.
Like a jovial Fleet prisoner,
All of the present day.
 

3

 
Such right good hearts are rarely found,
As round me now I see;
With such, I'm 'most inclined to say,
Hang liberty for me.
For T – y, S – y, V – h,
In spirits who excel?
How could we better live than here,
Where friendship weaves her spell?
'Mongst jovial Fleet prisoners,
All of the present day.
 

4

 
To racquets, skittles, whistling shops,
We must soon say farewell;
The Queen's assent to her prison bill
Has rung their funeral knell;
And Bennett, Gray, and Andrew too
Must close their welcome doors,
For sing song and tape spinning now,
This damn'd new Act all floors,
For the jovial Fleet prisoner,
All of the present day.
 

5

 
But to her gracious Majesty
You'll long be loyal and true,
Although this latest act of hers
Must be felt by some of you.
Speed through the Court, or compromise
Like gallant Captain T – h,
Or else you'll soon be sent to grieve
Your guts out in the Bench.
All melancholy prisoners¹⁶³
Unlike those of the present day.
 

Much, however, as the prisoners might grieve, it was of no use kicking against an Act of Parliament, and those prisoners who did not take advantage of the Insolvent Debtors Act, were transferred to the Queen's Prison, which in its turn ceased to be a debtor's prison, and was used by Military offenders, until it was sold on Oct. 30, 1879, and pulled down in that and the following year. Now, legally speaking, there is no imprisonment for debt, but people are only committed for Contempt of Court.

The Commissioners of Woods and Forests invited Tenders for the site and buildings of the late Fleet Prison, the estate of which contained above One Acre, with a frontage of about 251 feet, towards Farringdon Street, and a depth of about 230 feet. The tenders were returnable on Oct. 22, 1844, and the Corporation of the City of London became the owners of the property at a sum variously stated at £25,000 to £29,000, and the sale of its building materials commenced on April 5, 1845. Its exterior was not particularly attractive.

And so it passed away, and half the present inhabitants of London the Great do not even know its site, which was not finally cleared until 1846. As a guide to those who wish to know its locality I may mention that the Congregational Memorial Hall and Library, in Farringdon Street, stands on a portion of its site.

Before quitting the subject of the Fleet prison I cannot help referring to "the grate." Like Ludgate, it had a room open to the street, but furnished with a strong iron grating, behind which sat a prisoner, who called the attention of the passers-by monotonously chanting, "Pray Remember the poor Prisoners." A box was presented for the reception of contributions, but very little money was thus obtained.

The begging grate was served by poor prisoners who had to swear that they were not worth £5 in the world. He was then entitled to share the contents of the begging box, and also be a partaker of the charities and donations to the Prison, which amounted to the magnificent sum of £39 19s., besides meat, coals, and bread.

Prisoners of all sorts and conditions met here, on one common basis, one of the last of any mark being Richard Oastler, who was the leader of the Ten Hours' Bill Movement, and from this prison he issued a series of "Fleet Papers" about Free Trade, Factories Acts, and the Amalgamation of the Prisons. He died in 1861, and a memorial to him was erected at Leeds.

Fleet Marriages

CHAPTER XXVI

THERE is no doubt that in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the Marriage laws, as we now understand them, were somewhat lax, and it is possible that it was so long before that time, for in Edward VI.'s time an Act was passed (2 and 3 Ed. VI., c. 21, s. 3) entitled "An Act to take away all positive laws made against marriage of priests." Section 3 provides that it shall not "give any liberty to any person to marry without asking in the church, or without any ceremony being appointed by the order prescribed and set forth in the book intituled "The Book of Common Prayer, and administration of the Sacraments, &c." Mary, of course, repealed this Act, and it was revived and made perpetual by 1 Jas. 1. c. 25, s. 50.

It was only after the Council of Trent, that the offices of the Church were considered indispensable, for that Council decreed that a priest, and two witnesses were necessary for the proper celebration of the Nuptial tie. Still, the law of England, like the law of Scotland, allowed the taking of a woman as wife before witnesses, and acknowledging her position, which constituted at common law a good and lawful marriage, which could not be annulled by the Ecclesiastical Court. That many such took place among the Puritans and Sectarians of the time of Charles I. and the Commonwealth is undoubted, for it needed an Act of Parliament (12 Chas. II. c. 33) to render such marriages legal. This enacted "That all marriages had, or solemnized, in any of his Majesty's dominions since the first day of May, in the year of our Lord, one thousand six hundred forty and two, before any justice of the Peace, or reputed justice of the Peace of England, or Wales, or other his Majesty's dominions, … shall be, and shall be adjudged, esteemed, and taken to be, and to have been of the same, and no other force or effect, as if such marriages had been had, and solemnized, according to the rites and ceremonies established, or used in the Church or kingdom of England; any law, custom, or usage to the contrary thereof notwithstanding."

This short synopsis of the Marriage law in England is necessary, in order to understand the subject of Fleet Marriages, which, however, were not all disreputable. The Fleet, as we have seen, had a Chapel of its own; and in old times, a Chaplain – so that Marriages might well be celebrated there, in as proper and dignified a manner as elsewhere. And, we must bear in mind that early in the seventeenth century, the prisoners were of a very different stamp to those of the latter half of the eighteenth century, until the demolition of the prison. Therefore we see no impropriety in the first Marriage known on record – which is that of Mr. Geo. Lester, then a prisoner in the Fleet, to a woman of fortune one Mistress Babbington. This is mentioned in a letter of September, 1613, from Alderman Lowe to Lady Hicks, and may be found in the Lansdowne MSS. 93-17. He writes: "Now I am to enform you that an ancyentt acquayntence of ye and myne is yesterday marryed in the Fleete, one Mr. George Lester, and hath maryed Mris Babbington, Mr Thomas Fanshawe mother in lawe. Itt is sayd she is a woman of goode wealthe, so as nowe the man wyll be able to lyve and mayntayne hymself in pryson, for hether unto he hath byne in poor estate. I praye God he be nott encoryged by his marige to do as becher doth, I meane to troble his frynds in lawe, but I hope he wyll have a better conscyence and more honestye than the other men hathe."

Towards the middle of the seventeenth century clandestine, and irregular marriage was prevalent, and it is easily accounted for. A public marriage had come to be a very expensive affair. There was a festival, which lasted several days, during which open house had to be kept; there were the Marriage Settlements, presents, pin money, music, and what not – so that the binding of their Children in the holy Estate of Matrimony was a serious matter to parents; who probably preferred giving the young couple the money that otherwise would go in useless waste and profusion. So they used to get married quietly: a custom which Pepys reprobates in the marriage of the daughter of Sir William Penn to Mr. Anthony Lowther. "No friends, but two or three relations of his and hers." The bride was married in "palterly clothes, and nothing new but a bracelet that her servant had given her." And he further says, remarking on the meanness of the whole affair, "One wonder I observed to day, that there was no musique in the morning to call up our new married people, which is very mean, methinks."

Misson, who visited England in the reign of William III., speaks of these private marriages. "The Ordinary ones, as I said before, are generally incognito. The Bridegroom, that is to say, the Husband that is to be, and the Bride, who is the Wife that is to be, conducted by their Father and Mother, or by those that serve them in their room, and accompany'd by two Bride men, and two Bride Maids, go early in the Morning with a Licence in their Pocket, and call up Mr. Curate and his Clerk, tell them their Business; are marry'd with a low Voice, and the Doors shut; tip the Minister a Guinea, and the Clerk a Crown; steal softly out, one one way, and t'other another, either on Foot or in Coaches; go different Ways to some Tavern at a Distance from their own Lodgings, or to the House of some trusty Friend, there have a good Dinner, and return Home at Night as quietly as Lambs. If the Drums and Fiddles have notice of it, they will be sure to be with them by Day Break, making a horrible Racket, till they have got the Pence; and, which is worst of all, the whole Murder will come out."

This senseless custom survives, in a modified degree, in our times, when on the marriage of a journeyman butcher, his companions treat him to a performance of the "Marrow bones and Cleavers," and also in the case of marriage of persons in a superior station of life, in the playing, on the Organ, of a Wedding March.

The oldest entry of a Marriage in those Registers of the Fleet which have been preserved is A.D. 1674, and there is nothing to lead us to imagine that it was more irregular than that of Mistress Babbington; on the contrary, it is extremely probable that, previously, prisoners were married in their chapel, with the orthodox publication of banns, and by their own Chaplain. But marriages were performed without licence or banns in many churches, which claimed to be peculiars, and exempt from the Visitation of the Ordinary: as St. James', Duke's Place, now pulled down, denied the jurisdiction of the Bishop of London because the Mayor, Commonalty, and Citizens of London, were Lords of the Manor, and Patrons of the Church: but the Rector found that the Ecclesiastical Law was stronger than he, and that its arm was long and powerful, and the Rev. Adam Elliott was suspended (Feb. 17, 1686) for three years, ab officio et beneficio, for having married, or having suffered persons to be married, at the said Church, without banns or licence. He did not suffer the full term of his punishment, for he managed to get re-instated on May 28, 1687, and began his old practices the very next day.

The Chapel of Holy Trinity, Minories, pleaded privilege, on the ground that it was a Crown living, and as much a peculiar as Westminster Abbey, or the Deanery of Windsor; while the Chapels of the Tower and the Savoy sought exemption because they were Royal Chapels, and therefore the Bishop had no jurisdiction over them. Besides these, there were very many more chapels scattered over the Metropolis where irregular marriages were performed, a list of about ninety having been preserved.

These Marriages so increased that it was found necessary to legislate about them, and, in 1689, an Act (6 and 7 Will. III. c. 6, s. 24) was passed making it compulsory, under a penalty of One Hundred pounds, for every parson to keep an accurate register of births, Marriages, and deaths. Another Act was passed in 1696 (17 and 18 Will. III. c. 35, s. 2-3) whereby a penalty of £100 was imposed on any Clergyman who married, or permitted another to marry, couples, otherwise than by banns or licence. This was enforced by another Act in 1711 (10 Anne c. 19, s. 176), which confirmed the penalty, and moreover, this section shows that irregular marriages were getting to be common in prisons, for it provides that "if any gaoler, or keeper of any prison, shall be privy to, or knowingly permit any marriage to be solemnized in his said prison, before publication of banns, or licence obtained, as aforesaid, he shall, for every such offence, forfeit the sum of one hundred pounds," &c.

Of course, this did not stop the practice, although it prevented Marriages in the Fleet Chapel. Yet there were the Rules, and real and pretended clergymen for many years plied their illicit vocation with impunity.

But there seems to have been some compunctions of conscience even among this graceless lot, for one of them, Walter Wyatt, has left behind him, in a pocket-book dated 1736, the following moral reflections.

"Give to every man his due, and learn ye way of Truth. This advice cannot be taken by those that are concerned in ye Fleet Marriages; not so much as ye Priest can do ye thing yt is just and right there, unless he designs to starve. For by lying, bullying, and swearing, to extort money from the silly and unwary people, you advance your business and gets ye pelf, which always wastes like snow in sun shiney day."

"The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. The Marrying in the Fleet is the beginning of eternal woe."

"If a clark or plyer ¹⁶⁴ tells a lye, you must vouch it to be as true as ye Gospel; and if disputed, you must affirm with an oath to ye truth of a downright damnable falsehood – Virtus laudatur et alget."

That this custom of swearing prevailed at Fleet Marriages is borne out by contemporary evidence. The Grub Street Journal July 20, 1732, says: "On Saturday last, a Fleet Parson was convicted before Sir Ric. Brocas of forty three-oaths (on the information of a plyer for weddings there) for which a warrant was granted to levy £4 6s. on the goods of the said parson; but, upon application to his Worship, he was pleased to remit 1s. per oath; upon which the plyer swore he would swear no more against any man upon the like occasion, finding he got nothing by it."

And an anonymous Newspaper cutting dated 1734, says, "On Monday last, a tall Clergyman, who plies about the Fleet Gate for Weddings, was convicted before Sir Richard Brocas of swearing 42 Oaths, and ordered to pay £4 2s."

There were regular Chaplains attached to the Fleet Prison to serve the Chapel there, and, as we have seen, the Warder made every prisoner pay 2d. or 4d. weekly, towards his stipend. Latterly the Chaplaincy was offered to a Curate of St. Bride's Church – as is now done in the case of Bridewell.

A complete list of Chaplains cannot be given, because all documents were destroyed when the Fleet was burnt by the Lord George Gordon rioters; but Mr. Burn in his "History of Fleet Marriages" (a book to which I am much indebted, for it has all but exhausted the subject) gives the names of some, as Haincks in 1698; Robert Elborough, 1702; John Taylor, 1714; Dr. Franks, 1728; 1797, Weldon Champneys; 1815, John Manley Wood, and John Jones: and in 1834, the date of the publication of Mr. Burn's book, the Rev. Richard Edwards, was the Chaplain.

These Clergymen, of course, married couples according to Law, and probably used the Chapel for that purpose. We know that it was so used, for the Original Weekly Journal of Sept. 26, 1719, says: "One Mrs. Anne Leigh, an heiress of £200 per annum and £6000 ready cash, having been decoyed away from her friends in Buckinghamshire, and married at the Fleet chapel against her consent; we hear the Lord Chief Justice Pratt hath issued out his warrant for apprehending the authors of this contrivance, who have used the young lady so barbarously, that she now lyes speechless."

But it is not of the Chaplains I would speak, but of the irregular Clergy, or Lay men, who performed the Marriages. One thing they all agreed in, the wearing of the Cassock, Gown, and Bands. They would never have been believed in had they not. The accompanying illustration¹⁶⁵ gives an excellent idea of the Fleet Parson, and it is taken from an Engraving entitled "The Funeral of Poor Mary Hackabout, attended by the Sisterhood of Drury Lane" and it has a footnote calling attention to the "wry-necked" parson. "The famous Couple Beggar in the Fleet, a Wretch, who there screens himself from the Justice due to his Villanies, and daily repeats them."

The lady holds a sprig of Rosemary in her hand, which in polite society was always presented by a servant, when the funeral cortége was about to leave the house: – In this case, a dish full of sprigs is placed upon the floor, and a child is playing with them. The Mourners carried them to the grave, and then threw them in, as we now do, flowers and wreaths of the same.

Perhaps one of the earliest notices of these irregular Fleet Parsons is in the first year of Queen Anne's reign, very soon after she came to the throne, as it appears, in the Registry of the Consistory Court, – that on June 4, 1702, the Bishop of London visited the common prison called the Fleet, London, and took Master Jeronimus Alley, clerk, to task, requiring him to exhibit to the Chancellor of the Diocese, before the 24th June instant, his letters of ordination, "and his Lordsp ordered him not to marry or perform any divine Office in ye Chapell in ye ffleet, or any place within ye Dioces untill he has exhibited ye same. Mr. Alley soon afterwards fled from ye sd Prison, and never exhibited his orders."

But if Alley fled, there were others left, and the practice of marrying without banns, or licence, brought forth the act of the 10th Anne, before quoted. It was probably before this, but certainly during her reign, that the following letter was written, which also is in the Bishop's Registry.

"Sir, – I think it my Duty to God and y^e Queen to acquaint you with ye illegal practices of ye Ministers and Clark in ye Fleet Chappell for marrying Clandestinely as they do som weeks fifty or sixty couple. The Ministers that are there are as follows, Mr. Robt. Elborough, he is an ancient man and is master of ye Chapple, and marries but very few now without Banns or Licence, but under a colour doth allow his Clark to do wt he pleases, his name is Barth. Basset. There is there also one Mr. James Colton a Clergyman, he lives in Leather Lane next door to ye Coach and horses, he hath bin there these four years to marry, but no Prisoner, he marries in Coffee houses, in his own house, and in and about ye Fleet gate, and all ye Rules over, not excepting any part of City and Suburbs. This Clark Basset aforesaid registers wherever Colton marries in ye Fleet Register and gives him Certificates. Colton had a living in Essex till ye Bishop of London deprived him for this and other ill Practices. There is also one Mr. Nehemiah Rogers, he is a prisoner but goes at larg to his P. Living in Essex, and all places else, he is a very wicked man, as lives for drinking, whoring, and swearing, he has struck and boxed ye bridegroom in ye Chapple, and damned like any com'on souldier; he marries both within and without ye Chapple like his brother Colton. There was one Mr. Alley; he was a Prisoner, and ye benefit of weddings, but is gone to some other prefermt. The abovesaid Basset rents ye sellers of ye Fleet, and pays for yt and two watchmen 100 and £20 p. ann. but he him pays but £20 per ann. for ye Clergy pay all ye rest, and if they do not, they are threatened to be confined or outed. This Clark hath bin sworn in Drs Commons not to marry any without Banns or Licence, unless it be such poor people as are recommended by ye Justices in case of a big belly, but have married since many hundreds, as I and many can testifie who are confined Prisoners. The Chief days to marry are Sundays, Tuesdays, and Saturdays, but evry day more or less. The Clark Basset keeps a Register book, altho he told ye Bishop of London he had none; he also antidates as he pleases, as you may see when you look over ye Registers; he hath another at his son's; he does what he pleases, and maintains a great family by these ill practices. £200 p. ann. he hath at least. The Ministers and Clark bribe one Mr. Shirley, I think him to be Collector for ye Oueen's Taxes. I hope, Sir, you will excuse me for concealing my name, hoping yt you will inspect into these base practices.

For

Dr. Newton Chancellrs to My Lord of London at Drs Commons

These."