Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

Waggle-to shake, or knock about. Wankle-unsteady, unstable. A drunken person, an invalid, or a baby when walking unsteadily, are said to be walking. wankily.

Wapentake-a name exclusively confind to Scandinavian England, and which means "we apon-tig" i. e., "weapon-touching."

Warp-a deposit of mud.

Wark-(1.) to work. "Ger on wi thi wark." (2.) a pain. Teeath wark. Belly wark, &c.

Wear-to spend. wear on that."

"Hoo mich did tha

Welt-(1.) part of a boot, to which the sole is fastened. Literally, the part thrown over on to the boot uppers. (2.) Sheep will sometimes roll on their backs, and are then quite helpless. They are said. to be over welted.

[blocks in formation]

JOHN ALCOCK, LL.D.,

WITH A FEW NOTES ON THE ALCOCK FAMILY.

BY GEO. J. GRAY.

HE family of Alcock, to whom the subject of this memoir belonged, were well-to-do merchants of Hull. There is no evidence of any others of the same name being in Hull at this time. No records show where William Alcock, the earliest member of the family we know of, came from. Mr. J. H. Leggott,* says he was a dealer in skins, and probably a tanner;' but in his will he only describes himself' mercator.' His son, Robert, followed his father's profession with success, as in his will he bequeaths among other things, a fourth part of a ship called "The George," to John, his brother Thomas's

son.

William Alcock married Joan . . .? and had issue, (1.) Thomas, (2.) Robert, (3.) John, his will being proved by his widow, January 13th, 1434-5. We know Thomas to be the eldest, because he is the only son mentioned in his father's will; the others only as pueros meos.' It is only a conjecture that John was the youngest.

Thomas was sheriff in 1468; and mayor of Kingston-upon-Hull, 1478, when "the plague (which had alternately raged, more or less, from 1472, destroying near 1600 persons) ceased this year, but not before it had proved the death of this worshipful magistrate, and brought his dear wife and children to their silent graves." Such is the record given to posterity by an historian of Hull. † I may here note that Robert, in his will (1484), mentions "Johanni Alcok filio Thomæ Alcok fratris mei medietatem unius quartæ partis unius navis vocatæ George," but I cannot say whether the will was made before this sad event. cannot find any will of Thomas Alcock; but, on June 21st, 1480, the administration of the effects of Thomas Alcock was

Hull and Lincolnshire Times. Jan. 27. 1883.

+ Gent's History of Hull, New Edition, 1869. p. 104.

I

granted to Robert Alcock, merchant, John Alcock, and Alice Baxter.

Robert was also sheriff in 1478, and mayor of Hull, 1480. He married Katherine ...? and had issue, (a.) Robert, (b.) Katherine, who was twice married; (1)to John Dalton, who died in 1496, leaving a large family, and was buried in Trinite Church, Hull. (2.) Henrison, and died 1545, desiring "to be buried in Trinite-churche, in the quere, under the throughe wher my hushand, John Dalton liethe." The editor of Testamenta Eboracensia, says, that this John Dalton was the founder of the Daltons who afterwards settled in Hawkswell, in Richmondshire. Robert Alcock's will was proved by his wife, Katherine, July 10th, 1484. After this all traces of the Alcocks in Yorkshire disappear.

De la Pryme* gives Robert Alcock as the father of John, the future bishop, and the subject of this memoir; and he has been so quoted by all biographers of John Alcock, especially Yorkshiremen, although the Coopers in 1858 corrected this error. If attention is paid to the wills of William Alcock and his son Robert, it will appear quite plain. In Robert's will, (1484-5) is Thoma Alcok fratre meo;" in the father's will, (1434-5) § "Thomam Alcok, filium meum." This shows that Thomas and Robert Alcock were brothers, and with this before them, it is surprising that Yorkshire biographers have not corrected their error. William Alcock, as I have said before, was the father.

As to the birthplace of John Alcock, there is a contention between Hull and Beverley, as to whom the honour should belong. I cannot see why Beverley is brought forward. There is nothing to show either way, but as the family were eminent merchants of Hull, I think that Hull may keep the honour for itself. Perhaps, as De la Pryme asserts that the records of Hull show him or his parents to have lived there, more light may be thrown upon this matter by the searching

* Ephemeris Vita. Edited by C. Jackson, 1870. (Surtees Society).

+ Athena Cantabrigienses, vol. I. pp. 3. 4, and 519. Testamenta Eboracensia, vol. III. p. 295.

Ibid, Vol. ii. p. 42.

of the records, which I understand, sadly require reporting upon.

We do not know when John Alcock was born, but we can form an opinion from the evidence I now give. The father's will was proved by his wife Jan. 13th, 1434-5; his son, John, died 1500. Comparing these dates and remembering that the father only mentions Thomas, and the first appointment of John Alcock was in 1461, after his ordination in 1449, we can conclude that he was about ten years of age when his father died, thus making him about 75 at the time of his death.

The earliest notice of him is given by the editor of Testamenta Eboracensia* He was admitted to the order of Subdeacon by John, Bishop of Philippolis, the Suffragan of the Archbishop of York, on March 8, 1448-9, at the Abbey of Thornton, in Lincolnshire, of which house he may perhaps have been an inmate, giving him a title. He became Deacon, March, 29th, and Priest the 12th of April following.

The events of the earlier part of the fifteenth century-the French wars; the domestic squabbles at home, resulting in the Wars of the Roses-affected all, though the monks perhaps least of all. If Alcock had not been trained in a religious abbey, he would probably have taken a more prominent position in the struggles then going on, which would have clung to him, favourably or not, as each side was successful for a season. Although he took not a prominent onesided position in political affairs, he seems to have adhered to the rightful owner of the throne, and, in consequence, shared some of the ups and downs of those we may call his party; but his partisanship was mild, and perhaps only caused by his appointment which connected him with Henry IV. and the unfortunate young Edward V., further strengthened by the murder of Edward V. by Richard.

For a time he studied at the Cambridge University; when, we do not know, but, in 1466, he proceeded to the degree of Doctor of Law; this was after he had left Cambridge for a larger

* Testamenta Eboracensia, vol. II. p. 42.
+ Who is this John, Bishop of Philippolis?

sphere of work. It may be well to state that, during the time he was at Cambridge, the colleges of King's and Queen's were founded. Those were the days when learning was scarce; and it was even so at the beginning of the sixteenth century, when Erasmus resided there for a time. The prominent course of study was theology, followed by philosophy; law was not encouraged, though a few proceeded to a law degree, as Alcock did. It seems difficult to realise those days, when there were so few places for learning, when the learning could only be gained through the few manuscripts which the colleges had, and the Fellows,' who then no doubt led an easy life. There was no public University Library, no impulse towards learning,-that was to come later on. John Alcock no doubt saw, or heard of the teachers of the new learning; we know he appreciated the invention of printing, because he had his sermons &c. printed by Pynson, and W. de Worde.

His first appointment came by the hands of a friend-Thomas Kempe, Bishop of London, who offered him the living of St. Margaret's, Fish Street, London, which was accepted in 1461. Bishop Kempe's father was successively Bishop, of Rochester, Chichester, London, and finally Archbishop of York. Following this came his appointment as Dean of the Royal Chapel of St. Stephen's, Westminster, April 29th, 1462. Six years afterwards, on the 16th of December, 1468, he was installed as Prebend of Brownswood in St. Paul's Cathedral, which he resigned February 20th, 1473-4, being succeeded by William Dudley, Dean of the Royal Chapel.

In 1470, he was appointed one of the Privy Council; and the same year was engaged on an embassy to the King of Castille.

This was followed in 1471 by his appointment to be one of the Privy Council, along with the Queen and others, to Edward, Prince of Wales, afterwards Edward V., the ill-fated boy who, with his brother the Duke of York, were put to death by their bloodthirsty uncle who assumed the royal power as Richard III.,

but only for two years, when he ended his wretched life by the hands of the rightful owner of the crown, at Bosworth Field.

The same year, (1471), Edward IV. determined to obtain the Scottish King in the interest of the House of York, by proposing a perpetual peace, and a marriage between the two royal families. To further this, commissioners were appointed by both Kings. Amongst the English Commissioners was "doctor John Alcock." The Commissioners were instructed to meet on the 23rd of September, 1471, at Alnwick, but it appears they did not assemble until April 25th, 1472, and then at Newcastle-on-Tyne, when the truce was. renewed. To show the magnitude of these meetings, the Scottish Commissioners had passports for themselves (12) and four hundred attendants. According to some authorities, Alcock was treating with the Scottish Commissioners again in July, 1486.

During 1472, the see of Rochester was open by the transference to the see of London of Thomas Rotheram, the Bishop of Rochester. To this see Alcock was accordingly appointed to succeed him, and we find that Pope Paul II. exerted his influence with Edward IV. to get him appointed. How had Alcock. obtained the Pope's favour? We find that Alcock obtained leave to be consecrated elsewhere than at Rochester, March 13th, 1472-3. He retained this bishopric till 1476, when he was transferred to Worcester.

**

For a time, by permission of the Pope, he was suffragan Bishop of Norwich, so it is not surprising that we find him appointed deputy to the Lord Chancellor; he was instated as deputy, September 20th, 1472, and in that capacity he opened Parliament on the 16th October, 1472, with a speech, but upon the Lord Chancellor's recovery, the parliament was prorogued, April 5th, 1473, and Bishop Alcock's authority ceased.

It was usual for the Lord Chancellor, or his deputy, who was generally the Master of the Rolls, to open parliament.

* See Nasmyth's Catalogue of MSS. in Corpus C. College, Camb. 1797.

[blocks in formation]

The peculiar and unparalleled instance of two persons, at the same time, holding the office of Lord Chancellor, occurred to Bishops Alcock and Rotheram, both Yorkshiremen. When Edward IV. planned his invasion of France, in the vain hope of gaining its crown, he intended that the Lord Chancellor (Rotheram) should accompany him, as well as the Master of the Rolls and others, and, finding it necessary to provide for the business of the Chancery in England, he nominated Bishop Alcock to take the duty in the Lord Chancellor's absence. Instead, *Lives of the Chancellors, vol. I.

however, of pursuing the customary practice of making him merely Keeper of the Seal, he was invested and sworn in with the full powers and title of Lord Chancellor, April 27th, 1475. But from some cause the armament was delayed from April to July, and during these months Privy Seal bills were addressed to both officers in England; frequently on the same day and from the same place. The last writ addressed to Bishop Alcock is dated September 28th, 1475, after which Bishop Rotheram resumed the office. So Bishop Alcock was Lord Chancellor of England jointly with Bishop Rotheram from April to July, and alone from July to September, 1475. He was Lord Chancellor again in 1486, which will be spoken of further on. In 1476, at the request of John Dalton, who had married his niece Katherine, he founded a grammar school at Hull, which exists to the present day; although not the same building, it is a fac-simile of the one Alcock built. It was pulled down and sold in Edward VI's reign, but eventually rebuilt. It is not used as a grammar school now. The

[graphic]
[ocr errors]

principal object of the school was that all should be taught gratis, the schoolmaster being provided for by money proceeding from certain houses. For more particulars concerning the Grammar School, I refer the reader to R. W. Corlass's Hull Grammar School, published in 1878.

In 1476, upon the resignation of John Carpenter, Bishop of Worcester, who survived his resignation only a few months, Bishop Alcock was transferred from Rochester to Worcester, 18th September, 1476, the temporalities whereof being restored to him by the King, September 25th, 1476. It was during his residence here that he visited and restored the Collegiate Church of Westbury.

According to some authorities, he was made Lord President of Wales in 1478, being probably the first occupant, and that he continued to hold the office after he had been transferred to Ely.

He visited Little Malvern Priory in 1481,"rebuilt the church, repaired the convent, and in a great measure discharged their debts."

The

He built a chapel on the south side of Holy Trinity Church, Hull, and appointed a chanter "to pray for the souls of Edward IV., of himself, parents and other relations who were buried there, likewise for the souls of all Christians." chanter was also to give instruction in the Grammar School free. This chapel was built during 1478-1483, probably as a memorial to his brother and family, who died of the plague in 1478.

In the disturbed state of England, Richard III. took the great seal from Bishop Russell, July 29th, 1485, and temporarally entrusted them to Thos. Barrowe. Master of the Rolls, for the despatch of necessary business, who probably retained them until the end of this reign. At the battle of Bosworth Field, Richard III. was killed, and Henry VII. upon his return from the battle-field, nominated Bishop Alcock as his first Chancellor. In this capacity he summoned Parliament, November 7th, 1486, and declared the cause of the summons. Several delicate questions testing his learning and experience were placed before him, but he was always careful to obtain the opinion.

of the Judges, and so gave general satisfaction. To quote Lord Campbell* "One of the questions brought forward was the effect of the attainder, by the parliament. of Richard, of a great number of the temporal Peers now summoned. Could they, at the commencement of the session, take their seats in the House of Lords? Chancellor Alcock asked the opinion of the Judges, who held that they ought not to sit till their attainder had been reversed, thereby recognising the principle that any statute passed by a parliament under a King de facto is ever after to be taken for law till repealed.' But a more puzzling question arose as to the effect of the attainder of Henry himself, as Earl of Richmond; for how could this be reversed without an exercise of the prorogative in giving the royal assent ? and could the royal assent be given till the outlawry was received? The Chancellor again consulted the Judges, and they cut the knot by unanimously resolving that the descent of the Crown itself takes away all defects, and stops in blood by reason of attainder,' which has ever since been received as a maxim of constitutional law; and no doubt was relied upon by the Jacobites who attempted to restore the Princes of the House of Stuart under King William, Queen Anne, and George I."

For some reason the Lord Chancellor

ship was not long with him. My opinion. is that Henry only used him until he had raised Bishop Morton to sufficient dignity, to support that office. Rather would I think otherwise, but the fact of Bishop Morton having advocated his cause and lost everything, his escaping from England and remaining in exile with Henry until his restoration, surely claims recompense from him whom he so zealously served. The transference is supposed to have taken place between August and November, 1487.

When Mortor was appointed Archbishop of Canterbury, Bishop Alcock was transferred, by bull of provision 6th, October, 1486, to the see of Ely, then one of the richest in England. He obtained the royal assent and the temporalities December 7th, and was enthroned December 17th, *Lives of Chancellors, vol. 1.

« ZurückWeiter »