« PreviousContinue »
years refus'd marriage, or to receive any assistance from the parish besides the little hermitage my lady gives her rent free; she lives on foure pence a day, which she gets by spinning; says she abounds, and can give alms to others, living in greate humility and contente, without any apparent affectation or singularity; she is continually working, praying, or reading; visites the sick; is not in the least given to talke; very modest, of a simple, not unseemly, manner; of a comely countenance, clad very plaine, but cleane and tight. In sure she appears a saint of an extraordinary sort, in so religious a life as is seldom met with in villages now-a-daies."
Lord Clarendon began his journey to Chester en route for Ireland on December 16th, 1685. Evelyn writes on that day: "I accompanied my Lord Lieutenant as far as St. Albans, there going out of towne with him neere 200 coaches of all the great officers and nobilitie. The next morning on taking leave I returned to London." 1686. Lord Clarendon arrived in Dublin the first week in January. The following (hitherto unpublished) letter written by Geo. Trumball to his brother, Sir William Trumball, gives an account of his arrival. It is addressed to "His Maj., envoyé extra'nie at Paris," and is dated from Dublin, 12th January, 1685, and reads as follows: "My Lord Lieutenant Satterday last landed 6 miles from this place about 5 in ye morning which was soe early that people could not putt themselves into so good a posture as they would to receive him, however never was man in this world more welcome anywhere than he was to ye Protestants who received him with open hearts. He was conducted to towne with ye accustomed ceremonies (his lady who had been mightily indisposed at sea tho' had a short passage of 12 hours, coming privately before) and went presently to ye councell, where his commission being read and himselfe sworne, the Lord Chancellor on delivering up the sword made him a short but pithy speech which my lord answered as briefly, but extremely to ye satisfaction of all ye English, declaring that he had particular order from his Majesty to assure them that ye Irish Act of Settlement should not be altered &c."
The account of Lord Clarendon's proceedings in Ireland may be read in his letters to the Ministry at London, which contain a complete history of his government there from the day he entered Ireland, to the moment he embarked again for England, upon his being recalled, and the chain of his correspondence is never broken by the absence of so much as one link.
1686. On the 8th of the following February, Lady Clarendon addressed the following letter to Evelyn from Dublin: "Sir, I was not pleased to see your letter, because I was just writing to you; so that now my letter must pass for a forced answer, which was intended for a great complaint that I am come into a country that you have not cultivated, not a tree nor a shrub is here! though the place is fertile; the sun is kind enough to it; and you are famous here. I must not rail at so new and kind an acquaintance, though I have little hopes of its amendment, but sure I may justly be angry with my own country folks, who will have it that the garden of Chapel-Izod is like Swallowfield, a close walk of ashes and box hedges preferred to one of your best and dearest children! But what can anger do, when I have no hopes in anything but your prayers for my return into the garden of Eden? But I hope I shall have them for a more lasting Paradise, as you shall be sure of mine; but first I should be glad to meet you and my Lady Silvius at Deptford, as she returns from Denmark, for though she will be my near neighbour here, I do not find I am like to have her correspondence. All your children may be in Denmark for any good they do me; I have not had one word from any one of them. Now our meeting at the Cock-pit is gone, you must find some other place to discipline them in. I fear else you will lose your power with them as I shall your good opinion if I detain you longer, but after all I must beg you to believe me, sir, your most affectionate, humble servant, F. CLARENDON."
1686. In May, 1686, Lord Clarendon writes to Evelyn, may go as freely to Swallowfield without my Lord Cornbury as with him; though you will find little else, you may have what fruit and fish you have a mind to, and very good things out of the potagere."
(To be continued.)
Cookham; its Name and History.
HENCE and how does the name of Cookham arise?
WE Does the present village of Cookham occupy the site
to which the name originally belonged? or, has it acquired its name from some other settlement long since obliterated and its site forgotten? That the site on which the present village of Cookham stands was a settlement at a very early period, is certain. Remains have been unearthed which go to prove that a settlement existed here during the Roman occupation, but the present name, or at any rate its suffix, is clearly Anglo-Saxon. The name Sutton, i.e., South Ton or Town, by which a portion of land immediately south of the village is yet designated, would imply that in very early days another Saxon ton or town existed between Sutton and the river, and this must have occupied the site of the present village of Cookham. In later Saxon times Cocheham or Cok ham had its church with its priest, Reinbald, who-as Domesday Book tells us held one hide and one half hide of land, with two other clerks, each having half a hide. Also there was a market held there, worth 20s. for tolls; it also possessed two fisheries of the value of 13s. 4d., and two mills of 22s. 6d., all in the time of the Saxon King Edward. But, for all that, is this the spot where stood the Ham settlement, to which the prefix Cok or Coche was appended? If it be, how comes it that the Ham field lies so wide apart from it? Plenty of ground, which would have been equally suitable for such purpose, lay close to it. The "Ham field," which lies at some little distance beyond the railway-station, instead of being a "home field," would really have been an outlying field, separated from the settlement by a tract of low-lying, and doubtless then swampy ground-that now known as Cookham Moor, which must at times have been impassable, except that there was an artificially-constructed path or roadway. For a "home field" the Ham field would have been most inconvenient, and its choice appears inexplicable. If it be not the old Ham settlement, there arises the