Brittany and Richmond; the Kings Edward IV., and Richard III.; Mary, Queen of Scots; Harcla, Earl of Carlisle; Richard Nevile, Earl of Salisbury, and his sons the potent" King-maker" the Earl of Warwick, (1) and the Marquis of Montague, all men world-renowned in their day besides others of less note and too tedious to name. Such a district should have been worthily celebrated by minstrels, and described by topographers; nevertheless, few but native poets-humble, unnoticed writers-have given it their lays; and with the exception of the works previously named, and some valuable MSS. in public and private libraries, no history exists.

The task of the local chronicler, like that of the general one, is by no means easy: the attempt to please all would satisfy none. It may be that some who peruse this little volume will find occasion for offence; perhaps charge me with giving utterance to prejudiced feelings—with prefering the Past to the Present. But the plain duty of every man who undertakes to give an account of the Past, is to exhibit those who lived then in the colours given them by contemporaries, rather than from the suppositions and theories of modern authors. Perhaps I have not done this so effectually as might be; however, I have sought to state facts without unnecessary comments.

The same observation holds good with regard to public institutions and buildings. Those who are led to believe that Abbeys were the abodes of gluttony and licentiousness,

(1) "York: Call hither to the stake my two brave bears
That, with the very shaking of their chains

They may astonish these fell lurking curs;
Bid Salisbury and Warwick come to me."

Henry VI.: Pt. II, Sc. 1.

The chained bear and rugged staff was the most popular cognizance of the Neviles, lords of Middleham.

and Castles, strongholds of tyrants and thieves, will start, to find them represented otherwise. Well indeed may they, for it has long been customary to draw such false pictures, and fill up the outline with the most frightful colours. Even poets have lent their powers, and men of highest genius their eloquence and pens, to blacken past times, and decry the Ages of Faith. Glorious exceptions certainly intervene; but alas! of each and of all of these we may say,"He came and baring his heav'n-bright thought

He earned the base world's ban,

And having vainly lived and taught,

Gave place to a meaner man."

Only a little while ago, and no audience could be found. for such even at present it is limited.

Men may be met, affecting to advocate for their poor brothers and sisters, coarse bread and water-porridge in a Union House, as being preferable to good meat and ale at a Convent; forgetting, apparently, that while the maintenance of the Union, with its officials and starvation, costs themselves annually large sums, the Convent, with its monks and its charities, never extracted one penny from the pockets of their ancestors. They complain, justly enough, of oppressive rates, and cruel laws; all the while oblivious, if not totally ignorant of the frightful injustice which first caused a necessity for those rates and laws, with all the innumerable concomitant miseries hence entailed on us and our successors. They bemoan sincerely the scenes of suffering that frequently occur, never thinking that in the old day and under its rule, no gifted author could have written

"Back! wretched suppliant! back

To thy cheerless, homeless dwelling!

Hence to thy haunt of famine, grief, and gloom-
The workhouse swarms-as yet there is no room :""
G. LINNEUS BANKS.

-because, in the precincts of the Convent there was ever
"room," and food, and shelter, for the poor and needy.
Because our Catholic forefathers knew not how to look with
cold hearts and closed hands on the objects of Christian
charity.

"How beautiful they stand,

Those ancient churches of our native land!
Amid the pasture fields and dark green woods,
Amid the mountain clouds and solitudes;
By rivers broad, that rush into the sea;

By little brooks, that with a lisping sound,
Like playful children, run by copse and lea!
Each in its little plot of holy ground.

How beautiful they stand,

Those old grey churches of our native land!"

The Wensleydale churches frequently elicit the tourist's admiration. He, however, sees them greatly to disadvantage; these fine Catholic buildings having undergone numberless alterations, none of an improving character, and many of the very worst description which even a country churchwarden's proverbial ignorance could effect. This is a subject painful to dwell upon. The frightful whitewash, which has obliterated family memorials, and defaced fresco paintings and armorial shields, under the pretext of cleanliness or comeliness-the splendid oak stalls cut up, to make way for wooden boxes called pews-the utter disregard of architectural rules displayed both externally

and internally, by the innovators-all are truly sickening. Still, though changed to accommodate a service for which none of them, save East Witton, were intended, they contain indelible accessories of Catholic rites. The sedilia, the piscina, and the lychnoscope, remain in most; and nearly all contain traces both of the roodlofts and the chantry parcloses. Were it not for the pews, they would hold congregations at least one-third larger than now suffice to fill them.

Dr. Whitaker observes, "ancient piety was anxious to go beyond strict necessity, in the construction of churches. Their builders did not sit down, as we do, to compute the precise number of square feet which a given number of hearers will occupy, and to abolish form, proportion, and grace, if these requirements should either take up room, or cause expense." (1)

After saying: "from the expenses of building the choir, parishes were wholly exonerated; yet, in Richmondshire, this part of the fabric, if of a different period, and in a different style from the nave, varies principally in being more magnificent;" he thus proceeds:-"To account for this, we are compelled to acknowledge the prodigious advantage arising from the celibacy of the Catholic clergy. Many of the benefices, in this district, still continue to be opulent rectories; of the rest, not many had undergone the unhappy process of an appropriation, before the present chancels were built;" but, after lauding the old Catholic rectors for, as he says, applying the "superfluity" of "their glebe and tithes" "on that portion of the church which was properly their own," the Dr. "a Protestant, and a married clergyman," naively "protests" against

(1) Whittaker's Richmondshire, vol. 1. p. 6.

C

celibacy, and cautions married rectors, with families, not to expend more than is necessary for repairs, but to take care of their children! A curious and unconscious testimony, certainly, to the vast difference between the Present and the Past.(1)

(1) "From the gospel and the epistles of St. Paul, the first christians had learnt to form an exalted notion of the merit of chastity and continency. (Matt. xix. 10, 1 Cor. vii.) In all they were revered: from ecclesiastics they were expected. To the latter were supposed more particularly to belong that voluntary renunciation of sensual pleasure, and that readiness to forsake parents, wife, and children, for the love of Christ, which the saviour of mankind required in the more perfect of his disciples, (Luke xvi. 26.): and this idea was strengthened by the reasoning of the apostle, who had observed, that while the married man was necessarily solicitous for the concerns of this world, the unmarried was at liberty to turn his whole attention to the service of God. (I Cor. vii. 32, 33.) Hence it was inferred that the embarassments of wedlock were hostile to the profession of a clergyman. His parishioners, it was said, were his family: and to watch over their spiritual welfare, to instruct their ignorance, to console them in their afflictions, and to relieve them in their indigence, were expected to be his constant and favourite occupations. (The validity of this inference is maintained in the very act of the Protestant Parliament which licenses the marriages of the clergy. 2. Ed. vi. c. 21.) But though the first teachers of Christianity were accustomed to extol the advantages, they did not impose the obligation of clerical celibacy. Of those who had embraced the doctrine of the gospel, the majority were married previously to their conversion. Had they been excluded from the priesthood, the clergy would have lost many of their brightest ornaments; had they been compelled to separate from their wives, they might justly have accused the severity and impolicy of the measure. (Hawarden, Church of Christ, vol. 1. p. 403.) They were, however, taught to consider a life of continency, even in the married state, as demanded by the sacredness of their functions. (Orig. Hom. 23, in lib. num. Euseb. Dem, evan. l. i. c. g.); and no sooner had the succession of Christian princes secured the peace of the Church, than laws were made to enforce that discipline, which fervour had formerly introduced and upheld. (See the Councils of Elvira, can. xxxiii; of Neocæsarea, can i; of Ancyra, can. xx; of Carthage, con. ii, can. ii; and of Toledo, con. i, can i.) Every monument of the first ages of the Saxon Church which has descended to us, bears the strongest testimony that the celibacy of the clergy was constantly and severely enforced. God's priests and deacons, and God's other servants, that should serve in God's temple, and touch the sacrament and the holy books, they shall always observe their chastity. (Pœnit. Eg. p. 133, iv.) 'If priest or deacon marry, let them lose their orders.' (Ibid i. and p. 134, v.) But deposition was the only punishment: the marriage was not annulled. It was only in the twelfth century that holy orders were declared to incapacitate a person for marriage. (Pothier, traite du contrat de marr. p. 135.) Even female relations were forbidden to dwell in the same house with a priest. (See Pænit. Eg. p. 134. vi.)* "Thus writes the erudite and elaborate Dr. Lingard."

* The celebrated St. Egbert, Archbishop, of York, a.D. 743, 767.