loved to see his projects carried out speedily, and he found pleasure in observing the number of men at work as it daily rose. It is nearly 130 ft. high. The rooms in the lower part were well proportioned, and highly finished with ornamental ceilings and fittings, especially that which he called the Etruscan library; it contained the figure of St. Anthony, but few books. A handsome polished granite tazza stood at the bottom of the staircase, and the lower part was used for heating it. It is to be regretted that the building has not been kept in good order, and the repairs recently done at the top, owing to the colour of the painting, has much injured the external character. The building (with the grounds) having cost the parish nothing, except the charges for conveyance, it might be expected, at any rate, that the structure would be kept in perfect order.

Mr. Beckford's remains were at first entombed in the Abbey Cemetery, but removed hither when the grounds were consecrated. When the estate was sold, this property was marked out for a public pleasure-ground, but Mr. Beckford's daughter, the late Duchess of Hamilton, re-purchased the ground and tower, and presented them to a former rector, Mr. Widdrington, who, of course, assigned them to the parish of Walcot. The rector completed the unfinished entrance, the iron work and pillars, forming the wing walls of the original tomb, becoming part of a central entrance in the Byzantine manner. Mr. Beckford's sarcophagus was designed by himself. The following inscription is graven on one side :“ William Beckford, Esq., late of Fonthill Abbey, Wilts,

died 2nd May, 1844, aged 84.” And on the other the obituary is repeated, with these lines written by himself :

“Eternal power!
Grant me, through obvious clouds, one transient gleam
Of thy bright essence in my dying hour !”


Widcombe Cemetery.—This cemetery, on the Lower Bristol

[ocr errors]

Road, consecrated on the 6th of January, 1862, occupies acres, and was laid out by Mr. Butler. Two chapels, the designs of Mr. C. E. Davis, city architect, stand in a central position, and are precisely similar externally. They are connected by a cloister, affording a porte cocher to each, between arches supporting a bell turret ; one half of the turret only stands on consecrated ground. The belfry, forming an effective centre, is surmounted by a delicately tapering spire, 100 ft. to the metal cross on the apex. Both chapels are cruciform. The Episcopalian chapel consists of a nave, east end, floored with encaustic tiles, the gift of the late Mr. John Rainey.

Abbey Cemetery. This beautiful spot, purchased by the Hon. and Rev. W. J. Brodrick,' was laid out by Mr. Loudon. It covers 5 acres, and the chapel is in the Norman manner, after a design by Mr. Manners. It was consecrated on 30th January, 1843.

[ocr errors]

Walcot Cemetery, at Locksbrook, covers 12 acres ; it was laid out by Mr. Milner, the landscape gardener to the Crystal Palace Company. The chapels, lodges, entrances, and other buildings, are from the designs of Messrs. Hickes and Isaac, and are in the early Decorated style. The chapels are united by cloisters, from the centre of which rises a tower, 100 ft. in height.

Unitarian Cemetery. - This exquisitely beautiful spot, in the lovely glen of Lyncombe, was presented to his brethren by the late Mr. E. Howse, as a burial ground, in the year 1819. Here is a convenient chapel, around which many interments have taken place.

Bathwick Cemetery occupies the most secluded part of

1 Afterwards Visconnt Midleton.


Smallcombe, and was laid out in 1856. It has two chapels, one for Episcopalians, designed by Mr. T. Fuller, the other by Mr. A. S. Goodridge.

[ocr errors]

St. Michael's Cemetery, on the Upper Bristol Road, near Locksbrook, is well laid out, sufficiently spacious, and has two chapels. The Episcopal in the second Pointed order, with a broach or belfry, and at the west end is a circular window, with seven lights. The Dissenters' chapel is octagonal.

[ocr errors]

The Roman Catholics have a cemetery near Pope's Walk, in a secluded part of Perrymead, in Lyncombe parish.


We have in the first portion of this work said as much of the early Municipal and Parliamentary usages and institutions as is necessary or desirable in a work of this character. Besides, Messrs. King and Watts have so fully and so ably dealt with the Municipal Records of the city, in their recent work on the subject, down to the reign of Queen Elizabeth, that practically nothing is left to be said. The great charter which that famous Queen granted to the city in 1590 was so ample, so expansive, so capable of adaptation to the ever-advancing and changing conditions of society and municipal government, that, with one important change, Bath was well governed under its provisions until the Municipal Reform Act of 1835. We may admit, without hesitation, that from time to time there was no little roguery, that the poor were robbed of their just rights, that public institutions were perverted to enrich unscrupulous aldermen and mayors, who like Judas, if they did

We owe

not carry the bag, held the purse-strings. These were some of those human weaknesses from which few communities were free. Public virtue was rarer than it is now, partly for the reason that it was easier to commit public wrong with impunity than it is at present, and partly because of the general laxity of public opinion. We have shown how by a corrupt and shameful collusive compact our Abbey was robbed of her just rights, and the history of St. John's Hospital reveals similar attempts of municipal heroes to rob the city of some of its noblest institutions. One-perhaps the greatest-safeguard of public property in the past has been in the immutable truth of the proverb as to the result of “rogues falling out.” much to that despised, but nevertheless grand proverb. Apart from this rather serious infirmity, the close corporation, as a rule, took care to choose efficient and proper representatives in parliament. We have no reason to be ashamed of the men as men, or of the representatives as such, who represented the city. We ought to be, we are, proud that Bath and her representation has been associated with statesmen of undying fame ; and it is right to add that we have no reason to believe that that representative connection was at any time degraded by the corrupt stipulations which prevailed generally from the second Charles down to the last George.

There is no reason to suppose that, during the century preceding the Municipal Reform Act, there was any peculation, nor that the affairs of the city were not, on the whole, well conducted. Previous to Queen Elizabeth's Charter, (which did little more than affirm and amplify existing privileges) municipal institutions were very much at the mercy of the sovereign; hence their administration was subject to capricious and violent control, which oftentimes rendered them valueless and sometimes mischievous. The Charter of 1590, therefore, practically, was an immense gain. It was a clear declaration of rights; the consolidation of all previous documents in an imperial instrument, embodying the sovereign will and power,


and it pru

which could neither be evaded nor repudiated by her suc

It would be difficult to say with certainty what the precise status of the corporation was at the period of the Charter, but it may be safely inferred that it was a demoralized body, notwithstanding the “Recital of the Antient Liberties,” because the Charter really constituted morally a new corporation altogether. The first mayor and 8 aldermen and recorder by name were appointed under its provisions, and to them was delegated the power of choosing 20 councillors from the citizens. To this extent the first Elizabethan corporation was of popular choice, but from that time for a period of 245 years it was a close, self-elective, and self-elected body. here was one interval during the civil war of the 17th century, when Bath was a “buffer” between both parties, during which the corporation effaced itself. If it met at all, it was in cainera, dently kept no minutes or records whatever of its proceedings. In many respects the old corporation enjoyed larger powers and exercised greater influence than the reformed body. It could hold and dispense ecclesiastical and secular patronage, but these privileges were sources of unmitigated evil; they were exercised sometimes for self-aggrandisement, and sometimes for corrupt purposes, seldom to promote the ends of right and laudable purposes. This is all now changed. Charities, still nominally under the administration of the council, are really under the direction and management of responsible trustees, and these municipal charities excite neither the cupidity of the covetous, nor the disposition to select, for party ends, improper and unworthy recipients of the bounteous provisions made in times past, only for the worthy and those who need it. In other respects the reformed council is endowed with greatly extended powers-powers, in fact, which mean mainly self-government, and which most wisely relieve the central government of much of the details which it could neither efficiently nor wisely carry out itself. The reformed council, of course, is deprived of the power of electing members of

« VorigeDoorgaan »