1667-8, Feb. 7. A letter was read from the Duke of Monmouth 'declaring he had chosen Dr Gelsthorpe physitian to himselfe and his family, and desiring he might have leave to discontinue (i.e. be absent) and retain the proffits of his fellowship.'

1671. 'For Christmas Boxes, 28 6d' (first reference to this).

1674. For a sword for the porter, 148.'

1675. 'Mr Loggan for his Book, £3.' (The well-known volume of Cambridge pictures.) 1676, May 27. That the master should be repaid five ginneys which he gave to Mr Vernon, our Chancellor's secretary, for hindering mandates from coming to the College' (these mandates, mostly for the election of some Court favourite to a fellowship, became a serious grievance during this and the next reign).

1677. 'Paid the Gold finders, for twice cleansing, £2.0. 4' (the entry as to "gold finders" occurs regularly during many previous years, and is continued into the present century. It is a slang term for nightmen, or cleaners of privies and cesspools). It appears sometimes as "Gold finder and candle."

1680. To the Duke of Monmouth's trumpeter, 2o.'

1681. 'For a coach and horses to Shelford, 78 64.' (This is almost the only early reference to the fellows travelling in any other way than on horseback.)

1681. 'For bringing Mr Knight's manuscripts from London, £1. 10. 0' (our well-known heraldic collection).

1682, June 15. The Master read his Majesty's letters willing and requiring us to elect Mr Scarborough (Vol. I. 458) into a fellowship, but not one of the fellows came up to give any vote, and so the meeting ended. On Monday following the Master receyved another letter from the king, willing and requiring him to admit Mr Scarborough forthwith, which he did.'

6

1683. A sword for the porter, 16.'

1685.

'For slating Caius Court, and one side of Gonville Court, £36.' 1689. 'Paid the master for his charges in reversing Mr Boult's and Mr Chettelber's mandates, £18. 18. 0.' Probably Rob. Chetelburgh, of Corpus, M.A. per lit. reg. 1683.

1694. For mending the College portmanteau, 6a.'

1695. The Legge and Perse Buildings,-they still went by the name of the "Pensionary" (v. p. 82),-underwent some repairs and alterations. There is an entry, "Mr Grimbold's bill for new freestone windows, £14. 13. 6. Mr Howard's bill for tyleing, &c., £23. 2.6." 1696. For painting and gilding the six Dyalls over Honoris Gate, £6.'

1696, Oct. 24. If any fellow desired to have his chamber wainscotted, and it was done at the College charge, the common chest should receive yearly after the rate of £5 per cent. for their money so laid out.'

The first corresponding entry in the bursar's accounts is in 1697, when a sum of £50.8.11 was paid for Mr Case's chamber.

1698. 'To Mr Lancaster for carrying the old hammered money to London to be new minted, and for porteridge and other expences, £4 . 4 . 0.'

'For returning £800 of it by Martin the carrier, to the master, £4. 4. 0.'

'To the master for a journey to London and back again, and expenses there: to Mr Gaywood, a goldsmith: fees at the Tower, melting office, Coach hire, and porteridge, £10.7.0.' (v. Macaulay; Iv. 622.)

1698. To Caton and others for their assistance in preserving the College from fire.' 1700. Some rather elaborate posts seem to have been set up at 'Humility Gate,' as there is a charge of £17. 13. 9 for them, including £4. 10. 0 for "carving them."

JAMES HALMAN.

James Halman, twenty-third master (1700-2), son of Nicholas Halman, clerk, rector of Thursford, Norf., was educated at Holt school. He was admitted sizar at our college, June 27, 1655. He was elected a scholar immediately on his entrance: graduated B. A. 1658-9 and M.A. 1662. He was elected a junior fellow, July 2, 1662; and a senior, March 9, 1670–1. For thirty years he seems to have resided continuously in college, holding in succession all the usual college offices; lecturer, dean, bursar, &c. He also held the important University office of registrary for 18 years, viz. from 1683 to 1701. Apparently he never took Holy orders, but must have contemplated doing so at one time, as it is recorded that he was unable to respond in Theology, Jan. 1669-70, owing to an attack of small-pox. He was elected master, Aug. 24, 1700; but his brief career in that capacity has left no perceptible impression behind. He died in college, and was buried in the chapel, Dec. 23, 1702. There is no monument to him. His portrait is in the Lodge.

By his will, dated Oct. 17, 1702, proved (V. C. C.) Jan. 5, 1702-3, he leaves to the college "my lease of Mepals (Isle of Ely) which I hold of the Dean and Chapter of Ely," to provide an augmentation of 40s. to every one of the Caian scholars. To the college library "all my Civil Law books, being a choice collection." Mentions a cousin, Thomas Halman of Waxham, and James his son.

Chronicle.

1700-1. The college was put to heavy expenses, amounting to nearly £100, by a dispute and law-suit with the Corporation of Cambridge about the mill at Newnham.

Ap. 14, 1702. That any Bedmaker who shall throw dirt or empty their chamberpots, either out of the windows or in the courts or within the gates of the college, shall for every such offence be punished half a crown. Whoever of the Bedmakers shall bring young wenches into the college, or hire any as servants that are not approved of, shall be themselves turned out of all their business in the college.'

Feb. 9, 1702-3. 'That the names of the Founders and Benefactors to the college be collected and read every Commemoration day before the prayer used in that office.' This duty was entrusted to Mr Lightwine and Mr Gurdon, who produced the form still in use in the college.

JOHN ELLYS.

John Ellys, twenty-fourth master (1702-1716), was a son of John Ellys, of Raveningham, Norf. He was born at Huntingfield, Suffolk, and was educated at the schools of Wingfield, Hoxne, Wrentham, and Norton, all in that county. He was admitted at our college, as a sizar, Feb. 15, 1647-8. He was soon afterwards elected a scholar: graduated B.A. 1651-2, and M.A. 1655. He was elected a junior fellow Ap. 16, 1659; and a senior, Jan. 14, 1661-2; and during his long residence held all the usual college appointments. It deserves notice that he was

not in Holy orders. This did not however in any way hinder his college advancement, or prevent him from becoming, as he almost unquestionably did, the most distinguished and popular tutor of his day in Cambridge. Whiston, for instance, in his life of Samuel Clarke, speaks of Ellys as "that eminent and careful tutor."

As regards his origin, his father is described as "gentleman" in our Register, but Le Neve (Knights, p. 487) is decidedly contemptuous about the family claims to gentility. He says of his grandfather, "an ordinary man, and had no pretence to arms," and of Sir John himself, "The coat he pretends to is, A mermaid gules, armed with a mirrour and comb Or, but I believe hath no right to arms." His two brothers, Thomas and Anthony, were both merchants in Yarmouth, and married into Yarmouth families. Anthony Ellys, bishop of St David's, was his grand nephew.

Far the greater part of his working life was spent in the capacity of tutor. As master, beyond the bitter disputes in which he was involved with the fellows, there is little to be said. He was over 70 years of age at the time of his election; but he nevertheless served as Vice-Chancellor during the Academic year 1704-5. It was whilst holding this office, on the occasion of the visit of Queen Anne to Cambridge, that he was knighted.

Le Neve, in his brief pedigree of Ellys, makes what must surely be a unique remark in a pedigree; "Com'only called the divel of Keys." I suppose this refers to the decidedly inharmonious relations which existed between him and the fellows towards the close of his life. Where the main fault for this state of things may have lain, it is impossible to say, but considering the high character which the master had earned in the capacity of a tutor, during the very long period of over forty years, and weighing such evidence as is obtainable, it seems probable that the devil in this case was not so black as he was painted.

The first signs of a quarrel are at the meeting of Jan. 18, 1708-9, when the master for some reason refused his assent to the sealing of Mr Hawys' presentation to Weeting, though unanimously requested by the fellows. He gave no reason beyond declaring that he had no personal objection to Mr Hawys. From soon after this the Gesta register is constantly recording such entries as this: "The fellows unanimously desired of the master either to pass the bursar's accounts, or to give reasons for his refusal." "It was the unanimous desire of the fellows that the master would admit Sympson as fellow; but he refused to admitt him, not excepting anything against him" (July 10, 1712). Matters came to a crisis Ap. 14, 1714, when the fellows having unanimously chosen Ds Morrant into a senior fellowship, the master declared, Custos suspendit suum suffragium; and consequently there was no election.

The fellows took the legal advice of Mr Cheshire. His judgment (May 11, 1714), exactly the same question was again raised in Dr Gooch's time as it had been before in that of Branthwaite,—was on the whole against the master having legally a negative vote which would thus enable him to stop the proceedings and throw the election, by devolution, entirely into his own hands. The queries and answers are transcribed in our MS. no. 621. The fellows also appealed to the

visitors, who decided against the master in the matter of Mr Morrant's election. Their decision is that "dictum dominum, Joh. Ellys, in errorem esse, dictumque dominum cedere debere; præfatumque Joh. Morrant in dictum sodalitium sine mora admittendum esse....' The master saved some of his dignity by absenting himself from the admission, and leaving the work to the president of the college, who admitted Morrant in the visitors' presence, May 22, 1714. A month or two afterwards, the master repeated his opposition in the case of another fellow, Selth, and again left the business of admission to the president. The same process was gone through in 1715, in the case of Peter Parham.

Whether the master had any secret justification in all this, it is impossible to say. The general impression left is that the dispute was the almost inevitable result of the relations between an old man, brought up under a very different system, his first ten years in college were during the Commonwealth,-and a body of comparatively young fellows, with little to do, with no studious instincts, and who were chafing against the retention of what they regarded as antiquated rules.

The dispute continued to grow more bitter until it ended in an attempt to get rid of the master as 'inhabilis,' as had been tried before in the case of Dr Branthwaite. Ten of the fellows met in the chapel Ap. 30, 1715, and sent word by the butler "that the master would please to meet them," but the message was brought back "that he had business and could not meet them." A repetition of the request met with the reply "that he should be busy all the afternoon, but would meet them, as he had promised, on May 2." When at last they succeeded in meeting him, having secured the presence of a notary, they called on him to proceed to the election of a fellow. On his refusal they at once presented him with a list of "articles relating to his ill administration," and added a formal instrument "wherein he was invited to secede from the mastership, upon maladministration," in accordance with Bateman's statute "De inhabili custode." This the notary was directed to attest. Apparently an appeal was made to the Chancellor, but nothing seems to have come of it.

The only statement that we have of the master's side of the question is in a petition by him to the Queen, undated, and possibly never presented. The extracts below are from our MS. no. 602 (by Dr J. Smith, master); where it is stated to have been taken from the original, "which Mr Betham, of King's, received from Lord Godolphin, March 23, 1771." It describes how he, Sir J. Ellys, "has much endeavoured, according to his trust and duty, to have the statutes of the said College observed by the members thereof, but without success, by reason of the opposition which he meets with from the twelve senior fellows," and proceeds to mention some instances of their conduct in detail.

"1. The fellows are irreverent towards the master in words and actions in Publick, before the Fellow-commoners, the scholars, and servitors of the College....

4. When the master sends for punishments or mulcts for breaches of the statutes, the Payment is denied.

5. They refuse to consent to cite the absent members under the College seal, when important affairs of the College require the presence of the whole number....