USA > Rhode Island > Newport County > Newport > Trinity church in Newport, Rhode Island; a history of the fabric > Part 2
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8
The outside of King's Chapel was quite simple. It had, accord- ing to the contract, five windows on the south side and five on the north, with two at each end. There was a door in the middle of the south side-the side toward School Street, which was the prin- cipal approach, for Tremont Street was at that time little more than a lane at the back of the burying ground. This side of the church probably was little changed, since the additional land for the enlargement was on the other three sides. At any rate, a shell was ordered put over it in 1714, the first definite touch of the Renaissance to be found in the documents. What this shell was may be seen in that built by Wyatt and Munday in Daniel Ayrault's
I 5
THE FIRST CHURCH
house in Newport and now set up at the Newport Historical So- ciety's building. Further, when, in 1729, the south gallery was to be built, John Pillet agreed: "Also to take down a large Window over the South door, make two Window-frames and Casements, and fix them. .. . " This means that there were, at first, five win- dows in that front: one above the door and two, one over the other, on each side of it. The two "Window-frames" were to replace the one over the door.
The glazing of these windows is described in the contract, which reads: "and sufficiently glaze all the sª windows with good square glasse & iron casements." The "square" glass, which was really rectangular, was by this time supplanting the old-fashioned "quarrels" or diamond panes, as we call them. It came in sizes of 4 by 6 and 5 by 7 inches. The latter is known only in later adver- tisements. There are a few actual sash, one from the Codding- ton house in Newport, which have the 4 by 6 "squares" set in lead.
Iron casements, too, were probably more common than we have thought. They existed in the original college at Harvard, one has recently been found in Virginia, and two or three are in the mu- seum of the Society for the Preservation of New England Antiqui- ties. The openings were probably what in the England of that time were called "four light," that is, they were divided into four parts by a vertical bar or mullion and a horizontal bar or transom. The lower parts, probably, of the lower two compartments were in the iron casements and no doubt swung out. In volume v of the Wren Society publications, plate XXVII, there is a drawing of a house by Sir Christopher Wren which shows this exactly. Here the glass seems to be 5 by 7.
If the windows were round-headed-compass-headed-the round part was above the transom, or a second transom was set in. The problem of how the glazing was done will come up in the
16
TRINITY CHURCH IN NEWPORT
case of the original church at Newport, where, as we have seen, the glass was ordered set as late as 1709, and it will reappear in the second church.
In Figure 4 is an ancient view of King's Chapel, redrawn
5
FIGURE 4 "King's Chapel as in 1720"
from an old woodcut printed in Greenwood's History of King's Chapel and probably drawn from Price's print of 1722. If this drawing is correct, it should represent the east end and north side of the enlarged church of 1713. As far as we know this later building, it does not do this exactly, nor does it correctly portray the original chapel; for it has three windows instead of two in its east end, though these may possibly represent a change made dur- ing the construction. It also shows a tower which is not in the records. It is probably not an absolute likeness and may never have been intended for one.
The interior of the original Trinity Church was probably like that of the old King's Chapel, and both resembled, if they were not based on, St. Mildred's, Bread Street, London, perhaps the simplest of Wren's "hall" or one-room churches, which had its altar at the east end, gallery at the west, and pulpit somewhat east of the mid- dle of the north side. King's Chapel was not alone in having a
I7
THE FIRST CHURCH
governor's pew. In the list of pews of old Trinity in 1719, num- ber I is "set apart for the use of the Governor."
The Rev. Mr. Lockyer and the wardens, in their letter to the Venerable Society in 1702, say: "We have also got an altar." This altar is still in existence-is still in the present church to which it must have been transferred when the old church was abandoned. It stands now in the chancel, as it used to do, an oaken table of William and Mary's time, with curved stretchers and turned and twisted legs. A portion of it can be seen in the view of the pulpit on a later page (Figure 27). Discarded about 1837, rescued by William Gilpin, Esq., but practically forgotten by the parish, it came to light some years ago in New Hampshire in the possession of Mrs. Franklin, who had held the tradition of its origin and who returned it to the church.25 A statement written by the wife of William Gilpin was sent inclosed in a letter to the rector, the Rev. Stanley C. Hughes, by Mr. Harris C. Rush, who says in explanation:
"The paper was written by Aunt Hattie Gilpin, the wife of Uncle William Gilpin, and tells the story of how the old altar came into Uncle William's possession. .. .
"From the time he acquired the altar until his death, it was in Uncle William's law office-Uncle William died intestate, Mr. Godfrey of Nova Scotia and I administered the estate.
"When it came to making disposition of the altar we considered it our sacred duty to keep it from going into the auction room . . . and it was decided that Cousin Sarah Pattison should take it. .. . Cousin Sarah therefore bought the altar from the administrators." This letter is dated February 20, 1928.
The statement by Mrs. Gilpin is as follows. It is dated 1867.
25 When the Rev. Mr. Honyman wrote to the S. P. G. that the congregation had given the old church with all its furniture, he must have meant the pews only. He could hardly have meant the altar, the silver or indeed the cloths and cushions, all of which, with the silver, which the church still has, were reckoned, in that day, as furniture.
I8
TRINITY CHURCH IN NEWPORT
"About thirty years ago the ladies of the Parish were assisting in the improvements in Trinity Church interior; a new communion table was bought and placed in the chancel; the old one taken away from which for many long years (some said from the first foundation of the Church,) the sacraments had been administered to worshippers who for the most part had long gone away to take them 'new in their Father's Kingdom.'
"A gentleman who was partial to ye relics of ye olden time, went into the Church while the repairs were going on: he met the old sexton, Capt. Springer, (as he was called) asked him where the old table was ? 'The Church Wardens gin it me, but the carpenters got hold on it for a bench, and shook it to pieces amost-the painters has carried off one of the side pieces for a pattern to paint like old oak-the rest of the pieces I'm going to take home to burn-I was a going to have it for a washbench for my wife.' 'I'm sorry to hear they thought of moving it out of the Church' said the gentleman, 'I wish the Wardens had given it to me.' 'My, do yer want it?' 'Want it ? Yes indeed, glad to have it.' 'Dod rot it-ther 'tis in the corner, wats left on it.'
"The gentleman made immediate arrangements with Mr. Springer to have it for himself, collected the missing pieces, and had it repaired at a neighboring cabinet maker's; and then re- moved the precious relic to his law office, where it is cherished as one of his most valuable effects."
The altar itself agrees with the tradition of its age. It is an authen- tic table of 1698 and perhaps earlier.
A glimpse at what was then considered the proper furniture of a church may not be without interest. We have it in the early rec- ords of King's Chapel, in Boston. Some contemporary authority, probably the official record of the church, is quoted by the Rev. F. W. P. Greenwood in speaking of the return of the Rev. Mr.
19
THE FIRST CHURCH
Myles from England: "Boston, 1696. This year Mr Samuel Myles, Pastor of this Church, returned from England; hee arrived July 24th and brought with him part of the Gift of Quene Mary performed by King William after her decease, viz. the Church fur- niture, which were A Cushion and Cloth for the Pulpit, two Cush- ions for the Reading Deske, a carpet for the Allter, all of Crimson Damask with silk fringe, one Large Bible, two Large Common prayer Books, twelve Lesser Common prayer Bookes, Linin for the Allter. Also two Surplises, Alter tabell, 20 ydes fine damask."26 What must have been the rest of the gift came in the next year for we have the warden's receipt: "Boston 1697, then received of Mr Myles too great Silver Flagons, and one sallver and one boul27 and one Civer28 all of Sillver which was given to the Church by the King and Queen and brought over by Capt. John Foye, Re- ceived by me Giles Dyer Church Warden."29
The original King's Chapel possessed an altarpiece, an orna- ment which was required by law after the Restoration. Warden Giles Dyer records that "the Decalouge, viz., thee ten Command- ments, the Lord's Prayer and the Creed, were drawne in England and brought over by Mr Samuel Myles in 1696." The royal arms were in the church also, but nothing is said about their origin, nor is it stated that they were a part of the altarpiece. Indeed it might easily be inferred that they were not from the record which Warden Giles Dyer, who was by trade a painter, made of certain work which he had done about that building: " ... to Duing the Commandements and allter rome, and the Pulpet .. . mor to Duing the gallarey and the Kings Armes .... "3º It seems from this as if
26 Greenwood, History of King's Chapel, p. 52; Foote, Annals of King's Chapel, 1, 121.
27 Probably the baptismal bowl.
28 Cover (kiver), pronounced thus in older New England.
29 Greenwood, History, p. 53.
30 Ibid., p. 53. Foote, Annals of King's Chapel, 1, 123.
20
TRINITY CHURCH IN NEWPORT
the arms were not a part of the "Commandements" but were on the front of the west gallery. They were not always in the chancel in England, and in the one church in the colonies, that at Goose Creek, South Carolina, which still retains the arms, they are over the chancel arch facing the nave.
On December 12, 1710, the Rev. Mr. Honyman and certain of his vestry wrote to their staunch friend Col. Nicholson: "to your other Kind Appearances for ye Interest and Honour of our Church we Also Most Humbly Intreat that this may be added Namely that you Would Interceed with ye Honble Society for an Altar Piece for it [is] ye Only Ornament thats Wanting to finish & Compleat its Beauty we have already sent ye Dimensions to Mr Chamberlain .... " Col. Nicholson must have bestirred himself, for, while the records of the church say no word of the reception here of so important a gift, we have the testimony of Dr. MacSparran that the church did have an altarpiece. In his letter to the people of the New London church, the rector of St. Paul's says: "I went to Newport ... & the Committee for building their new Church . . . met yt evening at Mr. Honeyman's house ... they came to the unanimous Result, that provided the Gentlemen ... take down, Transport, Erect & Finish the Church ... & Expect no assist- ance from them, they should have it & all its appurtenances Gratis: except the altar piece, which was expected to be given to Narra- ganset. ... "
The records of St. Paul's do not mention any such gift, nor is there any tradition of it. Any altarpiece which was in that church- and there were traces of a reredos-disappeared long ago, prob- ably when the church was moved. Whatever happened, the style of the panels now in Trinity makes it certain that they were not parts of the original altarpiece.
The fate of the original Trinity Church is somewhat obscure. It was once proposed to give it to the parish at New London, and
2I
THE FIRST CHURCH
the letter, already quoted, of Dr. MacSparran to the New London people about the matter is still extant; but the transfer was not accomplished. The Rev. Mr. Honyman, in one of his letters to the S. P. G., says that the people had "given the old Church, with all its furniture, to a neighboring place, where they conceive it will be of great use."31 Tradition says that this was Cowesett, in War- wick, which seems generally to be meant by the expression "War- wick church." Bull says directly: "The old building was given to the people of Warwick, who had no church of their own." Mason repeats this almost verbatim, and he adds: "Although it was taken down and carried there, it does not appear that the materials were ever put together again. There is a tradition that it was floated from Newport to Warwick, but for this there is no warrant." There is a further tradition that the raft made of the timbers was wrecked and the materials cast on the shore at Cowesett. This, also, is of course unproved.
Whether Mason is right or wrong, there was a Cowesett church, as we know from Dr. MacSparran's own records of St. Paul's. The congregation at Warwick was within the parish of that mighty missionary, and under the date of September 9, 1739, it is recorded that "Doctor MacSparran preached at ye Church of Warwick."32 A lot was conveyed to the Society by the Rev. George Pigot for building a church of England,33 and William D. Brayton, Esq., in a letter quoted by Mr. Updike, describes the church, which he says was built thereon, as "a wooden building two stories in height, with a steeple and a spire." He gives no authority for his state- ments, but he was an antiquary and he had evidently been at some pains to collect his facts. His description might fit the Newport
31 Quoted in Mason, Annals of Trinity Church, p. 43.
32 Updike, History of the Narragansett Church, 11, 118, 382, 383, 384, 385.
33 Warwick Deeds. It was a beautiful site, on the corner of the Post Road and the present road to the Cowesett railroad station.
22
TRINITY CHURCH IN NEWPORT
church as far as we know it, though Mr. Brayton does not say that the building came from the parish of Trinity. He does add, however, that it was pulled down about 1764, that it might be re- moved to Old Warwick, and then says: "The materials, having been conveyed to the shore, were scattered and lost during a storm which arose soon after."34 Dr. Goodwin adduces some evidence to show that the church may actually have been moved, after all, and, if this were the case, we have no way of discovering what was its latter end.35
34 Updike, History of the Narragansett Church, 11, 117.
35 Ibid., p. 384.
II The Church Land The Original Lot
T HE original church, it is now known, did not stand on the site of the present building. Henry Bull thought that the new church was built on the site of the old, but Dr. Goodwin has shown that this cannot be true, since the old church was still standing at the time of a vestry meeting held in the new building December 6, 1725.36 The old church stood on a part of the present church property, a lot given by Robert Carr, Jr., "to set a Church of England on." It remains to fix more exactly the position of this plot of ground and thus the site of the church. This, by a series of eliminations, we can do, as will appear in Figure 5.
The old building could not have been next to Spring Street, on the northeast corner of the present churchyard, for that land, for thirty to forty feet west of the present street line, belonged in 1703 to Peleg Sanford's estate.
Nor could it have stood on the northwest corner of the yard, for that the parish did not acquire till 1796.
The southwest corner is equally unavailable, since it was nearly one hundred years later, in 1866 and 1873, that this became a part of the churchyard.
Finally, the land whereon the present church stands would be excluded, even without the record already quoted, because it was not until 1720 that one part of it came into the possession of the parish by conveyance from Francis Brinley, while the remainder, the extreme southeastern corner of the present lot, was not in its hands, apparently, till about 1762.
36 Updike, History of the Narragansett Church, 11, 429; Mason, Annals of Trinity Church, PP. 40, 43.
1
BRENTON
R'CARR
JAMES BROWN
ROBERT 2 CARR
LANE
SANFORD
ESEK CARR-TOROBERT CARR 1686.
THAMES ST.
I. 1681-1687
BRINLEY
1
?
DIVISION OF ROBERT"CARR'S LAND.
CALEB CARR OF B. ARNOLD.
..
:
SPRING ST.
A. C.
BROWN
ABIGAIL CARR
II. 1704-
LANE ~(CHURCH ST.)
SANFORD
A.C.
GEO. HICKS
ABIGAIL CARR
CHURCH LOT
BRINLEY
LANE
-
CLARKE
STREET
MARY ST.
III 1721-26-62
SPRING ST.
THE BRINLEY LOTAND THE NEW CHURCH THE ADDED LAND, .
..
CLARKE ST. PROLONGED?
t
J.H., JR
BROWN & OTHERS
J.HONYMAN, JR.
CHURCH ST.
REV. J.H.
DUNBAR COWLEY PENROSE
KINCH-HONYMAN!Y HEIRS
OLD LINE OF SANFORD LAND
BRINLEY CRANTEES
....
FRANK ST.
BILLINGSGATE
MILL ST.
FIGURE 5 The Carr Land and the Church Property
-
1
FURTHER DIVISION
THE CHURCH LOT
25
THE CHURCH LAND
This leaves, as the only spot on which the original Trinity could have stood, the area north of the present church, east of a point nearly in line with the western face of the tower, and west of a slanting line which, at its southern end, was about thirty-five feet from Spring Street. On the north it probably included all of the width of Church Street, which did not, even in 1722, run through to Spring. All this is set forth in Figure 5. This lot could not have extended north of the street, for that land was sold, later, partly by James Honyman, Esq., and partly by Mrs. Bisset, Mrs. Red- wood and Mrs. Sherborne, his daughters.
We can check this, to some extent, by the graves in the yard. Almost in the middle of the area of which we are speaking, lies the slab which covers the grave of Thomas Mallet, who died in 1704. Unless this heavy stone has been moved, which does not seem probable, though other stones in the yard have been reset,37 the church was on the north side of it, as is shown in Figure 6.
The fact that this original lot overlapped the present Church Street is proved by the vote, March 22, 1722, that "a post and rail fence," with a turnstile, should be put "at the end of the lane leading up to the church."38
If the dimensions of the church, from the pews and the alleys, were actually as the plan shows it, 28 feet by 54 feet, the building would readily fit the part of the old lot north of Thomas Mallet's grave, and even if we take our cue from the length, which is the same as that of old King's Chapel, and assume the Chapel's breadth also of 36 feet, there is still room.
The proof of these statements, that is, the history of this land, or of the ways in which it was acquired, is very interesting and, as the land available profoundly influenced the shape and the placing 37 May 8, 1817, the sexton was directed " ... to set and erect all the gravestones that have fallen down in the churchyard." (Mason, Annals of Trinity Church, p. 317.) Vaults, of which little or nothing is now known, were also built at times. 38 Mason, Annals of Trinity Church, pp. 37, 38.
26
TRINITY CHURCH IN NEWPORT
not only of the first building but of the second and of the additions thereto, it is quite important that it should be set forth in some de- tail. We shall find that there are many unknown quantities; in fact not one dimension of the first lot is known from any document. There are but three deeds extant which relate to the church prop- erty and they are so vague that it is impossible to do more than approximate the lines of the old parcels of ground as they were added from time to time. All have been recovered, as far as they apparently can be at present, by study of the lots not only adjoin- ing but sometimes so far away that they seem to have little or nothing to do with the church property.
Robert Carr (1) of Newport, owned at the time of his death in 168 1 a strip of land about 120 feet wide, between William Bren- ton's six-acre lot on the north and land which was then or later the property of Brinley and Caleb Carr on the south. Carr's land ex- tended nearly equally on each side of what is now Church Street, which did not then exist.
The north half of this land Carr divided as Figure 5 shows, giving part to his son Robert (2), who had the mansion house at the corner of Thames Street, with a lot 100 feet in length and more land at the east, and part to his son-in-law James Brown, son of Chad, who had the land where he had built, 190 feet in length, bounded on the west by the younger Carr's mansion-house lots and on the east by the other land devised to the latter.
The southern half of the land Carr gave to his son Esek (2), who, in 1687, sold it to his brother Robert (2).
Robert(2) Carr made his will on July 8,39 1703. He gave his
39 The will is not on record. We know it from a MS. book, apparently Nathaniel Newdi- gate's, which contains copies of the other early Carr wills as evidence in a suit which he brought, in behalf of James Honyman, Jr., then a minor, against George Dunbar, son-in-law of the George Hicks named in the will. It is catalogued as Book 609 Carr and Easton Wills in the Newport Historical Society. Mr. Newdigate, who is said to have been one of the most eminent lawyers in the Colony, forms another tie with King's Chapel, of which he was a founder. He came to Bristol and thence to Newport. He was a vestryman of Trinity.
ID
A ROBERT CARR
CHURCH ST.
P
CVRB
e
L
N
M
1
7
L
-
1
18 50
-
SANFORD
1717
LATER GRAVES
I GRAVES
1704
1748
1
1
1
1
1
-
-
1
OLD PRIVET _.
H
C
SPRING ST.
CVRB
SANFORD
SECOND CHURCH
BRINLEY
1762
RHODES HUNTING SEARING
1/26 ON BRINLEY LOT
CRANDALL, HALF TO CHURCH 1866 FRANKLIN, HALF TO CHURCH 1873
CVRBy
F
E
R
FRANK ST.
FIGURE 6. The Original Lot and the Additions thereto
ABCD The original lot given by Robert Carr CEFG The Brinley lot, 1720 DE West line of Sanford land PQRE Old Sanford land acquired 1762 ML and G H North and south lines of Honyman purchase, westward to Penrose land, 1790-96
NO West line of land voted to be retained at sale of Honyman lot to Simeon Martin
L H West line of land actually retained at the sale to Martin, 1801 or 1802 HGF K Old Brinley land, purchased from Crandall, 1866, and Franklin, 1873 T Grave of Thomas Mallet
1
FIRST CHURCH 1701
1780
- PART RETAINED OF PURCHASE FROM HONYMAN HEIRS 1796
·+
1740
B
O
G
K
28
TRINITY CHURCH IN NEWPORT
son the mansion house and his daughter Abigail all the land on the "South Side of the way that Leads up to James Browns land40 on the North side of the way that leads to the Church from said Browns Garden easterly except what is given to George Hix and a piece of Land I gave to set a Church of England on at the East End of said Lands bounded as followeth on the South Side on Lands of Francis Brinley on the East on Land Late in Possession of Peleg Sanford Deceased the upper part of the North Side upon Mr. Burton's Land formerly Mr. Brenton's Land on the West and bounded on the Main Street that leads unto the Neck and on the North on the Highway that Leads up to James Brown's .... " This will be plain on a little examination of Figure 5. The words "on the West and bounded on" are confused, apparently, by a transposition of the "and"; they should read "and on the West bounded by." The lot "given to George Hix" began 110 feet (107.5 now) from Thames Street at the east end of the present Seabury property and extended eastward for 120 feet. The last north bound given extended for the length of the western or man- sion-house lot on Thames Street on the opposite side of Church Street from the present Seabury lot. George Hix was a nephew of Carr, the son of his sister Mary, who married John Hicks.
This locates the church lot but is far from giving it any di- mensions.
Robert (2) Carr died in 1704 and his son, Robert(3), in 1710. The latter left all his land to his mother, the widow Elizabeth Carr, Elizabeth Lawton before her marriage, and she, on her death in 1722, left it to her grandson James Honyman, Jr., son of Abigail Carr who had married the Rev. James Honyman. It was very probably at the instance of his wife that Robert (2) gave the
40 These two lanes, which were continuous and which are now Church Street, were part of Carr's land, driftways first to James Brown's property, then to the church. See will of Robert (1) in Book 609, ut supra.
29
THE CHURCH LAND
land to the church, as her name appears in the list of pew owners in 1719, while there is nothing to connect her husband with the parish.
James Honyman, Jr., in 1732 sold the mansion house and its lot on the northeast corner of Thames Street to Richard Ward. His own mansion was on the northeast corner of Thames and King, now Franklin Street.
The Hicks lot came to George's daughter Elizabeth, who had married George Dunbar, afterwards Judge of Admiralty. East of this lot was a piece of land about 27 feet long which came-there seems nothing to show how-into the hands of Jacob Dehane, who owned it in 1721, thence to the Kings and from them to Mary Penrose. Jacob's epitaph, a Latin elegiac distich, is better known than his biography:
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.