View report page

75
previously between the Minister, Dr. Spratt, and the
Vestry; but the subject of dispute on that occasion was
the keeping of the Register of those Touched for the Evil,
of which evidence is supplied by the Vestry minutes of 5th
April, 1682:—
Register for Touching. Upon reading an Order of his Matie in Councell made in
the yeare 1672 whereby the Minister of every parish is
appointed to keepe a register of persons touched for the
evell this Vestry is of opinion that the Right of keeping the said
Register is in Dr. Sprat and the Minister of the parish for the tyme
being and that he ought to have the keeping of the said Register
booke and the disposall thereof.
Whether this entry be interpreted as permissive or mandatory
there can be no doubt that the duty it refers to
involved more than appears at first sight. Nowhere,
indeed, but in Westminster, could an order of this kind
have been necessary. To Westminster it was that, during
the Jacobean period, thousands of scrofulous sufferers
attended by their surgeons and accompanied by their friends,
were attracted by the Orders in Council issued from time to
time appointing "sittings" of the King specially for the
purpose of "touching" those who sought their cure at the
hands of his Majesty. The sittings were occasionally held
at Windsor in the summer season, but nearly always during
the residence of the Court at Whitehall. Although the
ceremony was frequently performed by James I., the number
of applicants had so increased by the time of Charles II.,
that weekly sittings were appointed on Fridays, subject to
the number not exceeding 200 on any day. From 1660-64,
inclusive, 23,601 persons were "touched." In 1665-6 the
King removed from the metropolis on account of the plague;
but on his return the superstitious rite was resumed so
actively that from 1667 to 1684 no less than 68,506 persons
availed themselves of it. Thus the necessity for the above
mentioned order will easily be conceived, if only on account
of the labour which the keeping of the Register involved.
During the reign of William III. the solemnity was, in a
great measure, suspended, the King "being persuaded that