Page:Archaeological Journal, Volume 6.djvu/28

12 compact for that emblem, compared with other specimens I have seen. I was then disposed to consider it a reliquary of some kind; but upon finding that the Hospital above alluded to was dedicated to St. Mary Magdalen, it occurred to me that the lady may have borne the name of the saint, and, having the Magdalen for her tutelary patroness, may have been represented holding an unguentarium, a vase for ointment, such as is usually seen in representations of this holy person.

The Hospital of Brodebusk above mentioned is that alluded to by Throsby, as being in existence as late as 1797. He describes it as "a spital or chapel; an ill-looking place, without glass in the windows," &c. It was situated a few hundred yards from the present Church, and a farm on its site is still called the Spital Farm; but, I regret to say, there are no remains whatever of the old chapel. I made what inquiry I could respecting its total disappearance, and it will scarcely be believed that it was taken down somewhere about fifty years ago by the then rector of Gonalston, and the materials, which were stone, used to form drains for draining the adjacent grass lands. This statement is made on the authority of persons now living, who remember the chapel standing, and who also recollect its total destruction, and the use to which it was applied, by the rector: and during whose incumbency, the painted glass in the Church of Gonalston was also allowed to be abstracted by the more tasteful, perhaps, but not more scrupulous parties who desired to enrich the windows of Southwell Church with the spoil thus improperly acquired.

At this time, it appears that the family who owned the estate resided altogether in a distant county, seldom visiting Gonalston. The rector, therefore, in all probability, was entirely uncontrolled in his proceedings. At the same time, judging from the treatment the Church met with at the hands of the proprietor, in the diminution of the north aisle, and the reckless removal of the monuments of the very old family who had formerly possessed the property, there is little reason to believe that any opposition would have been offered to the destruction, and it may justly be called desecration, that was so ruthlessly effected.

The property is now held by John Francklin, Esq., who inherits from his maternal grandfather, Sir Thomas Monoux,