Protestant Exiles from France/Book First - Chapter 7 - Section IV
IV. David Primerose.
David Primerose, one of the pasteurs of Threadneedle Street after the restoration of Charles II., was born at Rouen, being a son of David, pasteur of Rouen, by Madeleine Heuze, and grandson of Dr. Guilbert Primerose (already memorialized.) As to the minister of Rouen, I note now, in addition to what my last chapter contains, that he was alive in 1642, and died before 1666.
The younger David Primerose followed in the steps of his grandfather, not only in ministering within the French Church of Threadneedle Street, but also in marrying thrice, and in taking to wife the widow of a predecessor. In the year remembered as the date of the Great Fire of London, 1666, on the 29th day of the preceding month of May, he married Sara Palliart, widow of the late pasteur Jaques Felles. He married, secondly, 25th April 1677, Judith, daughter of Daniel Du Prie, and had by her a son, Daniel, baptized 14th December 1681. He married, thirdly, in December 1685, or January 1686, Jeanne, daughter of Rene Sasserie, and had by her a son, Henry Alexander, baptized 5th February 1687 (n.s.). On 20th November 1687 our pasteur was a witness to the baptism of Marguerite Charlote Baignoux.
In my Volume Second I shall give an account of the reception in England of the stream of French Protestant refugees from the dragonnades of 168 1. The refugees and their fellow worshippers in London City, headed by Mr. Primerose, went on a Deputation and gave thanks to his Majesty Charles II., who had proclaimed through the Privy Council a national welcome. The memory of this interview was preserved in a printed brochure entitled, “The Thanks given to the King on behalf of the French and Dutch Churches in the City of London for the favour granted by His Majesty to the Protestant Strangers retired into this kingdom — spoken, October 19, 1681, by David Primerose, Minister of the French Church in London. Printed, October 24, 1681.”
I am unable to give any more biographical facts regarding Mr. David Primerose. But as his church was burnt in 1666, and was rebuilt under his supervision, a note may be here added regarding the sacred edifices occupied by his congregation. I do little more than systematize the jottings furnished by Mr. John Southerden Burn in his History of our Foreign Protestant Refugees.
*⁎* It appears, from a memorandum by the Pasteur Aaron Cappel, written in or about 1592, that in 1548 the Pasteur Richard Vauville [alias Francois], “homme vraiment entier et parfait en la piété chretienne,” had collected a congregation of French Protestants in London. Cappel gave as his authority a book printed in 1552 by Mr. Walleran Poulain, ministre à Glastonbury; and he believed that it could be proved that it was mainly out of regard for French-speaking refugees that Edward VI., on 24th July 1550, granted to Protestant strangers the Church in Austin-Friars, known as “The Temple of Jesus.” That strangers of other nations came into royal favour in the train of the French may be inferred from the fact that in King Edward’s charter no ministers were named except the French pasteurs, Francois de la Rivière and Richard Francois.
The French (as my readers know) soon separated from the Dutch for convenience sake. On 16th October 1550 the Dean and Canons of Windsor granted a lease of the Church of St. Anthony’s Hospital, in Threadneedle Street, to the superintendent, ministers, elders, and deacons of the Dutch and French Church in London. Under the presidency of the superintendent, John a Lasco, an arrangement was made that the Dutch should occupy “the temple of Jesus,” on the following conditions — namely, that they should put the Threadneedle Street church into good repair for the use of the French, and pay half the rent of the latter church, the Dutch recognising the right of the French to have occasional preaching within the temple in Austin-Friars. The lease of Threadneedle Street church was renewable at the end of periods of twenty years. From 1628 to 1642 one of their pasteurs was a Canon of Windsor, and perhaps obtained for them more permanent tenure. Or, the congregation may have received more liberal terms in order to induce them to rebuild the church after the fire. For these conjectures, however, no one but myself is responsible.
The Great Fire of London broke out on 2nd September 1666, and continued during four days and four nights. The French Church in Threadneedle Street was destroyed. The Dutch refused to contribute to the building of a new church. The re-building was accomplished by the French congregation alone, by means of collections and subscriptions, amounting to £3300. The new French Church in Threadneedle Street was consecrated on 22nd August 1669, and kept its doors open for public worship and ordinances for about a century and three quarters.
New streets required to be constructed, and the French Church must be pulled down. In April 1840 the city of London bought it; a jury valued the leasehold interest at £2000, and the freehold at 1977, the congregation retaining the carving and the interior fittings. The pasteur, Paul Charles Baup, preached the last sermon within the venerated building in the year 1842. A new church was built in St. Martin’s-le- Grand, and was consecrated by the pasteurs, Francois Martin and W. G. Daugars. on 19th March 1843. A proposal had been made in the consistory that the Bishop of London (Dr. C. J. Blomfield) should be asked to consecrate the new French Church. But a majority decided that the consecration should be conducted according to the ceremonies of the Reformed Church of France, “grounding their opinion (says Mr. Burn) upon the Presbyterian principle,” and considering that “the spirit of freedom and religious liberty, which their fathers had transmitted to them,” were opposed to Episcopal consecration. The pasteurs, in a suitable letter, invited the bishop to be present at their church’s consecration. “His lordship in his reply assured the consistory of his good wishes, and of the pleasure the invitation had given him; but being about to leave London on account of his health, he found it impossible to be present on the occasion personally, though he promised to be so with his prayers.”