The Grocers came next with 6,000, after which follow the Haberdashers (4,800), the Drapers (4,608), the Goldsmiths (4,380), the Mercers (3,720), the Fishmongers and Clothworkers (each 3,390) and the Vintners (3,120).(334) Certain members of the Vintners' Company having proved refractory, the master and wardens complained to the Court of Aldermen, who promptly committed the offenders to prison, thereby earning the approval of his majesty.(335) In cases where the master and wardens of a company had shown neglect in gathering the company's quota they were themselves committed to Newgate.(336)

The Court of Aldermen even committed one of their own body for refusing to contribute his quota.(337) With difficulty the first instalment of 60,000 was raised, several of the companies being forced to part with their plate.(338)

(M130)

In such a hurry was Charles for the money that the aldermen had to advance him 20,000 out of the 60,000 on their own personal security. This was in February. Discharged seamen were again clamouring for pay, and the Exchequer was empty. The aldermen came to his a.s.sistance, but, inasmuch as the lands and tenements had not yet been conveyed to the City according to the terms of the late agreement, the Court of Aldermen pa.s.sed a formal resolution that no further advances should be made until "one or more books of the lands to be a.s.sured by the contract be pa.s.sed under the great seale of England."(339)

(M131)

Notwithstanding the growing unpopularity of Buckingham, the king absolutely refused to abandon his favourite, against whom all kinds of rumours were astir. Nothing was too bad to be believed of him, and popular fury spared neither him nor his friends. Dr. Lamb, an astrologer and quack doctor, was set upon in the city as being one of the latter, and was nearly done to death one night whilst returning home from supper. None would receive into his house the almost lifeless body of the necromancer-the duke's devil, as he was called-who supplied him with love potions wherewith to corrupt women. He was at last removed to one of the compters, where he died the following day.(340) Charles was highly incensed on hearing of the occurrence, more especially as some of the murderers had been heard to say that if Lamb's "master"-the duke himself-had been there they would have handled him worse and so minced his flesh that every one should have had a bit of him. He forthwith summoned the mayor and sheriffs to court and threatened to take away their charter if the murderers were not quickly discovered.(341) The lords of the council also wrote to the mayor (15 June) reprimanding him for not taking steps to repress the riot and ordering him to seize the princ.i.p.al actors and abettors and commit them to prison.(342) These were not so easily to be discovered, but the Court of Aldermen (17 June) committed to Newgate two of the City Marshal's men for neglecting to give notice of the disturbance to the mayor or sheriffs, or even to the alderman or deputy of the ward, as in duty bound.(343) Others were taken on suspicion but were shortly afterwards set at liberty by order of the lords of the council (23 June).(344) The matter eventually ended by the City being fined 1,000.(345) In the meantime libellous placards(346) appeared stuck up in Coleman Street, and the Court of Aldermen committed a man to prison for no other reason than because he took one down to read and after reading it put it up again. That at least was the man's own story.(347)

(M132) (M133)

Early in July the balance of the second instalment of 60,000 (part of the late loan of 120,000) was due from the City, but Charles could not wait so long. An expedition to Roch.e.l.le under the Earl of Denbigh had recently proved a failure. Determined not to give way, Charles sent orders to the earl to refit his squadron and remain in England until the whole available maritime force of the country could be got ready to accompany him. Money must be raised at once. Charles himself wrote to the mayor and aldermen (30 June) stating that a sudden and important occasion of the relief of Roch.e.l.le required present succours, and directing them to find immediately the sum of 20,000 out of the moneys due on the last purchase of the Crown lands. If they had not such a sum in hand they were to raise it on credit.(348) This sum exactly represented the balance due from the City to the king, and precepts had already been issued to the livery companies for raising the amount. Another precept was sent out immediately on receipt of the king's letter, whilst other precepts were directed to levying the subsidies granted by parliament.(349) The fate of Roch.e.l.le was, in spite of every effort, soon to be sealed. The Duke of Buckingham fell by the hand of an a.s.sa.s.sin (23 Aug.) whilst engaged at Portsmouth in superintending preparations for its relief, and two months later (18 Oct.) the fortress was compelled to capitulate.

(M134) (M135)

In the meantime the question of the king's right to claim Tonnage and Poundage for life had given rise to so much opposition that Charles had occasion more than once to prorogue parliament. Merchants had refused to pay the dues, and their goods had been seized. Recourse was thereupon had to the Sheriffs' Court of the City, where the owners sued out a replevin as for property illegally distrained. Popular feeling was so much on the side of the merchants that when parliament met Charles publicly renounced all claim to tonnage and poundage as a right. Nevertheless the contest continued, and the feeling of both parties was embittered by mutual provocation and by proceedings taken in the Star Chamber against merchants for protecting their property from these exactions. At length matters reached such a crisis that Charles determined upon an adjournment; but no sooner was the king's intention divined than the Commons determined to put their grievances into writing and to cause them to be read by the Speaker, whom they forcibly detained in the chair. Sir John Finch having refused to accede to their request, resolutions condemning religious innovation, as well as the levying of tonnage and poundage, were hastily put and carried by acclamation, whilst Black Rod was vainly endeavouring to gain admission to the House with a message from the king. Before admittance was granted the House had voted its own adjournment. On the 10th March it was dissolved,(350) not to be summoned again until eleven years had pa.s.sed away.

(M136)

The years immediately succeeding the dissolution of Charles's third parliament, during which he was preparing a system of personal government destined eventually to work his own destruction, were years of sorrow and trouble to the citizens of London. A "pestilent sickness" again visited the city in the autumn of 1629-brought over from Holland or Roch.e.l.le-and remained until 1631. It was followed as usual by a great scarcity of provisions. The civic authorities did what they could to prevent the spread of infection and to alleviate the distress, but it was to little purpose. Riots were of frequent occurrence, necessitating the keeping a _posse_ of constables quartered in the Mercers' chapel.(351) Doggrel rhymes appeared in 1630(352) threatening the wealthier cla.s.s with mischief if food were not forthcoming-

The corne is so dear I dout mani will starve this yeare.

If you see not to this Sum of you will speed amiss.

Our souls they are dear, For our bodyes have sume ceare.

Before we arise Less will safise.

(M137)

In the midst of the general gloom one bright spot appeared, namely, the birth of an heir to the crown (29 May, 1630), an event which the king lost no time in communicating to the mayor and Common Council of the city-his "princ.i.p.al city and chamber."(353) On the occasion of the christening of the infant prince the bells of the city churches were set ringing,(354) and he was presented with a fair large standing cup of gold with cover, weighing nearly 300 ounces, and enclosed in a case of crimson velvet, the cost of the whole exceeding 1,000.(355) Two years later, when the prince was carried into the city to witness the pageants on lord mayor's day, the Court of Aldermen were so gratified with this unexpected mark of royal favour that they forthwith voted the babe a gift of 500.(356)

(M138)

The year following the birth of Prince Charles the queen was robbed of a great part of her plate and jewels. As the thieves were likely to dispose of their booty among the goldsmiths of the city, a precept was issued to the master and wardens of the Goldsmiths' Company to try and recover it.(357) The goldsmiths had long ago begun to leave Goldsmiths' Row in Cheapside, and to set up shops in different parts of the city, and in 1623 they had been ordered to resume their old quarters, which in the meantime had been given up to poor petty trades.(358) It was easier to trace lost property when all the goldsmiths were congregated together in one spot.

This order, however, was so ineffectually carried out that another order was issued by the lords of the council ten years later directing all goldsmiths to find shops for themselves either in Cheapside or Lombard Street within the next six months, inasmuch as the practice of setting up their shops in obscure places in different parts of the city offered facilities for abuses, and more especially "in pa.s.sing away of stolen plate."(359)

(M139)

On the occasion of the king's departure for Scotland in May, 1633, the Court of Aldermen voted him a present of 2,000 "in two severall purses of velvett or sattin," as a pledge of the City's true loyalty, love and obedience to his majesty.(360) After he had gone the mayor and aldermen proceeded in State to Richmond to pay their respects to the queen and to offer her a bason and ewer of gold of the value of 800, with her arms engraved thereon.(361)

(M140)

In the following November the Duke of York was christened, the ceremony being attended by the mayor, aldermen and sheriffs, as well as the chief officers of the City. The infant prince was presented with a gilt cup and cover weighing sixty ounces, and containing the sum of 500 in gold.

Similar fees were paid to the midwife, nurse and "rockers" to those paid on the occasion of the baptism of his elder brother.(362) During the absence of the mayor and aldermen at St. James', where the ceremony took place, a double watch was ordered to be kept in the city.(363)

(M141)

Five years had now elapsed since the dissolution of the last parliament, during which time the country had submitted to the personal government of Charles. Matters might have continued on the same footing for some time longer had not Charles conceived the idea of claiming the sovereignty of the seas as a pretext for raising a fleet. The difficulty then arose as to how to equip a fleet without summoning a parliament. It had been the custom ever since the time of the Plantagenets to call upon maritime towns to furnish ships ready manned for the defence of the realm at a time of threatened invasion. This custom had been rendered sufficiently elastic to comprise the port of London, and the City had frequently been called upon to furnish a contingent of vessels in time of war. Occasionally a protest may have been made against such demands, but they were seldom, if ever, altogether refused. On the 20th October, 1634, writs were issued calling upon the city of London and various port towns and places along the coast to furnish a certain number of ships of war, and to have them ready at Portsmouth by the 1st March, 1635. In many cases it was impossible to supply ships of the size required, and in these the king offered to supply ships of his own on condition that the port towns should equip and man them. London was called upon to supply seven ships varying in size from 300 to 900 tons, with an equipment of from 150 to 350 men.

(M142)

The Court of Aldermen appointed (13 Nov.) a committee to consider this writ to the City as well as another sent to the borough of Southwark, and to learn what had formerly been done in like case. The City's records were to be consulted with the view of ascertaining how far it was exempt from such charges, and the City's Solicitor was to attend them on that behalf.(364) The law officers had previously been directed (6 Nov.) to consult together on the matter, and the Town Clerk had received orders to translate the writs into English and make copies of the same.(365)

(M143)

When the matter came before the Common Council that body, after serious consideration, decided (2 Dec.) to present a pet.i.tion to his majesty setting forth that, by ancient privileges, grants and Acts of Parliament, which were ready to be produced, the City was exempt from any such obligation as that contained in the writ, and praying that the City's privileges might be upheld.(366)

(M144)

The only effect of this pet.i.tion was to cause another writ to be issued a week later (9 Dec.) enjoining specific performance of the former writ.(367) Finding that there was no way of escape the mayor, Sir Robert Parkhurst, began to take the necessary steps for raising 30,000, the sum required from the different wards.(368) On Sunday, the 14th December, Robert Mason, who had recently been appointed Recorder in succession to Littleton, on the king's own recommendation (although the election is recorded as having been according to "antient custom and freedom of election"!),(369) appeared before the lords of the council with an account of the progress made in the city in the matter of the ships, with which Charles was well pleased, and the Recorder was ordered to attend the council every Sunday afternoon with a similar account "untill the worke be perfected."(370) On the 19th the Court of Aldermen appointed a committee to fit out the ships as required, but they were limited in expenditure to the sum of 30,000.(371) On the 17th February, 1635, the committee reported to the court that his majesty had resolved that two of the City's ships should be a.s.signed to the admiral and vice-admiral of the fleet, and that they should be fitted out by the care and oversight of officers of the navy. For this purpose the sum of 11,475, out of the 30,000 already voted, was ordered to be paid to the treasurer of the navy, whilst the committee proceeded with the business of the other five ships.(372)

(M145)

Hitherto all had promised well, but on the 4th August Charles thought fit to issue another writ calling upon the nation at large, and not only port and maritime towns, to furnish ship money, on the ground that as all were concerned in the mutual defence of one another, so all might contribute towards the defence of the realm.(373) The City found itself called upon to provide two more vessels of 800 tons apiece.(374) The authorities, however, were so slow in executing this further order that the Sheriffs were made to appear every Sunday before the lords of the council to report what progress was being made.(375)

(M146)

In June, 1636, Richard Chambers, a merchant, who had previously displayed a bold front against the king's demand of tonnage and poundage, for which the Star Chamber had condemned him to a term of imprisonment (1628-1629), again came to the fore, and carried the question of the king's right to levy ship money to the Court of King's Bench. The judges, however, refused to allow the question to be argued. "There was a rule of law and a rule of government"-said Justice Berkeley, scarce realising the true import of his words-"and many things which might not be done by the rule of law might be done by the rule of government." Chambers was again committed for contempt, but was afterwards liberated from prison upon payment of the 10 at which he had been a.s.sessed. He contented himself with bringing an action in the King's Bench against the mayor, who had made the a.s.sessment on the ground of some technical informality.(376)

(M147)

Other matters had arisen lately-"great and important businesses"-all tending towards an estrangement of the City from the king. Early in 1635 the City had been condemned by the Court of Star Chamber to a fine of 70,000 and the loss of its Irish estate for having, as was alleged, broken the terms of the charter under which their Irish estate was held.

One of the charges against the city and the companies was that they continued to employ the "mere Irish" on their estates instead of relegating them to the narrow limits reserved for them, there to perish of disease or starvation.(377) There were differences too touching the Royal Contract, differences as to the City's rights to estreated recognisances, as to pretended encroachments and other matters. It was felt that there would be no peace until some arrangement could be made with Charles on all the matters in question, and for this purpose a committee was appointed in May, 1636, to see what could be done. A schedule of "thinges desired by the cittie of London" was drawn up, and an offer was made to the king of the sum of 100,000, to be paid by annual instalments of 20,000, if he would make the concessions desired.(378) The king's commissioners, who had the business in hand, refused the offer. They informed the committee that not only would the City have to surrender certain valuable fisheries and other privileges in Ireland, as well as the castle of Culmore, but it would have to provide an allowance of 5,000 to Sir Thomas Philips.

Instead of 100,000 it would have moreover to pay 120,000.(379) Negotiations continued for two years. Eventually a compromise was effected in June, 1638, and the city was fain to accept a pardon on surrendering its Irish estates and payment of the comparatively small sum of 12,000,(380) of which the queen happened at that time to stand in need.

The patents of the Irish Society and of the companies were not however actually surrendered until 1639.(381)

(M148)

In the meantime Charles had given umbrage to the City in other matters, more especially in the measures he had taken for regulating trade and the inst.i.tution of corporate monopolies. An order restricting the use of coaches and carts, and forbidding anyone to keep a carriage unless he was also prepared to keep four sufficient horses or geldings for the king's service, weighed heavily upon the mayor and aldermen of the city, who were for the most part men advanced in years and whose duties carried them a good deal abroad. They therefore pet.i.tioned the king for an exception to be made in their favour. The pet.i.tion was granted, but only after long delay.(382)

(M149)

The civic authorities were not better pleased with the king for his having (1636), in spite of all protest, created a new corporation which embraced all tradesmen and artificers in the city and suburbs, and thus threatened to be a formidable rival to the ancient corporation.(383)

(M150)

In the midst of a growing feeling of dissatisfaction at the existing state of things, a third writ for ship money appeared (9 Oct., 1636). It raised such a storm of opposition in every quarter, however, that Charles once more appealed to the judges for a formal acknowledgment of his right.

Their opinion proving favourable,(384) the work went on and the City was called upon (Sept., 1637) to furnish two ships each of 700 tons.(385)

In the following year, after Hampden's case had been decided, Charles continued to levy ship money, and the City was told to furnish a ship of 500 tons (5 Nov., 1638). The cost was estimated at 1,000. The usual precept was issued (26 Nov.) to the alderman of each ward for the purpose of ascertaining how best that sum could be raised.(386) The returns must have been unfavourable, for on the 29th January (1639) the Court of Aldermen appointed a committee to wait upon the lord high admiral and explain to him that the City was not in a position to fit out another ship.(387) The money was eventually raised by the twelve princ.i.p.al livery companies, seven of which contributed 100 apiece and the other five 60.(388)

(M151)

In the meantime troubles had arisen in Scotland through Charles's ill-advised and bigoted attempt to impose upon his northern subjects a Book of Common Prayer. By midsummer (1638) he was preparing for war and would shortly be under the necessity of applying to the city for money and men. It was probably with this end in view that he granted (18 Oct., 1638) to the citizens an ample inspeximus charter, confirming to them their ancient privileges and franchises. Negotiations for a new charter had been going on since the preceding March(389) (if not earlier), and it was only now conceded on payment of a sum of 12,000.(390)

(M152)

At the opening of the new year (4 Jan., 1639) Charles applied by letter under his hand to the City for a liberal contribution and a.s.sistance towards putting down the disorders in Scotland, notifying at the same time the fact that he had called upon the peers of the realm to attend in person at York by the 1st April. The letter was read to the court of Common Council on the 12th February, but the matter seemed of so great importance that further consideration of it was adjourned to the 16th, when it was agreed to issue a precept to the alderman of each ward to take steps for raising a free and liberal contribution.(391) A month elapsed, and notwithstanding every effort of the aldermen, less than 5,000 was got together. The aldermen were directed to renew their efforts, but this only resulted in increasing the amount by 200 or 220.(392) The whole amount was so small that it was contemptuously refused. At the beginning of April Charles found himself at York with an indifferent army, and with little prospect of being in a position to maintain even that army beyond a very limited period.