On the 30th October (1689) a parliamentary committee was appointed to prepare a Bill for "restoring and confirming of corporations." A Bill was accordingly brought in, read for the second time and committed.(1686) The Bill was mainly concerned with those corporations that had _surrendered_ their charters, and a great struggle took place upon the committee's report (2 Jan., 1690) over an attempt to introduce a clause providing that every munic.i.p.al officer who had in any way been a party to the surrender of a borough's franchises should be incapable of holding any office in that borough for a period of seven years.(1687) The city of London had not surrendered its charters. It preferred, as we have seen, on the advice of its Recorder, to let judgment be entered up against it, and allow its privileges and franchises to be confiscated by process of law rather than voluntarily surrender them. London was therefore excepted out of this Bill, saving a clause touching the not taking or subscribing the oath and declaration.(1688)

(M861)

On the 6th February, 1690, the Convention Parliament was dissolved. Its greatest achievement had been the pa.s.sing of the Bill of Rights, the third Great Charter (as it has been called) of English liberties. The Bill of Rights embodied the provisions of the Declaration of Rights, and strictly regulated the succession to the crown. It const.i.tuted the t.i.tle-deed by which the king was thenceforth to hold his throne, and the people to enjoy their liberties. The late parliament had been none too liberal to William in the matter of supply. Money was much needed for carrying on war with France and for reducing Ireland. Extraordinary aids were voted from time to time, but the money came in so slowly that the king was fain to seek advances from the City.(1689) A new parliament was summoned to meet on the 20th March.(1690)

(M862)

The election of members to serve the City in the coming parliament took place on the 19th February, and was hotly contested. There appears to be no record extant among the City's archives of what took place, but from a pet.i.tion laid before the new House (2 April) by Pilkington (the lord mayor) and three others, viz., Sir Robert Clayton, Sir Patience Ward and Sir William Ashurst(1691)-all professing more or less Whig principles-we learn that they claimed to have been elected by the Common Hall. A poll had been granted, and a scrutiny was in course of being held when (as they complained) the sheriffs declared the election to have gone against them.

The pet.i.tioners had afterwards learnt that upon the completion of the scrutiny the majority of those that had a right to vote had proved to be in their favour. They prayed therefore for relief. Their pet.i.tion was referred to the Committee of Privileges and Elections for them to consider and report thereon to the House; but nothing came of it. It was in vain that Pilkington issued precepts to the livery companies for returns to be made: (1) of the names of those who were on the livery at Midsummer, 1683; (2) of those who had been admitted since; (3) of those that had died since 1683, or who were absent; and (4) of those who had omitted to take the prescribed oaths for a freeman or liveryman-in order to affect the scrutiny.(1692) The result was declared to be in favour of two aldermen and two commoners of distinct Tory proclivities. These were Sir William Pritchard, Sir Samuel Dashwood, Sir William Turner (once an alderman and soon to become one again) and Sir Thomas Vernon. Upon Turner's death in February, 1693, Sir John Fleet, then lord mayor, was elected in his place.(1693) In the country the elections were carried on with the same heat as in the City,(1694) and with like result. The majority of the members of the new parliament were Tory.

(M863)

In November last (1689) a new committee was appointed to prepare a Bill for the reversal of the proceedings upon the _Quo Warranto_ and for the removal of other grievances.(1695) The provisions of the Bill had been scarcely settled before the House, of its own motion, granted (8 April) leave for a Bill to be brought in to reverse the judgment on the _Quo Warranto_ against the City as arbitrary and illegal, and appointed a committee to prepare such a Bill.(1696) A Bill was accordingly prepared, was brought in, and pa.s.sed the first and second reading on the 14th April.(1697) On the 7th May it pa.s.sed the committee stage and was ordered to be engrossed, and on the following day it pa.s.sed and was ordered to be carried up to the House of Lords.(1698) On the 14th the Bill pa.s.sed the Lords without amendment, after counsel for the City had been heard during its progress through the House.(1699)

(M864)

Pursuant to provisions of the Act (sec. 10) thus pa.s.sed an election of mayor, sheriffs and city chamberlain took place on the 26th May, and an election of a Common Council on the 10th June following. Such as were then elected were according to the statute to hold office not only for the remainder of the usual term, but to continue in office throughout the year ensuing. On the 26th May Pilkington was again elected mayor, although the majority of votes in Common Hall was in favour of Sir Jonathan Raymond,(1700) whilst Edward Clark, mercer, and Francis Child, goldsmith, were chosen sheriffs.(1701) Sir Peter Rich was re-elected chamberlain by a narrow majority over the head of Leonard Robinson, who had ousted him the previous Midsummer,(1702) but he was not admitted to office, his rival being imposed upon the citizens as chamberlain in spite of his having been in the minority.

(M865)

When the elections for a new Common Council took place on the 10th June there were severe contests in several of the wards between the "Church party" and the Whigs, involving irregularities which led to disputes between the aldermen and the Common Council.(1703) The working of the new Act, as a matter of fact, gave rise to much dissatisfaction, and scarcely was it pa.s.sed before the Court of Aldermen resolved (27 May) to take counsel's opinion upon some of its clauses.(1704)

(M866) (M867)

The state of affairs was at length brought to the notice of parliament by a pet.i.tion subscribed by members of the Common Council and presented to the House of Commons on the 3rd December.(1705) The pet.i.tioners explained to the House that they had conceived and hoped that the late Act would have restored the city to its ancient rights and privileges. It had, however, done quite the contrary. They then proceeded to relate how, notwithstanding the Act, several aldermen of the city who had been appointed by commissions under the late king continued to act as such by virtue of certain doubtful expressions in the Act; that by their illegally a.s.sumed authority Pilkington had been declared and made mayor, although not duly returned by the Common Hall; that by the contrivance of the said mayor and the aldermen Leonard Robinson had been made chamberlain, notwithstanding another having been declared duly elected by the sheriffs, and the Common Hall had been thereupon dissolved. Nor was this all. The pet.i.tioners went on to complain that divers members of the Common Council had been illegally excluded, whilst others who had been duly elected had been refused admittance; that the place of town clerk having been vacant for three months and more-an office, they remind the House, of great trust in the city and one to which only the Common Council had the right of appointment-the mayor and aldermen had of their own authority appointed several persons to execute the office against the consent of the Common Council; that the pet.i.tioners had not been allowed to meet and consult about the necessary affairs of the city according to their ancient rights and customs; and that a Common Council having met on the 3rd October, and a majority of the members having agreed upon the presentation of a humble address to parliament with the view of explaining the recent Act and settling the rights of the city, the mayor refused to allow the question to be put and immediately dissolved the court. The pet.i.tioners therefore, finding all their ancient rights and privileges thus invaded, prayed the House to grant them relief. Having heard the pet.i.tion read the House ordered a copy of it to be given to the mayor and aldermen,(1706) and appointed Monday, the 8th December, for hearing both parties by themselves or by counsel. Accordingly, on that day the pet.i.tioners were heard by their counsel, and divers witnesses were examined, after which the further hearing was postponed until the morrow. On the 9th the case of the mayor and aldermen was opened by counsel and was continued on the 10th and the 11th, when by a majority of thirteen it was decided to adjourn the matter for a week.(1707) It never was taken up again, parliament being probably unwilling to run the risk of losing the favour of those in the city who were in power at a time when interference on its part might be the cause of stopping the flow of money into the coffers of the exchequer.(1708)

(M868)

As early as January, 1690, William had made up his mind to go to Ireland in person for the purpose of reducing the country into subjection, but although every effort was made to push on the necessary preparations nearly six months elapsed before he was ready to set out. On the 30th May the a.s.sistance of the City was invoked. The Common Council willingly agreed to raise money to a.s.sist the king in his enterprise,(1709) and on the 2nd June the mayor waited on his majesty at Kensington Palace, accompanied by the recorder, the aldermen and the sheriffs, and wished him a prosperous journey, promising at the same time to secure the good government of the city during his absence.(1710) On the 4th William set sail, and ten days later (14 June) landed at Carrickfergus. His arrival was a surprise to James, who flattered himself that the state of affairs in parliament and "the distractions of the city" would not allow of his leaving England.(1711) During the king's absence the queen took an active part in the administration of the kingdom, and by her tact and kindliness won many friends. As soon as it was known that William had safely landed in Ireland the sheriffs were deputed by the Court of Aldermen to attend her majesty and desire when the court might wait upon her to offer its congratulations upon the good fortune that had so far attended the king.(1712)

(M869)

The defeat of a combined English and Dutch fleet off Beachy Head on the last day of June caused a great commotion, although some compensation was found in the news of William's victory at the Boyne. Seeing that a French force might any day be expected in England, the government, as was its wont, turned to the city of London. On the 7th July the mayor, the aldermen and some members of the Court of Lieutenancy(1713) obeyed a summons to attend upon her majesty in council. The state of affairs having been fully explained to them, they were asked as to the numerical strength of the City's militia, and more especially as to the number of horse and dragoons the City could raise on an emergency. The mayor professed himself unable to give a reply off hand to these questions, and desired time to consult the Common Council on the matter.(1714) Whatever political or religious differences existed at the time of the recent city elections, these were now laid aside in the face of a common danger, and "London set the example of concert and of exertion."(1715) No time was lost. Already the mayor had, in pursuance of an order from the Privy Council (3 July) issued precepts to the several aldermen (5 July) for search to be made in private as well as public stables for horses for military service.(1716) On the 10th the Court of Aldermen resolved to apply to the hackney-men plying their trade in and about London, and to learn from them the number of horses they could supply on an emergency like the present, and upon what terms.(1717) The Common Council at the same time resolved to raise a regiment of horse and another of dragoons.(1718) The next day (11 July) the mayor and aldermen and a deputation of the lieutenancy again waited upon her majesty sitting in council and a.s.sured her of their loyalty. The city militia, the queen was informed, consisted of about 9,000 men, well equipt and ready for active service, and six regiments of auxiliaries were about to be raised. As to the horse and dragoons, the Common Council had unanimously resolved to raise by voluntary contributions a large regiment of horse and 1,000 dragoons, and to maintain them for a month if need be.

We have seen how jealous in former days the city had been in the matter of appointing its own officers over its own forces, but now all signs of jealousy were wanting, and the queen herself was desired to appoint officers over the cavalry that was in course of being raised.(1719) On the 21st her majesty reviewed the city militia in Hyde Park, and expressed herself as much gratified.(1720)

(M870)

The City was ready not only with men but money. On the 22nd July the Common Council was asked to a.s.sist her majesty by making a speedy loan of 100,000 "or what more can be advanced" on the security of the hereditary revenue. The court at once gave its consent, and precepts were issued to the aldermen to raise the money in their respective wards without delay.(1721)

(M871)

Fortunately for England the French fleet, which kept hovering for more than a month off the south coast in the hope of being able to effect a landing, at last was seen to be sailing homewards. When all danger was past the queen sent for the lord mayor (15 Aug.) to thank his lordship and the city for their readiness in advancing money and raising forces, and to inform him that there was no immediate necessity for the horse and dragoons which were then being raised.(1722)

(M872)

Hearing of the danger that was threatening England, William had serious thoughts of leaving Ireland and returning home in July.(1723) He did not return, however, before September. Landing in England on Sat.u.r.day, the 6th, he proceeded by easy stages to London, where he arrived on the 10th, and took up his residence at Kensington Palace. The bells of the city rang out a welcome, bonfires were lighted, and the tower guns fired a salvo.(1724) On the 9th the sheriffs were instructed by the Court of Aldermen to wait upon his majesty to learn when and where he would be pleased to see them.(1725) An appointment having been made for Thursday morning (11 Sept.) the mayor and aldermen proceeded to Whitehall and congratulated his majesty on his safe return, their example being followed by the bishop and the clergy of London in the afternoon of the same day.(1726) The Common Council, not to be outdone in display of loyalty, also craved an audience, and on the 18th were permitted to wait upon his majesty to offer their congratulations.(1727)

(M873)

Early in 1691 William again left England for the purpose of attending a congress at the Hague. Before leaving he gave an audience to the mayor and aldermen, who desired to wish him a prosperous voyage. He took occasion to thank them for the care they had formerly taken of the city during his absence and desired them to do the same again.(1728) A few days later (16 Jan.) he embarked at Gravesend and did not return to England until the following April, when he received the usual welcome from the city.(1729)

(M874) (M875)

His presence was much needed, for the Jacobites were becoming more dangerous every day. One plot, of which Lord Preston was the ruling spirit,(1730) had been discovered before William left for the Hague, and another was on foot. Nevertheless the state of affairs on the continent would not allow of his remaining long in England; so, after a brief stay he again set sail for Holland (2 May), with Marlborough in his train, to open a regular campaign against the King of France.

(M876)

The king had not been gone long before the queen sent to the City (18 June) to borrow 120,000 to be employed in the reduction of Ireland, a business left to the Dutch General Ginkell, afterwards created Earl of Athlone, to carry out. The sum of 75,000 was to be advanced on the security of the parliamentary imposts on wine, vinegar and tobacco, and the remainder of the loan on the security of similar imposts on East India goods and other commodities.(1731) The Common Council readily consented to find the money, notwithstanding its having so recently as February last advanced no less a sum than 200,000 towards fitting out the fleet.(1732) These advances were, however, still insufficient to meet the necessities of the times. Long before the year was out the citizens were called upon to lend another 200,000 to a.s.sist in paying off the ships of war that were about to lay up for the winter.(1733) In the following year (1692), when parliament laid the foundation of the National Debt and decided on borrowing a million of money for the support of the war, the City was asked at different periods to advance no less than three sums of 200,000(1734) and one of 100,000.(1735)

(M877)

In view of the elections which were to take place on Midsummer-day, 1691, a motion had been made in the Common Council on the 18th June (immediately after the court had agreed to lend the queen 120,000) for repealing the clause in the Act of Common Council of the 6th June, 1683, touching the confirmation of one of the sheriffs of the city and county of Middles.e.x chosen by the mayor for the time being. A debate thereupon arising the previous question was put, and was declared by the lord mayor to be carried. A poll, however, was demanded, when the previous question was lost by 35 votes to 30, and the original motion being afterwards put was carried by 30 votes to 29.(1736) Such is the narrative of what took place in the Common Council on the 18th June, 1691, as related in the Journal of the court, according to which the clause in the Act of 1683 would have been repealed. We know however, as a matter of fact, that the clause was not repealed until three years later.(1737) An explanation is afforded us by Luttrell, the diarist, who says that the minority against repealing the clause immediately withdrew from the court "so there were not enough left to make a Common Council, so the Act continues in force."(1738) He adds that the mayor (Pilkington) thereupon went to the Bridge House and drank to Sir William Ashurst as a "recommendatory sheriff" for the ensuing year to hold office only on condition that the choice should be approved by the Common Hall, "otherwise no good sheriff." When Midsummer-day arrived, the common sergeant having asked the Court of Aldermen for instructions as to how to proceed to the elections, was ordered to "pursue such directions as he should receive from the sheriffes, and in his report of the elections, to declare it as the report of the said sheriffes." The court further ordered that the Common Hall should be opened by proclamation in these words: "You good men of the livery of the several companies of the city summoned to appear here this day for the election of sheriffs and other officers usually chosen at this time, draw near and give your attendance, etc."(1739) The claims of the Livery in Common Hall to elect both sheriffs being thus allowed, the electors were satisfied to pay the mayor the compliment of electing Sir William Ashurst, his nominee, to be one of the sheriffs, whilst choosing Richard Levett to be the other. There was another candidate in the person of William Gore. A poll was demanded and allowed, the result of which was declared on the 2nd July, when it appeared that Ashurst had polled 3,631 votes, Levett 2,252 and Gore 1,774.

A keen contest again took place between Sir Peter Rich and Leonard Robinson for the office of chamberlain, in which the latter came off victorious.(1740)

(M878) (M879)

In the spring of the next year (5 April, 1692) the Court of Aldermen had before them a Bill, the object of which was to settle the election and confirmation of sheriffs for the future. After due deliberation amongst themselves, and after consulting the attorney-general upon its provisions, the Bill was recommended to the Common Council to be pa.s.sed as an Act of that court.(1741) Of the particulars of the Bill we are not informed. It was laid for the first time before the Common Council on the 6th May, when it was referred to a committee. On the 26th ult. it was read the first time and on the 31st a second time, but upon the question being put whether the Bill should be then read a third time it pa.s.sed in the negative,(1742) and nothing more is heard of it.

(M880)

A Bill for regulating the election of members of the Common Council itself met with better success. Of late years divers inhabitants of the city who were not freemen (and among them the doctors and other gentlemen of Doctors' Commons) had been in the habit of exercising the franchise at wardmotes, to the prejudice of freemen, to whom alone belonged the right of voting. Many complaints having been made to the Common Council of the rights of freemen having been thus infringed,(1743) an Act was at length pa.s.sed (26 Oct., 1692) declaring that the nomination of aldermen and the election of common councilmen for the several wards of the city appertained only to freemen, being householders in the city, and paying scot and bearing lot, a list of whom was thenceforth to be prepared and kept by the beadle of each ward, as well as a separate list of the other householders. A copy of the Act was to be appended to all precepts for wardmotes, and the provisions of the Act were to be publicly read to the a.s.sembled electors.(1744) At the next election of a Common Council, which took place in December, the Whigs, we are told, were, after a hard fight, returned by "above 50 more voices than last year."(1745)

(M881)

When William returned from abroad in October, 1691, it was to find Ireland completely subjugated. The mayor and aldermen waited upon his majesty at Whitehall, as usual, to congratulate him upon his safe arrival. The king thanked them for the care they had taken of the city during his absence, and more particularly for supplying the queen with the sum of 200,000 to enable her to carry on the necessary affairs of the kingdom, and bestowed the honour of knighthood on Richard Levett, one of the sheriffs, Sir William Ashurst, the other sheriff, being already knighted. Leaving Whitehall, the mayor and aldermen next proceeded to Kensington to offer their compliments to the queen and to thank her majesty for her good government during the king's absence.(1746) A fortnight later (4 Nov.) the Common Council resolved to pay their respects also to the king and to congratulate him upon the success of his arms in Ireland.(1747)

(M882)

The king did not long remain in England. Early in March of the following year (1692) he returned to the Hague to make preparations for renewing the war against France both by sea and land, leaving the queen to carry on the government in England. On the morning of the 12th March the mayor and aldermen, accompanied by the recorder, proceeded to Whitehall to offer the queen their congratulations upon the receipt of news of the king's safe arrival in Holland, as well as of her majesty's a.s.sumption of the reins of government. The recorder a.s.sured her of the City's loyalty, and desired her only to put it to the test.(1748)

(M883)

The City had not long to wait. Within a week (18 March) application was made to the Common Council, on behalf of the queen, for a loan of 200,000.(1749) This was the first of the three loans of that amount already mentioned as having been advanced this year. The council readily consented to raise the money, and so successful were their efforts that within four days one-half of the whole loan was already paid into the exchequer. By the king's orders the whole of the 200,000 was kept intact "for some extraordinary occasion."(1750)

(M884)

Such an occasion was at hand. Whilst England and Holland were preparing to make a joint attack on France, France had been getting ready a navy for a descent on England with the view of restoring James to the throne. As soon as intelligence arrived of a threatened invasion great excitement prevailed. This was towards the close of April (1692). The trained bands were called out, not only in the city, but throughout the country, and more especially in those counties bordering on the coast. The Court of Lieutenancy had orders to administer the oaths to every officer and man, and any that refused were to be instantly cashiered and disarmed. The same with Papists and all suspicious persons found in the city. The oaths were to be tendered to them, and if any refused to take them they were to be disarmed and banished ten miles from the city.(1751) The mayor issued instructions for closing coffee-houses in the city on Sundays.(1752) Troops that had been ordered to Flanders were now countermanded, and a camp was formed at Southampton.(1753) The lord mayor was given a commission as general of all the city's forces-trained bands and auxiliaries-during the king's absence abroad, and on the 10th May was complimented by her majesty at the close of a review held in Hyde Park.(1754)

(M885)

At length-on the 19th May-the French fleet, which was to cover the invasion of England, met the combined Dutch and English fleet off La Hogue, and was so signally beaten that all further thought of an invasion had to be abandoned. News of the victory reached London on the 21st, and was received with every demonstration of joy. Medical aid was at once despatched to tend the sick and wounded at Portsmouth, whilst the hospitals were got ready to receive those who should be brought to London.(1755)

(M886)

The formal announcement of the victory to the Common Council of the city (26 May) was thought a fitting opportunity for asking for a further loan of 100,000 to enable her majesty to pay and "gratify" the seamen who had so gallantly warded off invasion and to refit the fleet. It need scarcely be said that the money was readily promised.(1756)

(M887)