London and the Kingdom.
Volume II.
by Reginald R. Sharpe.
CHAPTER XIX.
The proclamation announcing James VI of Scotland to be "by law, by lineal succession and undoubted right," heir to the throne of England, now that Elizabeth was dead, ill.u.s.trates again the ancient right of the citizens of London to a voice in electing a successor to the crown. The doc.u.ment not only acknowledges the a.s.sistance received by the lords of the realm from the lord mayor, aldermen and citizens of London in determining the succession, but at the very head of the signatories to the proclamation stands the name of "Robert Lee, Maior," precedence being allowed him over the primate and other lords spiritual and temporal.(1)
(M2)
Whatever failings the new king may have had, he possessed sufficient shrewdness to know the value of the favour of the City, which he hastened to acknowledge with "thankfull mynde" within a few days of his accession.(2) A reply was sent to the king"s letter the following day, signed by the mayor and aldermen, in which, after expressing their twofold feelings of sorrow and joy-sorrow at losing a mother in the late queen and joy at gaining a father in the person of the new king-they declared they had used all their powers to advance his just claim to the crown, and would preserve the city of London, the king"s Chamber, against every enemy at home or abroad. He was invited to notify his wishes to them through their secretary or remembrancer, "Mr. Doctor Fletcher," whom they sent as their special messenger.(3) The king returned for answer, that although he had been already aware of the City"s forwardness in joining with the n.o.bility in proclaiming him rightful successor to the crown, he was pleased to learn from their trusty messenger that the citizens had advocated his cause not only from the consciousness of its being a just one, but also because they were a.s.sured of his zeal for the preservation of religion.(4) This was one of James"s mystifying remarks which he was accustomed to throw out in order to raise the hopes of the Catholics, who questioned his t.i.tle to the crown, whilst affording no cause for alarm or discontent among the Protestants.
(M3)
On the 5th April James left Edinburgh for London, where every precaution was taken to prevent disturbance by ridding the streets of rogues, vagabonds and "masterless" men.(5) He proceeded southward by easy stages, accompanied by a long retinue of Scotsmen, until he reached Theobald"s, at that time the mansion house of Sir Robert Cecil, but soon to become a royal hunting-lodge. On the 19th the mayor issued his precept to the livery companies to prepare a certain number of members to accompany the mayor in his attendance upon the king, who was shortly expected in the city. It was intended that not only the mayor and aldermen but also the full number of 500 of the "best and gravest" citizens should wait upon his majesty on horseback, clothed in coats of velvet with velvet sleeves and adorned with chains of gold, and each accompanied by "one comlie person, well apparelled in his doublet and hose," on foot. In a word, the cavalcade was to be furnished on a more sumptuous scale than had yet been seen within the memory of man.(6) The Court of Aldermen in the meantime appointed a committee to consider what suits were "fitt to be made to the Kinges most excellent Maiestye for ye good of this Cittie and the enlarging of the libertyes and priviledge of the same."(7)
(M4)
After resting a few days at Theobald"s, James set out (7 May) for the last stage of his journey. At Stamford Hill he was met by the mayor and aldermen and a deputation from the livery companies. At every stopping-place on his journey from Scotland he had lavishly bestowed knighthoods.(8) On the 11th May he entered the Tower of London, having come from Whitehall by water for fear of the plague which was ravaging the city.
(M5)
The coronation ceremony was hurried over owing to the presence of the plague. Only the mayor, the aldermen and twelve of the princ.i.p.al citizens were permitted to attend, and much labour bestowed on preparations for the event was consequently lost.(9) The civic authorities did their utmost to stay the sickness and alleviate distress. The streets were ordered to be kept better cleansed. Infected houses were marked with papers bearing the words "Lord have mercy upon us," and when these were torn down a red painted cross, fourteen inches in length and breadth, and not so easily effaced, was added.(10) Persons stricken with the plague were forbidden to leave their houses. A master who had been inhuman enough to turn out into the street a domestic servant who had fallen a victim to the prevailing disorder was ordered by the Court of Aldermen to take her back again into his house,(11) a circ.u.mstance which seems to point to the pest-house or hospital being already overcrowded. Instructions were given for seeing that the graves of those who died of the plague were sufficiently covered with earth, and that the number of mourners attending funerals should be as far as possible limited. Women whose duty it was to search the bodies of the dead, as well as all those who were brought into contact with the sick, were forbidden to go abroad unless they carried before them a red rod three feet in length in order to give notice to pa.s.sers by. It was a common belief that infection was carried about by stray dogs. To those, therefore, who killed dogs found in the streets without an owner a reward was given.(12) The sufferings of the afflicted were alleviated, as far as circ.u.mstances permitted, by money subscribed by the livery companies, which were further called upon to forego their customary banquets in order to relieve the poor.(13) The plague was accompanied, as was usually the case, with a scarcity of corn, and again the a.s.sistance of the companies was invoked.(14)
(M6)
By the end of the year (1603) the city was almost free of the plague, and in the following March (1604) James determined to make his first public entry into London. A sum of 400 was raised by the livery companies(15) for furnishing pageants and stands for the occasion, and steps were taken to remove from the streets everything that might be offensive to the king"s eye or ear. Thursday, the 15th March, was the day fixed for his entry, and from the preceding Wednesday until the following Friday no refuse of any kind was to be thrown into the street.(16) It was further ordered that no church bells should be rung before seven o"clock in the evening of the eventful day, lest the noise should prove offensive and hinder his majesty from hearing the speeches that were to be made.(17) When all was over and the pageants were about to be taken down, the Court of Aldermen, with the frugal mind of men of business, ordered the master and wardens of the Company of Painter Stainers to examine the painters"
work bestowed on them, and report whether, in their opinion, such work had been well and honestly executed, and what amount of remuneration the workmen deserved.(18) It is said that the Recorder, Sir Henry Montagu, welcomed the king on this occasion with a speech, wishing him on behalf of the city "a golden reigne," and that a cup of gold was presented to the king, the queen and the young prince who accompanied them respectively;(19) but no record of the speech or gifts appears in the City"s archives.
(M7)
One of the first questions James had to decide on his accession to the throne was that of religious toleration; and his settlement of the question was anxiously looked for as well by the Puritans as the Catholics. The fear lest the policy which the king should advocate might prove adverse to their interests determined the Catholics to resort to strong measures, and the life of James was threatened by a series of plots, as that of Elizabeth had been before him. Among these was a plan for seizing the king at Greenwich on Midsummer-day, 1603. The plan was laid by a secular priest named William Watson, who had previously sounded James as to his probable att.i.tude to the Catholics if he came to the throne, Sir Griffin Markham, a Catholic gentleman, who for private reasons was discontented with the government, and one Antony Copley. News of the plot having reached the government, the conspirators fled for their lives.
Proclamations were issued for their capture,(20) in which details were given of their personal appearance. Thus Watson was described as a man of the lowest sort about thirty-six years of age, "he lookethe a squinte and is verie purblynde," and had formerly worn a long beard which he was believed to have cut off; whilst Sir Griffin Markham is credited with having a large broad face of a "bleake" complexion, a big nose, and a hand maimed by a bullet. His brethren "have all verie greate noses." Copley"s description is not given, but we have that of another conspirator, William Clarke, a priest, whose hair is represented as having been "betwixte redd and yeallowe." The whole party was subsequently taken, one after another, and their examination disclosed traces of another conspiracy, the object of which was to place Arabella Stuart on the throne.
The discovery of Watson"s conspiracy-generally known as the "Bye" or "Surprise" Plot-so alarmed the king that he lost no time in making known his intention to exact no longer the recusancy fines. The result was such as might be expected. The Puritans were disgusted, whilst the number of recusants increased to such an alarming extent that in February, 1604, the king took the extreme measure of ordering the expulsion of all Jesuits and Seminary priests from the country before the 19th March,(21) the day fixed for the meeting of parliament.
(M8)
As soon as parliament met a crisis was felt to be at hand; the new king and the Commons were for the first time to measure their strength. The city"s representatives are duly recorded.(22) At the head of them was Sir Henry Billingsley,(23) a former mayor, Sir Henry Montague,(24) recently appointed Recorder of the city upon the king"s own recommendation, Nicholas Fuller, of whom little is known beyond the fact that he came from Berkshire and married the daughter of Nicholas Backhouse,(25) alderman and grocer, and Richard Gore, a merchant tailor.
(M9)
With his customary self-complacency and patronising air James told the a.s.sembled Commons that he had brought them two gifts, the one peace abroad,(26) and the other the union of England with Scotland under the t.i.tle of Great Britain,(27) and he expressed no little surprise and indignation when he found that neither one nor the other was acceptable.
The question of the union of the two kingdoms, seeing that it involved some political difficulties necessary of solution, was referred to a commission.(28) James showed his displeasure at the want of compliance displayed by the Commons by refusing to accept a scheme of commutation of his rights of purveyance and wardship, which had now grown so burdensome.
(M10)
The abuse of purveyance, more especially, had become a standing grievance to the burgesses of London as well as of other cities and towns, in spite of attempted remedies by statute or charter.(29) An offer of 50,000 a year was made to the king by way of commuting any shred of right he might still have to purveyance after thirty-six statutes had p.r.o.nounced it altogether illegal. This, however, he refused, and the matter was allowed to drop. Two years later, almost to the day (23 April, 1606), the king endeavoured so far to remedy the evil as to issue a proclamation against exactions and illegal acts of his purveyors,(30) and yet scarcely a month elapsed before the lord mayor had occasion to call the attention of the lords of the council to the great inconvenience caused in the city by their recent demand for 200 carts with two horses to each, together with the lord mayor"s own barge, for the purpose of conveying his majesty"s effects to Greenwich. As for the barge, the mayor wrote that the lord chamberlain sometimes borrowed it for conveying the king"s guard, and it might haply be required again for the same purpose, "but for carringe anie stuffe or lugedge whereby it maie receave hurt it was never yet required,"
and he hoped their lordships would see the matter in that light.(31)
(M11)
Another important matter which occupied the attention of the House at this session-although no reference to it appears in the City"s records of the day-was the introduction of Free Trade, to the prejudice of the chartered rights of various trading companies. The citizens of London were deeply interested in the bill which was introduced for this purpose, for although it little affected the livery companies, it touched very closely the interests of those companies which were incorporated for the purpose of trading with foreign countries, such as that of the Merchant Adventurers, the Levant Company, the Russia Company, and others. These companies had been formed at a time when few individuals were sufficiently wealthy to bear the risk of distant enterprises. Not every citizen was a Whitington or a Gresham. The risk incurred by these a.s.sociations in undertaking voyages to distant countries was compensated by the advantage gained by the enjoyment of a monopoly of the trade with those countries by charter from the Crown. At the outset there had been no cry raised against monopolies of this kind, but as time wore on and the merchant navy increased, as it did in the last reign with extraordinary rapidity, a feeling of jealousy grew up on the part of shipowners who were not members of one or other of these chartered companies. By the beginning of the seventeenth century dissatisfaction with the privileges of these trading companies had become so general that appeals were made to the Privy Council. These being without effect, the whole matter was referred to a parliamentary committee. No pains were spared to get at the root of the grievance. The committee were attended by "a great concourse of clothiers and merchants of all parts of the realm and especially of London."(32) Counsel was heard in favour of the bill which had been drafted for the purpose of throwing open foreign trade to all merchants alike, and the bill was supported by all the merchants attending the committee with the exception of the merchants of London, who were represented on the occasion by the princ.i.p.al aldermen of the city. The free traders urged the natural right of every one to the free exercise of his own industry and the example set by other nations. They declared that the pa.s.sing of the bill would lead to the more even distribution of wealth,(33) the greater increase of shipping, and the augmentation of the revenues of the Crown.
The upholders of the companies, on the other hand, could find no better arguments in their favour than that no company could be a monopoly inasmuch as a monopoly was something granted exclusively to a single individual, and that if the existence of the companies was determined, apprenticeship would cease and difficulties arise in collecting the king"s customs! After three days" debate on the third reading the bill pa.s.sed the Commons by a large majority.(34) It met, however, with so much opposition in the House of Lords that it was eventually dropt.
(M12)
A quarrel afterwards arose between the king and the Commons on financial and ecclesiastical questions, and matters being brought to a deadlock, the House was adjourned (7 July). A few days before the adjournment the Speaker and over a hundred members held "a friendly and loving meeting" at Merchant Taylors" Hall, before departing to their country homes. The king contributed a buck and a hogshead of wine towards the entertainment, which proved so popular that thirty more guests appeared on the scene than was originally intended. The "Solemn Feast" was further graced by a "marchpane"-(a confection of bitter almonds and sugar)-representing the House of Commons sitting.(35)
(M13)
Three years later (17 July, 1607) the king himself honoured the company with his presence at dinner in their hall. The Merchant Taylors would gladly have welcomed him as one of their number and admitted him to the honorary freedom of their company, but James had already been made free of the company of Clothworkers. His son, Prince Henry, who was present at the entertainment, declared himself willing to accept the freedom, and made those of his suite who were not already members of some other company follow his example.(36)
(M14)
In August (1604) the king sent to borrow 20,000 from the City, a sum which was afterwards, at the City"s earnest request, reduced to 15,000.
The money was to be levied by order of the court of Common Council (23 Aug.) on the companies, according to rates agreed upon at the time of the loan of 20,000 to the late queen in 1598,(37) and it was to be delivered to Sir Thomas Lowe, the treasurer of the fund, by the 5th September. Some of the companies, however, proved remiss in paying their quota.(38)
(M15)
The action of James in expelling the Jesuits and Seminary priests had in the meantime so incensed the Catholics that a plot was set on foot for blowing up the king, the lords and commons, with gunpowder, as soon as parliament should re-a.s.semble. In May (1604) a house had been hired by a Catholic named Robert Catesby, through which access might be gained to the bas.e.m.e.nt of the parliament-house. The party-wall, however, proved exceptionally thick, and more than a year elapsed before the necessary mining operations were complete. Catesby was a.s.sisted in his work by a Spaniard named Guy Fawkes, who a.s.sumed the name of John Johnson. In the spring of 1605 the exasperation of the Catholics was increased by James again imposing the recusancy fines, and the little band of plotters increased in numbers, although never allowed to become large. The design of the conspirators was rendered more easy of execution by the discovery that a cellar reaching under the parliament-house was to be let. This was hired by one of the plotters, and a large quant.i.ty of gunpowder was safely deposited there and carefully concealed. After several adjournments parliament was summoned to a.s.semble on the 5th November. On the eve of its meeting Fawkes entered the cellar with a lantern, ready to fire the train in the morning. One of the conspirators, however, Tresham by name, had given his friends some hint of the impending danger. Fawkes was seized and committed to the Tower, where he was subjected to the most horrible torture by the king"s orders.(39) The rest of the conspirators, with the exception of Winter, took immediate flight. Hue and cry was raised,(40) and a personal description of the leaders for their better identification was scattered throughout the country. Winter was described as "a man of meane stature, rather lowe than otherwise, square made, somewhat stouping, neere fortie yeares of age, his haire and beard browne, his beard not much and his haire short"; Stephen Littleton, another conspirator, as "a verye tall man, swarthy of complexion, of browne coloured haire, no beard or litle, about thirty yeares of age"; and Thomas Percy, another, as "a tall man, with a great broad beard, a good face, the colour of his beard and head mingled with white heares, but stoupeth somewhat in the shoulders, well coloured in the face, long-footed, small legged."(41)
On the 8th November the mayor issued his precept for bonfires to be lighted that evening in the princ.i.p.al streets of the city in token of joy and thanksgiving for the deliverance of the king and parliament from this "most horrible treason."(42) A week later (16 Nov.) another precept was addressed to the alderman of each ward to furnish an extra watch, as those who had been engaged in safe-guarding the city had found the work too much for them "since the troubles begonne."(43) A diligent search was subsequently ordered to be made in every cellar and vault for any illegal store of gunpowder.(44) Fawkes and such of his fellow-conspirators as were taken alive were brought to trial at Westminster, in January (1606), and executed, some in St. Paul"s Churchyard and others before the parliament-house, their quarters being afterwards placed on the city"s gates, whilst their heads were stuck up on London bridge.(45) Pending their trial a double watch was kept in the city and fresh halberds issued.(46)
Three Jesuits were implicated in the plot, their names being John Gerrard, Oswald Greenway, and Henry Garnet. Gerrard and Greenway effected their escape, but Garnet was captured after having suffered much deprivation whilst in hiding, and was brought to trial at the Guildhall. Gerrard is described as tall and well set up, but his complexion "swart or blackish, his face large, his cheeks sticking out and somewhat hollow underneath,"
his hair long unless recently cut, his beard cut close, "saving littell mustachoes and a littell tuft under his lower lippe," his age about forty.
Equally precise descriptions are given of Greenway and Garnet; the former being represented as of "meane stature, somewhat grosse," his hair black, his beard bushy and brown, his forehead broad, and his age about the same as that of Gerrard; whilst Garnet is described as an older man, between fifty and sixty years of age, of fair complexion, full face and grisly hair, with a high forehead, and corpulent.(47) At his trial, which took place on the 28th March, Garnet denied all knowledge of the plot save what he had heard under the seal of confession. He was nevertheless convicted and executed (3 May) in St. Paul"s Churchyard.(48)
(M16)
Notwithstanding the capture and execution of the chief actors in the late conspiracy, some time elapsed before the nation recovered from the shock, and every idle rumour of mishap to the king soon became exaggerated as it flew from one end of the kingdom to the other. Thus it was that the citizens of London awoke on the morning of Sat.u.r.day, the 22nd March, to learn that the king was reported to have been killed with a poisoned dagger whilst engaged in his favourite pursuit of hunting. The alarm thus raised was with difficulty laid to rest by the following precept(49):-
_By y_e_ Mayo_r_._
_"Where rumo_r_ hath this morninge bine dispersed abroad within this cittie and ells where neere about the same that his ma_ties_ person was in very greate dainger for asmuch I have even now receaved intelligence from the lords of his ma_ties_ most honorable__ pryvye counsell that his ma_tie_ G.o.d be thancked is in saftie, and that I should presently make knowne the same to all his lovinge subiects which by theis presents I doe._
_G.o.d save y_e_ kinge."_
On the 10th June James signed a proclamation ordering all Priests, Jesuits, Seminaries and such like to depart the kingdom before the first day of August. Any priest presenting himself to the officer of a sea-port, and acknowledging his profession, would be forwarded on his way across the sea, with the exception of Gerrard and Greenway, or Greenwell.(50)
(M17)
In July of this year (1606) the king of Denmark arrived in England on a visit to his brother-in-law, king James. The mayor, being informed by the lords of the council that the Danish fleet was already in the Thames, summoned a Common Council (17 July) to consider what steps should be taken to give the royal visitor a befitting reception in the city. A committee was thereupon appointed to make the necessary preparations.(51) They had but a fortnight before them for contriving a pageant, cleansing the streets, setting up rails and executing the thousand little things which always require to be done on such occasions. The sum of 1,000 was raised by the livery companies,(52) and each alderman was directed to see that the inhabitants of his ward hung out suitable tapestry from houses on the line of procession. The distinguished visitor was presented with a gold cup taken from the king"s jewel-house in the Tower. It weighed 62-3/4 ozs., and the City paid for it at the rate of 3 10_s._ per ounce.(53) There was but one thing to mar the general rejoicing in the city, and that was the presence of the plague. This necessitated special precautions being taken to prevent the spread of infection, and an additional number of wardens were appointed to take their stand, halberd in hand, at the doors of infected houses on the day of the king"s visit to prevent anyone going in or coming out.(54)
(M18)