On the 19th December these pet.i.tions, which had previously been submitted to the Common Council for approval,(563) were laid before both Houses of Parliament, the sheriffs and certain members of the Court of Aldermen and of the Common Council attending at the bar of the House of Commons and publicly disavowing any other pet.i.tion. Having notified its approval of both pet.i.tions the House gave orders that those who had been suspected of taking part in the late tumult at the Guildhall should be committed as prisoners to Lambeth House.(564) A week later (26 Dec.) both Houses were prepared to open negotiations with the king.(565)
(M247) (M248)
Having obtained the sanction of parliament to present their pet.i.tion to Charles, the Common Council left it to the mayor to send whom he would to "Mr. Secretary Falkland to learn his majesties pleasure whether certeine citizens might with safety repaire unto his highness" with the City"s pet.i.tion, and in the meanwhile nominated the members of the deputation who should wait upon the king if Falkland"s reply to the mayor"s messenger proved satisfactory.(566) The reply was favourable, and the deputation set out for Oxford, where Charles had taken up his quarters. On their return they reported the result of their journey to the Common Council.(567) They arrived in Oxford, said they, between one and two o"clock on the afternoon of Monday, the 2nd January (1643), and an hour later waited upon Lord Falkland at his lodgings in New College. At five o"clock the same evening they were admitted into the king"s presence and the City"s pet.i.tion was then publicly read. The king professed satisfaction at seeing them, for he could now be sure that certain printed declarations of his would reach those for whom they were intended. He questioned very much the ability of the City to protect his person, seeing that it was unable to preserve peace among themselves. On Wednesday (4 Jan.) the deputation was dismissed with a promise that Charles would send an answer by Mr. Herne (or Heron), one of his own servants, who would accompany them on their return. He asked which was the larger a.s.sembly, the Common Council or the Common Hall. On being told that the latter were more numerous he directed that his answer should be read there, as he wished as many as possible to be disabused and to know the truth. Just when the deputation was about to set out from Oxford on its return a printed paper purporting to be the king"s answer was handed to Sir George Garrett and Sir George Clark as they sat in their coach. The Common Council having heard the whole story of the mission to Oxford deemed it expedient to inform the House of Commons of the result, and to lay the printed paper in their hands.(568) This was accordingly done on the 11th January, with the result that the House directed the mayor to summon a Common Hall for Friday, the 13th, to hear the king"s reply.(569) When the Common Hall met at the appointed time it was only to hear a long diatribe against the heinousness of those who had taken up arms against their king. All good subjects were called upon to throw off their yoke, and to begin by arresting the lord mayor and certain leading citizens who had been guilty of treason. When this had been done, and not before, he would be prepared to return to London without the protection of his army, or, to use the expression of the pet.i.tioners themselves, with his "royal," and not his "martial attendance."(570)
(M249)
After this Pym, who attended the Common Hall and heard the king"s reply,(571) had no difficulty in convincing the a.s.sembly of the king"s real mind, and that he had no intention to accept terms of peace. The meeting was all but unanimous for continuing the war rather than submit to the degradation of their mayor. A subsequent attempt by Charles to have his reply circulated among the livery companies was frustrated by an order of the House of Commons (24 Jan.) which granted the sheriffs an indemnity for refusing to execute the king"s order.(572)
(M250)
If the war was to be carried on it was necessary for parliament to face the difficulty of getting a steady supply of money. Up to this moment the new parliamentary taxes had brought in nothing. Many of the wealthier cla.s.s of citizens absolutely refused to pay. At a Common Hall held on the 17th January Alderman Garway pointed out, in a very strong speech, the danger which would beset merchants trading with foreign parts if the king withdrew his protection from them in consequence of the city contributing to the maintenance of the parliamentary army. His speech was followed by a great tumult, and the meeting broke up amid cries of "No money, no money!
peace, peace!"(573)
(M251)
The payment of the a.s.sessment made in November last had been widely refused. The war had already ruined many, and if some refused to pay on principle others refused from sheer inability. Among the former must be reckoned Sir George Whitmore,(574) a royalist alderman of considerable means, who, with Thomas Knyvett, a goldsmith, Paul Pindar, and others preferred imprisonment to pay what was by them considered an illegal tax.(575)
(M252)
Nevertheless application was made to the City at this juncture for a loan of 60,000 to keep the army from disbanding. A deputation from both Houses of Parliament attended a court of Common Council held on the 18th February, and a.s.sured the citizens that the money would be repaid out of the weekly payments which parliament had resolved to impose upon every county in England.(576) This would be the last time, as they hoped, that a call of this kind would be made upon the city. The council declared its willingness to promote the loan, the members present promising an immediate payment of 6,000. Ministers were recommended to lay the matter before their respective congregations on the following Sunday and exhort them to contribute.(577)
(M253)
A weekly a.s.sessment of 10,000 had been imposed on the City, whilst a monthly rebate was allowed of 3,000. The Common Council complained to parliament that the City was over-a.s.sessed in comparison with other counties, and suggested that the monthly allowance should be raised to 4,000. They also desired some security for the repayment of the loan of 60,000. These and other proposals were laid before the House as being "encouragements" for the City to make the loan; and the House, in returning thanks to the City for its readiness in the matter of the loan, promised that the "encouragements" should receive favourable consideration.(578)
(M254)
In the midst of their financial difficulties the Commons had been busy elaborating the propositions for peace sent down to them from the Lords.
At length these were complete, and on the 1st February were presented to the king. They were, however, received by Charles with little favour, and the rest of the month was consumed by both Houses in an endeavour to arrive at a compromise at once satisfactory to themselves and likely to be acceptable to the king.
(M255)
Before fresh terms of compromise were formulated the House was asked (23 Feb.) to consider certain other propositions drawn up by the Common Council of the city. These were three in number. The first desired the reformation of the army. The second demanded an indemnity to the citizens for their adhesion to parliament. The third was a proposal for a religious covenant and a.s.sociation for the defence of religion and liberty in case the negotiations with the king should fall through. To only one of these propositions did the House give an immediate reply, and that was the second. To this the Commons returned answer that in the intended treaty with the king such care would be taken for the indemnity of the City and citizens of London and of the privileges thereof as should secure them and "be a witness to the present and future generations of their fidelity to the king and parliament."(579)
(M256)
That the citizens entertained but little hopes of a peaceful issue to the negotiations with Charles is evinced by their resolving (23 Feb.) to carry out a comprehensive scheme of defence of the city and suburbs.(580) The scheme received the sanction of parliament, which further allowed the civic authorities to call upon the inhabitants of the suburbs as well as of the city proper to contribute to the undertaking.(581) The City had a hard task to get subscriptions in from the outlying districts, and was consequently obliged to advance out of its own Chamber no less than six sums of 2,000 each between the months of March and July lest the work of erecting the necessary fortifications should be brought to a standstill.(582)
(M257)
In the face of this extraordinary expenditure the City was the more anxious to get its weekly a.s.sessment reduced. On the 1st March Colonel Venn, one of the city"s members, informed the Common Council that the application to have the a.s.sessment reduced had been made too late, but the House would allow the City an additional monthly sum of 3,000 in aid of its defences so long as the ordinance for a weekly a.s.sessment should continue in force.(583)
(M258)
On the 10th March a deputation from both Houses, including Pym, informed the Common Council of a message that had recently arrived from the Earl of Ess.e.x to the effect that Prince "Robert" (Rupert) had arrived with a large force within four miles of Bristol, and the earl intended forthwith to make an advance. His army, however, was sadly in arrears of payment; he wanted both men and money, and this fact he had desired to be represented to the citizens of London. Pym, therefore, in the name of both Houses desired the Common Council to hasten as far as possible the payment of the residue of the 60,000 already promised, and to furnish such forces as the city could spare.
(M259)
As far as the first part of the request went the council promised its ready a.s.sistance.(584) It frankly acknowledged that little more than one-third of the whole amount promised had come in, but there were difficulties in the way of getting it in. A large sum of money-as much as 30,000-which ought to have been repaid to the lenders out of the estates of malignants was still owing, and lenders were thereby discouraged. Men of ability refused to lend, and there were no means of forcing them; whilst divers rich men had left the city, carrying with them what property they could, and leaving their houses empty. Nevertheless, the council a.s.sured the deputation that it was well affected to parliament, all but a very few of its members having already contributed, and it would forthwith take steps to get the money in. Touching the furnishing of soldiers, the council remarked that there were but three regiments in the city besides the trained bands, two of which were on active service and the one remaining was on outpost duty.(585)
(M260)
Soon after the outbreak of the war it was seen that the weak point of the parliamentary army lay in its cavalry. Already something had been done towards remedying this defect. Volunteers had offered themselves for the formation of a troop of horse at their own expense, and a "seminary" for cavalry had been established.(586) The news about Rupert urged the citizens to a greater effort. On the 15th March an offer was made to the Common Council to raise no less than ten volunteer regiments, three of which were to consist of cavalry. The men were to receive no pay except when engaged on active service, and only a small sum was asked for, in order to provide colours, drums and other necessaries. The offer was gladly accepted.(587)
(M261)
The last loan of 60,000 could scarcely have been subscribed before an order came from the Commons for the city to make a further advance of 40,000 for the support of the army.(588)
(M262)
The East India Company was at the same time called upon to lend its ordnance and military store for the defence of the city. In case of refusal both ordnance and provisions were to be seized, on the understanding that the City would restore them in as good condition as it received them or give satisfaction for them. Should any great emergency arise the Commons would supply the company with what was necessary.(589) The livery companies too were exhorted to lend their arms. These were to be stored at Salters" Hall, in Bread Street.(590)
(M263)
A few days later the negotiations between parliament and the king for a cessation of hostilities collapsed, and the parliamentary commissioners at Oxford were ordered to return home (14 April).(591) Irritated at the king"s obstinacy, the Puritan party vented its spleen by ordering the wholesale destruction of superst.i.tious or idolatrous monuments in Westminster Abbey and elsewhere. The City followed suit by asking parliament to sanction the removal of Cheapside cross, "in regard of the idolatrous and superst.i.tious figures there about sett and fixed."(592) In 1581 these figures had given cause for offence and were secretly removed,(593) but others had apparently been set up in their place. The demolition of the cross, which took place on the 2nd May amid signs of public rejoicing, was followed (10 May) by the public burning of the "Book of Sports" by the hands of the common hangman in Cheapside.(594) Another measure in the same direction was the placing of the appointment of preachers in St. Paul"s Churchyard in the hands of the mayor and aldermen, a proposal which the mayor had formerly suggested to the House of Commons.(595)
(M264)
Now that all hopes of a peaceful settlement had gone, Charles took measures to gain over as many Londoners as he could to his side. He had previously (16 March) caused a commission of array to be drawn, addressed to Gardiner, who was still Recorder, and others, authorising them to raise a force on his behalf in the city.(596) This commission he had retained at Oxford until he could find an opportunity for conveying it safely to London. It was now entrusted to Lady Daubeny to carry to London. She succeeded in her mission and handed the doc.u.ment over to a city linendraper named Chaloner, who, in his turn, transferred it to Tompkins, a brother-in-law of Waller the poet, who was also implicated in the design which on that account came to be known as "Waller"s Plot." Tompkins endeavoured to conceal it in a cellar, but it did not escape the prying eyes of parliamentary searchers. Early in the morning of the 31st May Tompkins was arrested, and in the course of time both he and Chaloner paid the penalty of their rashness by being hanged in front of their own houses, the one in Cornhill and the other in Holborn. Waller was also taken and flung into prison.(597)
(M265)
Thursday, the 15th June, was appointed to be kept as a day of thanksgiving for deliverance from the plot,(598) and on that day the new parliamentary vow or covenant, binding those who took it to support the forces raised in defence of parliament against those raised by the king, was generally accepted in the city.
(M266)
In the meantime Ess.e.x had besieged and taken Reading (26 April), but his troops became affected with disease, and he made no attempt to advance on Oxford until June. Before his arrival Hampden had received a mortal wound at Chalgrove Field (18 June). On the 5th July the royalist forces under Hopton worsted the parliamentary army under Waller in the west, whilst a similar success was achieved against Fairfax in the north (30 June). The king had reason to be elated as he rode into Oxford (14 July) accompanied by the queen, from whom he had been separated for fifteen months, amid the shouts of men and the ringing of bells.
(M267) (M268)
Parliament and the City, on the other hand, had reason to be dejected. On the 17th July Charles issued a proclamation for seizing all merchandise on its way to London. The trade of the city became paralysed.(599) Nor was this all. For some months past the citizens had been suffering from a scarcity of coal. Ever since the appointment of the Earl of Newcastle as governor of the town of Newcastle in June, 1642,(600) that town had been held for Charles, and a refusal to allow its coal to be supplied to the supporters of parliament had brought the city of London and the eastern counties into great straits.(601) It thus became a matter of prime importance that Newcastle should be captured. How this was to be accomplished was set out in a series of propositions drawn up (25 May, 1643) by the Common Council of the city to be laid before parliament.(602) A monopoly of the trade in coal, salt and gla.s.s with the north of England was to be held out as an incentive for persons to adventure their money in the reduction of the town. A committee, of which one-half of its members was to be nominated by the Commons and the rest by the City, was to have charge of all the money subscribed and to direct the undertaking. The propositions were well received (26 May),(603) and on the 10th June the Common Council nominated three aldermen and seven common councilmen to join with a like number to be appointed by parliament in raising a force by sea and land for the reduction of the town.(604)
(M269)
To make matters worse news arrived on the 18th July that royalist cavalry were in the vicinity of London, and that great disaffection to the cause of parliament had manifested itself in the neighbouring counties of Kent and Surrey. The Common Council, recognising the danger, forthwith resolved to raise what money it could at the rate of eight per cent., and to place it at the disposal of the Committee of the Militia of the city.(605)
(M270) (M271)
The danger which threatened London was increased the more by reason of dissensions which sprang up among those whose particular care were the defences of the city. A sub-committee which usually met at Salters" Hall fell out with the Committee of the Militia of London for presuming to get into its hands the sole power over the auxiliary forces which had lately been raised. Another committee was appointed to investigate the cause of dissension, and if possible to suggest a _modus vivendi_.(606) This was no easy matter to accomplish. It was eventually agreed to lay before parliament a pet.i.tion that all the forces raised within the city and liberties, as also within the parishes adjacent mentioned in the weekly bill of mortality, might be under the sole command of the Committee of the Militia of the city, under the direction of both Houses of Parliament.(607) On the 18th July a pet.i.tion to this effect was accordingly laid before the Commons by a deputation of aldermen and common councilmen, and received the approval of the House. The outcome of all this was that the House eventually pa.s.sed a resolution (29 July) that "Sir William Waller do command in chief all the forces raised within the city of London, and all other forces that are or shall be under the command of the militia of London, subordinate to the lord mayor and militia," and at the same time transferred the custody of the Tower into the hands of the lord mayor and sheriffs.(608)
(M272)
Waller"s appointment was a distinct slur upon Ess.e.x, about whom some rumours had been spread in order to prejudice him in the eyes of the City.
The Common Council took an early opportunity of deprecating strongly these false rumours, and appointed (1 Aug.) a deputation to wait upon "his excellency" to a.s.sure him of the good opinion which the court-as the representative body of the city-had of his great care and fidelity in the preservation of the king, parliament, city and kingdom, and to promise him every a.s.sistance in recruiting his army. The citizens would stand by his excellency with their lives and fortunes.(609)
(M273) (M274)
Taking advantage of a split in the parliamentary camp, the Lords renewed their proposals for peace. As soon as the City became aware of this there was great consternation. A Common Council hurriedly met on Sunday afternoon (6 Aug.) and drew up a pet.i.tion to the Commons praying them to continue the same course they had hitherto pursued and to reject all propositions for peace.(610) This pet.i.tion was presented to the House on Monday (7 Aug.), when the proposals of the Lords came on again for consideration. The House thanked the City for its care, recommended the lord mayor to take measures to prevent all disorders, and afterwards formally rejected the peace propositions.(611)