(M677)
As soon as Somerset was made aware of the Tower being in the possession of his rivals he removed from Hampton Court to Windsor, carrying the young king with him, and despatched a letter to Lord Russell to hurry thither with such force as he could muster.(1307)
(M678)
On Monday (7 Oct.) the lords of the council sat at Mercers" Hall-they felt safer in London-and thence despatched a dutiful letter to the king, and another (explaining their conduct) to Cranmer.(1308) The Common Council met at seven o"clock that morning, having been warned on Sunday night.(1309) The object of their meeting so early in the day was that no time might be lost before taking into consideration the letters that had been received from Somerset and from the lords. After due deliberation the citizens agreed to throw in their lot with the lords and to a.s.sist them "to the uttermost of their wills and powers" in the maintenance and defence of the king"s person.(1310)
(M679)
On Tuesday (8 Oct.) the Common Council again a.s.sembled in the Guildhall to meet the lords by appointment. Rumour had been spread to the effect that it was the intention of the lords to cause a reestablishment of the old religion.(1311) This the lords a.s.sured the meeting was far from their minds. They intended no alteration of matters as established by the laws and statutes. All they wanted was to cause them to be maintained as formerly, before they had been "disformed" by the Lord Protector, and for this they prayed the a.s.sistance of the citizens. Thereupon the mayor, aldermen and common council, thanking G.o.d for the good intentions of their lordships, "promised their ayde and helpe to the uttermost of their lieves and goodes."(1312)
(M680) (M681)
On Wednesday (9 Oct.) the lords met at the house of Sheriff York, where they had dined the previous day.(1313) They had heard that Somerset had seized all the armour, weapons and munitions of war he could lay his hands upon, both at Hampton Court and Windsor, and with them had armed his adherents. They again sent letters to the king, the archbishop and others, and declared Somerset to be unworthy to continue any longer in the position of Protector.(1314) The Common Council, which met the same day-"for divers urgent causes moved and declared by the mouth of the recorder and of the lord mayor and aldermen on the king"s behalf"-agreed to furnish with all speed 500 men, or if necessary 1,000 men, well harnessed and weaponed, to proceed to Windsor Castle for the delivery and preservation of his majesty. It was subsequently arranged that 100 of the contingent should be hors.e.m.e.n.(1315) By the afternoon of Friday (11 Oct.) the men and hors.e.m.e.n were ready. They mustered in Moorfields, whence they marched through Moorgate, Coleman Street, Cheapside, and out by Newgate to Smithfield, with the Sword-bearer riding before them as captain. At Smithfield they broke off, and were discharged from further service for the time.(1316) There is no evidence to show that the force was ever called upon to proceed to Windsor.
(M682) (M683)
The adhesion of the City to the lords had in the meanwhile added strength to their cause, many who had at first held back now declaring themselves against Somerset. In this manner they were joined by Lord Chancellor Rich, the Earl of Shrewsbury, Chief Justice Montague and others, whose signatures appear to a proclamation issued on the 8th October setting forth "the verye trowth of the Duke of Somersettes evell government and false and detestable procedynges."(1317) By the end of the week (12 Oct.) the lords felt themselves strong enough to proceed in person to Windsor, where on their knees they explained their conduct to the king, who received them graciously and gave them hearty thanks. The following day (Sunday) was spent in removing some of Somerset"s followers; and on Monday (14th) Somerset himself was brought prisoner to London, "riding through Oldborne in at Newgate and so to the Tower of London, accompanied with diuers lordes and gentlemen with 300 horse, the lord maior, Sir Ralph Warren, Sir John Gresham, Mr. Recorder, Sir William Locke and both the shiriffes and other knights, sitting on their horses agaynst Soper-lane, with all the officers with halbards, and from Oldborne bridge to the Tower certaine aldermen or their deputies on horsebacke in every streete, with a number of housholders standing with bils as hee pa.s.sed."(1318)
At the sudden fall of one who for a short time had been all powerful-a little more than a week had served to deprive him of the protectorate and render him a prisoner in the Tower-did it cross the mind of any of the onlookers that he it was who carried away from the Guildhall Library some cartloads of books which were never returned?
(M684)
There were some who looked upon Somerset"s fall as an act of G.o.d"s vengeance for his having caused Bonner to be deprived of his bishopric of London. On the 1st September last Bonner had preached at Paul"s Cross against the king"s supremacy. Information of the matter was given to the council, and Bonner was called upon to answer for his conduct before Cranmer and the rest of the commissioners. The informers on this occasion were William Latymer, the parson of the church of St. Laurence Pountney, and John Hooper, a zealous Protestant, who afterwards became Bishop of Gloucester. Whilst under examination before the commissioners Bonner was confined in the Marshalsea. Hooper in the meantime was put up by Cranmer to preach at Paul"s Cross, and he took the opportunity thus afforded him of inveighing strongly against Bonner"s conduct. Bonner failed to satisfy the commissioners, and on the 1st October was deprived of office and committed to prison during the king"s pleasure. "But marke what followeth," writes the chronicler of the Grey Friars, within a week "was proclaymyd the protector a traytor."(1319)
(M685)
On the 17th October Edward came from Hampton Court to Southwark Place, a mansion formerly belonging to Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk, when it was known as Suffolk House. It was now used in part as a mint, and was occupied by Sheriff York in his capacity as master of the king"s mint.
After dinner the king knighted York in recognition of his hospitality and his past services, an honour personal to York and not extended to his colleague in the shrievalty, Richard Turke. From Southwark Edward set forth to ride through the city to Westminster, accompanied by a long cavalcade of n.o.bles and gentlemen, "the lord mayor bearinge the scepter before his maiestie and rydinge with garter kinge of armes."(1320)
(M686)
Somerset"s confinement in the Tower was not of long duration. On the 6th February, 1550, the lieutenant of the Tower received orders to bring his prisoner "with out greate garde or busyness" to Sheriff York"s house in Walbrook, where the council was sitting; and on the duke entering into a recognisance to remain privately either at Shene or Sion, and not to travel more than four miles from either place, nor attempt to gain an interview with the young king, he was allowed to depart.(1321)
(M687)
With Warwick, who became the ruling spirit of the council after the fall of Somerset and the abolition of the protectorate, religion was a matter of supreme indifference, and for a time it was uncertain whether he would favour the followers of the old religion or the advanced reformers. He chose to extend his patronage to the latter. The day after Somerset"s release from the Tower, Bonner was again brought from the Marshalsea, where he had been roughly used,(1322) and the cause of his deprivation reconsidered by the lords of the council sitting in the Star Chamber, the result being that the previous sentence by Cranmer was confirmed and Bonner again relegated to prison. Bishops were now appointed directly by the king, who in the following April caused Nicholas Ridley, bishop of Rochester, to be transferred to London in Bonner"s place; and the see of Westminster,(1323) which had been created in 1540, was united to London.
In July Hooper was nominated to the see of Gloucester; but some time elapsed before this rigid reformer could be induced to overcome his prejudice to episcopal vestments (which he denounced as the livery of Anti-Christ) and consent to be consecrated in them.(1324) As soon as the ceremony was over he cast them off.
(M688)
For some time past the City had experienced difficulty in exercising its franchise in the borough of Southwark. That borough consisted of three manors, known respectively as the Guildable Manor, the King"s Manor and the Great Liberty Manor.(1325) The first of these-and only the first-had been granted to the City by Edward III soon after his accession. The civic authorities had complained of felons making good their escape from the city to Southwark, where they could not be attacked by the officers of the city; and the king, in answer to the City"s request, had made over to them the town or vill of Southwark.(1326) This grant was afterwards confirmed and amplified by a charter granted by Edward IV in 1462, whereby the citizens were allowed to hold a yearly fair in the borough on three successive days in the month of September, together with a court of pie-powder, and with all liberties and customs to such fair appertaining.(1327) In course of time the City claimed the right of holding a market, as well as the yearly fair, twice a week in Southwark.
This claim now led to difficulties with the king"s bailiff, Sir John Gate.
A draft agreement had been drawn up during Somerset"s protectorate in the hopes of arranging matters,(1328) but apparently without success.
(M689)
At length the city agreed (29 March, 1550) to make an offer of 500 marks for the purchase of the rights of the Crown in Southwark,(1329) and eventually a compromise was effected. For the sum of 647 2_s._ 1_d._ the king conveyed by charter(1330) to the City of London divers messuages in Southwark, with the exception of "Southwark Place" and the gardens belonging to it, formerly the Duke of Suffolk"s mansion, and for a further sum of 500 marks he surrendered all the royal liberties and franchises which he or his heirs might have in the borough or town of Southwark. It was expressly provided that this charter was not to be prejudicial to Sir John Gate or to his property and interests. The ancient rent of 10 per annum was still to be paid, and the citizens were to be allowed to hold four markets every week in addition to a fair and court of pie-powder enjoyed since the time of Edward IV. On the 9th May the lord mayor took formal possession of the borough of Southwark by riding through the precinct, after which the Common Cryer made proclamation with sound of trumpet for all vagabonds to leave the city and borough and the suburbs and liberties of the same.(1331)
(M690)
It was originally intended, no doubt, that the borough should be incorporated for all munic.i.p.al purposes with the city, and that the inhabitants of the borough should be placed on the same footing as the citizens. This, however, was never carried out. Notwithstanding the fact that among the ordinances drawn up (31 July) for the government of the borough,(1332) there was one which prescribed the same customary procedure in the election of an alderman for the new ward of Bridge Without as prevailed in the city;(1333) the inhabitants of the borough have never taken any part in the election of an alderman. The first alderman, Sir John Aylyff, a barber-surgeon, was "nominated, elected and chosen" by the Court of Aldermen,(1334) and was admitted and sworn before the same body on the 28th May, 1850-that is to say, some weeks before the ordinances just mentioned were drawn up.
The alderman of the ward continued to be nominated and elected by the Court of Aldermen until 1711, when, by virtue of an Act of Common Council, the ward was to be offered to the several aldermen who had served as mayor, in order of seniority. If no alderman could be found willing to be translated from his own ward to that of Bridge Without, the Court of Common Council was empowered by another Act pa.s.sed in 1725 to proceed to the election of an alderman.
The ward of Bridge Without has never sent representatives to the Common Council, inasmuch as its inhabitants refused to "take up their freedom"
and bear the burdens of citizenship, and there existed no means for forcing the freedom upon them. In 1835, however, a pet.i.tion was presented to the Common Council by certain inhabitants of Southwark asking that they might for the future exercise the right of electing not only an alderman, but common council-men for the ward, and that the ordinances of 1550 might be carried out according to their original intention. The pet.i.tion was referred to the Committee for General Purposes, who reported to the Common Council(1335) to the effect that, considering that the borough of Southwark had never formed part of the City of London, the charter of Edward VI notwithstanding, and that the holding of wardmotes in the borough would materially interfere with the duties of an ancient officer known as a seneschal or steward of Southwark, the pet.i.tion could not be complied with, except by application to the legislature, and that such a course would neither be expedient or advisable. Another pet.i.tion to the same effect has quite recently been presented to the Court of Aldermen; but it was equally unsuccessful.(1336)
(M691)
Warwick had not long taken the place of Somerset before he found himself compelled to make peace with France (29 March, 1550). This he accomplished only by consenting to surrender Boulogne. The declaration of peace was celebrated with bonfires in the city, although the conditions under which the peace was effected were generally unacceptable to the nation and brought discredit upon the earl.(1337) One result of the conclusion of the war was again to flood the streets of the city with men who openly declared that they neither could nor would work, and that unless the king provided them with a livelihood they would combine to plunder the city, and once clear with their booty they cared not if 10,000 men were after them. It was in vain that proclamation was made for all disbanded soldiers to leave the city. They refused to go, and oftentimes came into conflict with the city constables. At length the mayor and aldermen addressed a letter on the subject to the lords of the council (25 Sept.).(1338)
(M692)
In the following year the state of the city was rendered worse by a proposal of Warwick to debase the currency yet more. As soon as the proposal got wind up went the price of provisions, in spite of every effort made by the lords of the council to keep it down. They sent for the mayor (Sir Andrew Judd) to attend them at Greenwich on Sunday, the 10th May, and soundly rated him-or, as the chronicler puts it, "gave him some sore words"-for allowing such things to take place. On Thursday, the 28th, the mayor summoned a Common Council, when the Recorder repeated to them the king"s orders that the price of wares was not to be raised. The livery companies were to see to it, and there were to be no more murmurings.(1339)
Warwick himself excited the anger of the city burgesses by riding through the streets to see if the king"s orders against the enhancement of the price of victuals were being carried out. Coming one day to a butcher"s in Eastcheap, he asked the price of a sheep. Being told that it was 13 shillings, he replied that it was too much and pa.s.sed on. When another butcher asked 16 shillings he was told to go and be hanged. The earl"s conduct so roused the indignation of the butchers of the city-a cla.s.s of men scarcely less powerful than their brethren the fishmongers-that they made no secret that the price of meat would be raised still more if the debas.e.m.e.nt of the currency was carried out as proposed.(1340) Yet, in spite of all remonstrances and threats, a proclamation went forth that after the 17th August the shilling should be current for six pence sterling and no more, the groat for two pence, the penny for a halfpenny, and the halfpenny for a farthing.(1341) The price of every commodity rose 50 per cent. as a matter of course, and nothing that Warwick could do could prevent it. Seeing at last the hopelessness of attempting to overcome economic laws by a mere _ipse dixit_, he caused a "contrary proclamasyon" to be issued, and "sette alle at lyberty agayne, and every viteler to selle as they wolde and had done before."(1342)
(M693)
Warwick"s increasing unpopularity raised a hope in the breast of Somerset of recovering his lost power. Some rash words he had allowed to escape were carried to the young king, who took the part of Warwick against his own uncle, and showed his appreciation of the earl"s services by creating him Duke of Northumberland (11 Oct.). A few days later Somerset was seized and again committed to the Tower.(1343) The new duke vaunted himself more than ever, and as a fresh coinage was on the eve of being issued, he caused it to be struck with a ragged staff, the badge of his house, on its face.(1344) Some of the duke"s servants thought to ruffle it as well as their master, and offered an insult to one of the sheriffs, attempting to s.n.a.t.c.h at his chain of office as he accompanied the mayor to service at St. Paul"s on All Saints" Day, and otherwise creating no little disturbance in St. Paul"s Churchyard. The mayor waited until service was over, and then took them into custody.(1345)
(M694)
At the time of Somerset"s second arrest the Common Council and the wardens of the several livery companies were summoned to meet at the Guildhall to hear why the duke had been sent for the second time to the Tower, and to receive instructions for safe-guarding the city. They were informed by the Recorder that it had been the duke"s intention to seize the Tower and the Isle of Wight, and to "have destroyed the city of London and the substantiall men of the same."(1346) This was, of course, an exaggeration, although there is little doubt that the duke was preparing to get himself named again Protector by the next parliament. On the 1st December he was brought from the Tower by water to Westminster, the mayor and aldermen having received strict orders to keep the city well guarded.(1347) He was arraigned of treason and felony, but his judges, among whom sat his enemy Northumberland himself, acquitted him of the former charge, and those in the hall, thinking he had been altogether acquitted, raised a shout of joy that could be heard as far as Charing Cross and Long Acre. When they discovered that he had been found guilty of felony and condemned to be executed they were grievously disappointed. As he landed at the Crane in the Vintry on his way back to the Tower that evening, and pa.s.sed through Candlewick (Cannon) Street, the people, we are told, cried ""G.o.d save him"
all the way as he went, thinkinge that he had clerely bene quitt, but they were deceyved, but hoopinge he should have the kinge"s pardon."(1348) According to another chronicler there were mingled cries of joy and sorrow as he pa.s.sed through London, some crying for joy that he was acquitted, whilst others (who were better informed of the actual state of the case) lamented his conviction.(1349) His execution took place on Tower Hill in January of the next year (1552).
(M695)
In the meanwhile the civic authorities had been energetically engaged in making regulations for the hospital of the poor in West Smithfield, better known as St. Bartholomew"s Hospital, which they had recently acquired, and in grappling with the poverty and sickness with which they were surrounded. Instead of trusting to the charity of those attending the parish churches on Sunday for raising money for the poor, the Common Council, in September, 1547, resorted to the less precarious method of levying on every inhabitant of the city one half of a fifteenth for the maintenance of the poor of the hospital.(1350) The voluntary system, however, was not wholly abolished. In the following April (1548) a brotherhood for the relief of the poor had been established, to which the mayor (Sir John Gresham) and most of the aldermen belonged, each agreeing to subscribe a yearly sum varying from half a mark to a mark.(1351) In September governors were appointed of St. Bartholomew"s Hospital-four aldermen and eight commoners(1352)-and in the following December the Common Council pa.s.sed an Act for the payment of 500 marks a year to the hospital, the sum being levied on the livery companies.(1353)
(M696)
In 1551 the City succeeded in obtaining another hospital. This was the hospital in Southwark originally dedicated to Thomas Becket, but whose patron saint was, after the Reformation, changed to St. Thomas the Apostle. Negotiations were opened in February with the lord chancellor for the purchase of this hospital.(1354) They proceeded so favourably that by the 12th August the hospital and church and part of their endowment were conveyed to the City by deed, whilst the rest of the endowment was transferred by another deed on the following day.(1355) The purchase-money amounted to nearly 2,500.
(M697)
Having thus cared for the sick and the poor, the civic authorities next turned their attention to the conversion of a portion of the ground and buildings of the dissolved monastery of the Grey Friars into a hospital for the reception and education of fatherless and helpless children. In 1552 Sir Richard Dobbs(1356) was mayor. He took an active part in the charitable work that was then being carried on in the city, and his conduct so won the heart of Ridley that the bishop wrote from prison shortly before his death commending him in the highest possible terms:-"O Dobbs, Dobbs, alderman and knight, thou in thy year did"st win my heart for evermore, for that honourable act, that most blessed work of G.o.d, of the erection and setting up of Christ"s Holy Hospitals, and truly religious houses which by thee and through thee were begun." In July the work of adapting the old buildings, rather than erecting new, was commenced, and in a few months the premises were sufficiently forward to admit of the reception of nearly 400 children. The charity was aided by the king"s bestowal of the linen vestures used in the city prior to the Reformation, and at that time seized by the commissioners.(1357) Just as the close of the reign of Henry VIII had witnessed the reopening of the church of the Grey Friars under the name of Christchurch, and the celebration of the ma.s.s once more within its walls, so now the close of his son"s short reign witnessed the restoration of their house and buildings, and their conversion, in the cause of education and charity, into Christ"s Hospital.
(M698)
There was yet another cla.s.s of inhabitant to be provided for, namely, those who either could not or would not work. On behalf of these a deputation(1358) was appointed by the City to present a pet.i.tion to the king that he would be pleased to grant the disused palace of Bridewell to the munic.i.p.ality for the purpose of turning it into a workhouse. The deputation was introduced by Ridley, who himself wrote in May of this year (1552) to secretary Cecil on the same subject.(1359) The efforts of the bishop and the deputation were rewarded with success. In the following spring (1553) the king not only consented to convey the palace to the munic.i.p.al body, but further gave 700 marks and all the beds and bedding of his palace of the Savoy for the maintenance of the workhouse.(1360) The City having thus become possessed of the several hospitals of St.
Bartholomew, St. Thomas, Christ"s and Bridewell, the king, a few days before his death, granted the mayor, aldermen and commonalty a charter of incorporation as governors of these Royal Hospitals in the city.(1361)