The practice of nominating as many as four candidates for a vacant aldermanry had prevailed since the commencement of the 15th century,(1975) but the inconvenience arising from this practice became so manifest during this last election that the Common Council pa.s.sed an Act before the result of the election had been declared, abolishing the custom and enacting that henceforth only two candidates should be put in nomination, one an alderman and the other a commoner.(1976) Even this number was found too many, and within three years was reduced to one commoner,(1977) thus reverting to the primitive custom of the city before it was enacted, _temp._ Richard II, that two (commoners) _at least_ should be nominated for every vacant aldermanry.(1978)
In July, 1712, another dispute arose over the election of an alderman. Sir John Fleet, alderman of the ward of Langbourn, had recently died, and it was necessary to appoint a successor. Four candidates were put up for the post, of whom two were to be selected for nomination to the Court of Aldermen according to the provisions of the recent Act. The wardmote was opened on the 9th July at Pewterers" Hall. Sir Robert Beachcroft, the lord mayor, was himself one of the candidates, the other three being Sir William Withers, alderman, Sir Samuel Clarke and Peter Delme, commoners.
The show of hands being declared to be in favour of Withers and Clarke, two Tories, a poll was demanded on behalf of his lordship and Delme. The result, however, was the same, and a scrutiny followed. To the great surprise of a large body of the electors, the mayor eventually declared (22 Aug.) the majority of votes to be in favour of himself and Delme, but like his predecessor he steadily refused to give any explanation as to how he had arrived at that conclusion. Again there appeared to be no remedy but to apply to the Queen"s Bench. The Common Council was again appealed to (6 Sept.), but whilst the matter was in course of debate the lord mayor was suddenly taken ill, and the court had to break up before coming to any resolution on the matter. On the 12th November, however, the council agreed to a.s.sist the pet.i.tioners as before, but refused any a.s.sistance to Delme, who had already been admitted alderman, and was about to be put on his defence.(1979)
(M977)
In 1713 the relations between the Courts of Aldermen and Common Council became still more strained. The latter complained of the city"s business being hindered from insufficient Courts of Aldermen, and of a newly elected alderman not having been sworn in on a certain day by reason of there not being a _quorum_ of aldermen present. On the 15th May a joint committee of aldermen and commoners was appointed to enquire into the matter. Six weeks elapsed before the committee was ready with its report.
At length, on the 30th June, the committee certified(1980) that having examined the minute books of the Court of Aldermen it had found that between the 24th March and the 15th May last six courts had been summoned to meet, but for want of a _quorum_ only one full court had been held. On the other occasions only seven, eight, nine, ten or twelve aldermen appeared, inclusive of the mayor. The committee also found that the courts were in the habit of meeting between twelve and one o"clock, and reported its opinion that such a late hour for meeting was prejudicial to the citizens and others who had business there.
Touching the other matter which had been referred to them, the committee found that on the 7th May the lord mayor had reported to the Court of Aldermen the nomination and election of Sir William Withers, alderman, and Joseph Lawrence to succeed Sir Owen Buckingham in the aldermanry of the ward of Bishopsgate; that Withers declining to remove, had moved that Lawrence should be called in and sworn, according to the provisions of the Act of 1711 for regulating the elections of aldermen; that thereupon a pet.i.tion was offered and part of the Act was read; that after some debate Lawrence was sent for and came into court; that upon the Common Sergeant being called in to give his opinion seven of the aldermen withdrew from the court, but one of them presently returned, and after hearing the Common Sergeant deliver his opinion-viz., that notwithstanding any pet.i.tion the court was bound by the Act to admit and swear in Lawrence-again withdrew, notwithstanding the lord mayor"s expressed desire that he should remain; that by this means a full court was not kept (only eleven aldermen being left with the mayor), and so Lawrence, although present, could not be sworn.(1981) The committee"s report was ordered to be entered on the Journal and likewise to be forthwith printed and a copy sent to every member of the Common Council.
(M978)
In the meantime the queen had been persuaded to dismiss Marlborough on his return to England (Nov., 1711) from all his offices, and to place the Duke of Ormond, a strong Tory, in command of the English forces in the Netherlands. Negotiations with France were simultaneously pushed on, in spite of a personal visit which Eugene himself paid to London (Jan., 1712) in the hope of obtaining a continuance of English support for carrying on the war. The presence of the ill.u.s.trious prince was heartily welcomed by the Whigs, by whom he was hospitably entertained. On the 15th January a motion was made in the Court of Aldermen and carried to the effect that the court was prepared to join with as many leading citizens (not exceeding sixty in number) as should be willing in providing an entertainment by private subscription for his highness, provided they first obtained her majesty"s permission. Two aldermen were thereupon nominated to wait upon Lord Dartmouth, princ.i.p.al secretary of state, in order to learn her majesty"s pleasure. There was nothing unusual in this proceeding. Nevertheless the idea of the prince being publicly entertained in the city was so distasteful to the queen and her government that she found fault with the citizens for daring to approach her with a mere verbal message (she was suffering from gout at the time),(1982) and declined to return an answer to any message which was not brought to her "with the same respect as has always been paid by the city of London to her predecessors."(1983) That there might be no mistake about the matter the queen"s answer was sent to the City in writing by Lord Dartmouth. The Court of Aldermen at once appointed a committee to search the City"s Records for the purpose of ascertaining how and in what manner messages had been delivered from the court to her majesty and her predecessors, whether they had usually been in writing or only verbal. On the 5th February the committee reported that they found that such messages had been delivered in a variety of ways: sometimes by the lord mayor alone, sometimes by two or three aldermen, and at other times by the recorder and sheriffs only. One instance had been found of a message having been sent by a single sheriff. Not once did they find that a message had been delivered in writing.(1984) It need scarcely be said that under the circ.u.mstances all idea of the entertainment was dropt.
In spite of the prince"s high character the greatest calumnies were whispered against him behind his back. He was said to be conspiring with Marlborough and the Whigs to raise an insurrection in the streets, fire the city and seize the person of the queen. A general panic prevailed.
Even the roysterings of a few drunken revellers calling themselves "Mohocks"(1985)-the successors of the "Roreres" and "Riffleres" of a past age-were looked upon as signs and tokens of some deep laid plot, so that more than ordinary precautions had to be taken, both in the city and elsewhere, to prevent riot.(1986) Finding at length that his presence in England did not promote his object the prince, after a stay of some weeks, returned to the Hague.
(M979)
By the 6th June negotiations with France had so far advanced that the queen went down to the House of Lords to fulfil, as she said, her promise of communicating to her parliament the terms of peace before it was absolutely concluded. What pleased the citizens most in her elaborate speech was the announcement of the steps taken to secure the Protestant succession to the House of Hanover and for protecting British commerce.
For these measures they returned to her majesty their hearty thanks, and expressed their sincere hopes that she might speedily finish the good work which had advanced so far notwithstanding "the artful contrivances and envious efforts of a factious and malicious party."(1987) In August a proclamation was made of a suspension of hostilities,(1988) and on the 31st March, 1713, the Peace of Utrecht was signed.
A fortnight later (14 April, 1713) the Common Council voted a congratulatory address to her majesty on the conclusion of the peace with France, but no copy of the address was to be shown to anyone until it had been actually presented.(1989) On the 5th May the lord mayor and Court of Aldermen attended at Temple Bar to a.s.sist at the proclamation, whilst Tuesday the 6th July was observed as a day of public thanksgiving at St.
Paul"s. The queen did not attend the service owing probably to indisposition, and the livery companies were on that account excused attendance. The mayor and aldermen displayed no little anxiety to have their proper seats reserved for them in the cathedral.(1990)
(M980)
Shortly before the conclusion of the peace the term of Sacheverell"s suspension expired. His popularity became greater than ever. The queen presented him with the living of St. Andrew"s, Holborn, whilst the House of Commons, which had formerly condemned him, now invited him to preach before them.(1991)
(M981)
The days of Queen Anne were now fast drawing to a close. For some time past her health had been failing, and at the close of the year (1713) she was confined to her bed at Windsor. Upon notice of her indisposition being conveyed to the Court of Aldermen they at once instructed the sheriffs and the city remembrancer to proceed to Windsor and enquire after her majesty"s health.(1992) The fact that in the event of the queen"s death the legal heir, the Electress Sophia, and her son, the Elector of Hanover, were favourable to the Whig party, drove the Tories to make overtures to the Pretender, the queen"s brother, who was still living in France, although by the terms of the Treaty of Utrecht Louis had promised to abandon his cause. On the 1st February (1714) the queen wrote to the lord mayor(1993) (Sir Samuel Stanier) informing him that she was recovering her health and hoped soon to return to her "usual residence." She further informed his lordship of her determination to open her parliament on the 16th, according to the notice given by proclamation, and desired him to communicate the same to the Court of Aldermen and to her other loving subjects of the city. Again the sheriffs and remembrancer were instructed to go to Windsor and tender the court"s acknowledgments of her majesty"s favour and to a.s.sure her that they would discountenance to the utmost of their power and put a stop to "those malicious rumours which had been so industriously spread by evil disposed persons to the prejudice of credit and the imminent hazard of public peace and tranquility."(1994) Sat.u.r.day the 6th was the queen"s birthday, and extra precautions were taken in the city to prevent tumult or disorder.(1995) A week later her majesty had so far recovered her health as to meditate returning to town, and the Common Council prepared (12 Feb.) to greet her with a congratulatory address.(1996)
(M982)
On the 21st June (1714) a royal proclamation was issued offering a reward of 5,000 for the apprehension of the Pretender in case he should effect a landing.(1997) The proclamation afforded the City an opportunity of further testifying its loyalty to the queen and its determination to uphold the Protestant succession as by law established, and at the same time to thank her majesty for pa.s.sing an Act ent.i.tled "An Act to prevent the growth of Schism"-an Act aimed against the Whigs, and which forbade anyone keeping a school without licence from the bishop.(1998)
(M983)
On the morning of Friday the 30th July the queen was seized with her last illness. Notification was immediately despatched to the lord mayor, who reported the news to a special Court of Aldermen that afternoon. The Secretary of State, who had written to the mayor, had desired his lordship to take immediate steps to preserve quiet in the city. The court, on being informed of the turn of affairs, despatched the sheriffs, the common cryer and the water bailiff to Kensington to enquire after the queen"s health and to a.s.sure her majesty that every possible care would be taken to preserve the peace of the city in any event.(1999) Two days later (1 Aug.) Anne was dead.
END OF VOL. II.