B EFORE proceeding with our outline of the events in the
Civic History of London, it may be perhaps well to say a word or two on some of the characteristics of the every-day life of the citizens during the Plantagenet period, not referred to by Fitz-Stephen, in his account of the London of Henry 11.'8 time. The inferences we gather on this point from the code of civic regulations are by no means so consistent with our modern ideas of comfort and happiness as the account of that warm lover of London would lead us to expect. No doubt he was loath to dwell on the more unfavourable side of London life, which, indeed, was pro- bably in many respects less unfavourable in his eyes than in ours. Custom and the spirit of the age make a great difference in this respect, and even civic dishonesty in petty things may have seemed to him too much a matter of course to be worth repining at. Mr. Riley, the learned editor of the Guildhall Records, embodies his own impressions on the subject in the following summary : — " That the favoured and so-called free citizen of London, even despite the extensive privileges with reference to trade which he enjoyed, was in possession of more than the faintest shadow of liberty can hardly be alleged, if we only call to mind the substance of the pages just submitted to the reader's notice, filled, as they are, with enactments and ordinances, arbitrary, illegal, and oppressive ; laws, for example, which compelled each citizen, whether he would or no, to be bail or surety for a neighbour's good behaviour over whom perhaps it was impossible for him to exercise the slightest control ; laws which forbade him to make his market for the day until the purveyors for the King and ' the great lords of the land' had stripped the stalls of all that was choicest and best ; laws which forbade him to pass the city walls for the purpose even of meeting his own purchased goods ; laws which bound hiin to deal with certain persons or communities only, or within the precincts only of certain localities ; laws which dictated, under severe penal- ties, what sums, and no more, he was to pay to his servants and artizans ; laws which drove his dog out of the street, while they permitted ' genteel dogs' to roam at large ; nay, even more than this, laws which subjected him to domiciliary visits from the City officials on various pleas and pretexts ; which compelled him to carry on a trade under heavy penalties, irrespective of the ques- tion whether or not it was at his loss, and which occasionally went so far as to lay down rules at what hours he was to walk in the streets, and, incidentally, what he was to eat, and what to drink. Viewed individually, laws and ordinances such as these may seem of but trifling moment ; but 'trifles make life,' the poet says, and to have lived fettered by numbers of restrictions like these must have rendered life irksome in the extreme to 'a sensitive man, and a burden hard to be borne. Every dark pic- ture, however, has its reverse, and in the legislation even of these gloomy days there are one or two meritorious features to be traced. The labourer, no doubt, so far as disposing of his labour at his own time and option was concerned, was too often treated little better than a slave ; but, on the other hand, the price of bread taken into consideration, the wages of his labour appear— at times, at least—to have been regulated on a very fair and liberal scale. The determination, too, steadily evinced by the civic authorities that every trader should really sell what he professed to sell, and that the poor, whatever their other grievances, should be protected in their dealings against the artifices of adulteration, deficient measures, and short weight, is another feature that commands our approval. Greatly deserving, too, of commendation is the pride that was evidently felt by the Londoners of these times in the purity of the waters of their much loved Thames ; and the carefulness with which the civic authori- ties, in conjunction with the Court, took every possible precaution to preserve its banks from encroachment and its stream from pollution. The fondness, too, of the citizens of London, in former times, for conduits and public fountains, though based perhaps on absolute necessity to same extent, is a feature that we miss in their representatives at the present day [1859]." The dark part of this picture seems to us a little overcharged, if we look at the matter in the broader light of custom and the requirements of the age. Even now we seem to be retracing our steps a little, and the wishes of some of our social reformers go still further back in the direction of social regulation. On the whole, we have no doubt the life of a Middle-Age Londoner, though open to much, that we should now think intolerable, was by no means unhappy or uncheerful.
In the reign of Stephen most of the London houses were wholly built of wood, and thatched with straw, reeds, or stubble. But after the great fire in that reign which consumed St. Paul's, the wealthier citizens rebuilt their houses with partition walls of free- stone, and covered the roofs with thick tiles. A code of regula- tions called the " Assize of Fitz-Alwin " was enacted in the year• 1189, for the purpose of preventing fires, and continued in force till the reign of Richard II. From this it appears that the houses which then presented a line of gables to the street consisted of but one storey over the ground floor. By the early part of the- fourteenth century, however, we find houses mentioned of two or- three stories, each of which, with the cellar beneath, sometimes- was the freehold of different individuals. The upper storey in such houses was probably entered by stairs on the out- side. Stalls, i.e., projections from the gables facing the street used to expose articles for sale, became common in the century after Fitz-Alwin. " They were to be no more than two and a half feet in depth, movable, and flexible, and as the Aldermen of the ward might think fit, considering the width of the street.'• There were, however, other stalls of a large size, called Penlices or Penthouses. Glass in the windows was, in 1189, a luxury for the very wealthy, but had come into general use in the reign of Edward III., when the Glaziers became an established " mystery."' Chimneys were unknown to Fitz-Alwin, but had come into pretty common use by the year 1300. We first frequently meet with char- coal as an article of fuel, but sea coal was commonly used as early as the reign of Edward U. Tiles were probably used instead of brieks. Every householder had to pave the footway before his own door evenly with that before his neighbour's, while the middle of the street was paved by a rate. The scavengers had to see to the proper repair of the pavements, as well as to the removal of nuisances. " In some parts of the City large open spaces were paved for the purpose of holding markets." Besides the ordinary trades and manufactures of a city, Weaving was very extensively carried on in London. Large numbers of weavers flocked thither from Flanders and Brabant. An important era in the history of the City is marked by the first creation into corporate bodies of different domestic Trades, under the name of " CoareasiEs." This began as early as the reign of Henry III. at least. But the reign of Edward III. was the time during which most of the great City Companies were incorporated. The Goldsmiths and Fish- lizongers, who date their origu just before this period, had such contests for precedency in early times, that the Mayor and Alder- men were obliged by proclamation to expel the mutineers from the City, and to deprive several of their freedom. A commercial company called the "Merchant Adventurers" was incorporated in 1296 by Edward I., and obtained special privileges from John, Duke of Brabant, " who gave them permission to establish them- selves and their trades ruder Government in the city of Antwerp, where they were principally settled till the reign of Edward M., and carried on a great manufacture in cloth made from wool imported from this country. That Prince, however, perceiving the great advantage which the Flemings thus gained, procured some of.their best workmen to established manufactures here ; by which, and by prohibiting the exportation of English wool, the finest cloths were soon afterwards made in this kingdom. By successive charters. and privileges granted to this Company by various Sovereigns, they afterwards arrived at the greatest pros- perity, and nearly engrossed the whole clothing trade of Europe."
Foreign merchants visiting London were received in so unfriendly a fashion that it is clear the profits of their ventures must have been ultimately enormous to induce them to undergo such a martyrdom as that to which they were subjected. A foreigner was looked upon by the citizens of London as one " bent solely on depriving the honourable dealer of his fair gains by dis- honest and illegal competition." "So early, however, as the reign of Ethelred II. (about A.D. 1000) some brief regulations were framed, if not for the encouragement of foreigners, at least for their protection." Those thus protected are described as " the men of France and Normandy, the people of Rouen, the merchants of Flanders, the inhabitants of Liege and of Lier (in Brabant), and the Emperor's Men, called first Easterlings, and then Merchants of the Hanse of Almaine." The trade of the " Lorraine Merchants ' is regulated by certain ordinances, which seem to belong to the first half of the thirteenth century. Every year, it appears from these regulations, a wine fleet was in the habit of visiting England. " When the fleet reached the City limits at the ' New Wear,' in the vicinity of the present Yantlet Creek, they were bound to arrange themselves in due order, and raise their ensign, the crews being at liberty, if so inclined, to sing their ‘kiriele,' or song of praise and thanksgiving, 'according to the old law,' until London Bridge was reached. The drawbridge being raised, they were to remain moored off a hythe or landing-place (probably Queen Hy the) until the King's officers had first made their purchases for his use. The next pur- chasers came in due priority ; those of London first, those of Win- chester next. From this time the Lorraine merchsti t fell under the operation of a number of stringent re drictions as to his movements and his residence. lie was bound also, unless prevented by con- trary winds, sickness, or debt, to lam: London within forty days. Other foreign merchants were more favoared. The Emperor's Men'. were allowed to lodge where they pleased, with the ex- ception -of the inhabitants of Tisle (Th'el, in Guelderlaud) and Brune .(probably Warren, in the same country), who had given some cause of grave offence. Tha natives of Denmark, however, were most favoured, being allowed to reside in the City the whole year, with a right to all the benefits of the law of the City of Loudon.' The Norwegians had the former, but not the latter privilege. Special privileges were sometimes granted by express conventions, as in the case of that concluded in 1237 between the citizens of ,London and the merchants of Amiens, Corby, and Neste. The city of Cologne had certain privileges for its mer- chants, the trade between the two cities being one of early date and considerable extent ; and the Cologne merchants, we find, had a guildhall in London belonging to them." Other 'foreign merchants, however, such, for instance, as the woad merchants from Picardy and Normandy, met with but a sorry reception, beidg watched and almost confined as suspected criminals during their whole stay in London. The foreign merchants, however, kept up a good heart under all their vexatious restrictions, and had their own special meetings of good-fellowship. At the close of the
thirteenth and beginning of the fourteenth century we find estab- lished in London a Society or Brotherhood of the Pui, a title derived from the city of Le Puy en Velay, in Auvergne, whose members were mostly foreigners. "There was a Prince' of this society yearly elected, a reward for the best songs or ballads-royal,' a grand feast every year, the residue of the fund going to the pri- soners at Ncwgate and the City poor, and a dance at the new Prince's house."
The original charter granted to the City of London by William the Bastard is to the following effect :—" William the King gives friendly greeting to William the Bishop, and Gosfregth the Portreeve, and all the Burgesses within London, French and English. And I let you knoW that I will that ye be all worthy of that law which ye were in the day of Edward the King. And I will that each child be his father's heir after his father's day. And I will not suffer that any man offer you any wrong. God preserve you." Such was the original agreement between the Norman line of Kings and the citizens of London, and the records of subsequent years testify to the determination with which the Londoners held both Normans and Plantagenets to this plighted. faith. We have spoken of Henry Beauclerk's confirmation of old and grants of new privileges to them. In the civil war between Stephen and Matilda, however, the Londoners adhered to the former. As pun- ishment, Matilda, when she was in the ascendant in 1141, granted to Geoffrey de Mandeville, Earl of Essex, among other honours and possessions which his grandfather, father, and himself had once held, the Tower of Loudon and the Sheriff wicks of London and Middlesex, at the fee farm of 3001. per annum. She also made him Chief Justiciary of the city and county, so that no one could hold pleas in either without his leave. The tyranny of the Empress-Queen, however, exciting a general rising against her, she fled from the palace at Westminster, where she had taken up her abode, and the Londoners joined Stephen's army in besieging her at Winchester. The Tower of London meanwhile held out for Earl Geoffrey till he was made a prisoner at St. Alban's in 1143, when he was compelled to surrender it. Henry H. was too politic to engage in any decided contest with the citizens of London, but he obtained several sums of money from them as " Dona " or "free gifts," which were probably to some extent forced exactions. A massacre of the Jews by the London populace, consequent, it is said, on their rash attempt to enter the Abbey Church, took place at the coronation of Richard I., in 1189. It is said they had been previously expressly forbidden to attend by a Royal proclamation. The ringleaders in this affair were executed the next day by the King's order. At the coronation feast the citizens of Londonofficiated as the King's butlers, while those of Winchester served up the meat. During Richard's absence from England the Londoners joined Prince John and many of the Barons in overturning the Regency of Longchamp, Bishop of Ely, who on being summoned before a Coun- cil of the nobility, bishops, anl citizens of London at St. Paul's, fled to the Tower, and was there besieged till he consented to give up all his powers and possessions and quit the kingdom. On the return of Richard in 1191 he was crowned again at West- minster, and the Londoners, on payment of 2001., again obtained the privilege of serving as the King's butlers, in opposition to the citizens of Winchester. The same King granted them other privileges, also for money considerations, among others that of the Conservancy of the Thames for 1,500 marks. The year 119G was marked by a great outbreak in the City of London, with the rights of which we are very imperfectly acquainted. It would seem, however, that the richer citizens, availing themselves of their tenure of official positions, had contrived that the taxation should be so unequally levied that nearly the whole fell on the poorer inhabitants. These last found a chief in William Vitz-Osbert, called Lon beard, who rendered himself so formidable that the chroniclers say that 52,000 Londoners adhered to him (probably a considerable exaggeration), and when he appeared before the Chief Justiciary, Archbishop Hubert, his following was so large that he was dismissed with only a gentle admonition. Fresh attempts to seize him led to his fortifying himself in Bow Church, where be was besieged by an armed force, and driven out by fire. Being made prisoner, he and nine of his followers were .hanged at a place called " The Elmes," outside Smith- field. The common people, however, cherished his memory, and believed that miracles were worked at the place of his execution. The citizens bought fresh charters and confirmations of charters from King John. In 1209 that King came into collision with the Sheriffs, on account of the acts within the City of the Royal purveyors. He afterwards removed his Exchequer to Northampton, in consequence of other differences with the Lon- doners. The citizens are then said to have deepened and widened their City ditch. The share of the citizens in the tillage imposed to obtain the revocation by the Pope of the Interdict on the kingdom was 2,000 marks. On the 10th of July, 1212, a great fire on the Southwark side of the bridge being carried by the wind to the opposite side, a great multitude of spectators found themselves enclosed between two fires, and overcrowding into the vessels which hastened to their rescue, these sank, and a large number of persons perished either by fire or water. In 1214 the King again irritated the citizens by demolishing Baynard's Castle, which belonged to Robert FitzWalter, castellan and standard-bearer of the City, whose daughter &feel, "The Fair Maid of Essex," King John had tried to violate. In the f011owing year the King tried to conciliate the citizens by a new charter, given from the New Temple, in London. The Barons, being in arms at Bury St. Edmund's, sent a deputation with their demands to wait on the King in the New Temple. John evaded an answer on this occa- sion, but soon afterwards sent a contemptuous refusal. On this the Londoners secretly agreed to admit the Barons, who came in two days by forced marches fro:n Bedford, and entered the City at Aldgate on the morning of Sunday, the 24th of May, 1215, while most of the inhabitants were in church, and the King in the Tower. They pulled down the Jews' houses, and with the materials began to repair the City walls. They then laid siege to the Tower, and compelled the King to consent to a conference— the celebrated meeting on Runnymede taking place on the 15th of June following. By the Great Charter then granted it was expressly stipulated that. " the City of London should have all its ancient privileges and free customs, as well by land as by water." The City, by its chief magiatrate, became one of the " Conserva- tors" of this Great Charter of Rights ; and by another agreement, the City and Tower of London were for a certain time to remain in the possession of the Barons and the Archbishop of Canterbury.
Previous page
