Chapter 41

A fresh committee appointed, 22 Dec., 1659.On the 22nd a fresh committee was appointed to consult for the peace and safety of the city as well as to consider what answers should be sent to Monk, to the officers at Portsmouth and to Lawson, who was in command of a squadron in the Thames, all of whom were opposed to the army in London and in favour of a parliament.Recommendation of the committee, 23 Dec.No time was lost; on the following day (23 Dec.) the committee reported to the Common Council recommending, among other things, that six regiments of trained bands should be at once called out and placed under the command of officers, whose commissions should be under the common seal of the city; that commissioners should be appointed to confer with Haslerigg, Morley, Walton and Vice-Admiral Lawson touching the safety of the city and the peace and settlement of the nation, and "in due time" to give an answer to General Monk's letter; and that the commissioners should be authorised to propound the convening of a free parliament according to the late "declaration" of the court. These recommendations being approved, commissioners were there[pg 361]and then appointed, and instructions drawn up for their guidance.1123Nomination of officers for the trained bands, 24 Dec., 1659.The next day (Saturday, 24 Dec.) the Common Council was busy nominating officers of the trained bands. It also ordered the city's chains and posts to be set up in the several precincts, and the gates, portcullises and posterns to be looked to; but the council afterwards changed their minds on this matter, and the order was countermanded before the court rose.1124The royalists' hopes centred in the city.The revival of the city's militia was a welcome sign to the royalists. "What does the city?" wrote secretary Nicholas from Brussels about this time. "We know they talk of setting up a militia of their own, and that some of them say, as they helped to drive out the father, they will help to bring in the son."1125And again, a few days later, "The city should be made to understand how much their interests are concerned to suppress the illegal and boundless authority usurped by the army which cannot be done but by force, and by no force so well as that of the city and counties adjacent; for if the army shall ... get again to be absolute masters in London, no citizen or inhabitant there will be secure of anything they possess longer than it pleases the soldiery, which will soon make the citizens their absolute slaves." Once more, "The city cannot be secure," he repeats, "if the army continue their quarter and soldiers still among them, nor can any[pg 362]parliament be free whilst awed by an army.... Until it [the army] shall be made to obey orders from a power superior to it, there can be no security or peace, either in city or country."1126The Rump again restored, 26 Dec., 1659.The spirit that had moved Haslerigg, Morley, Walton and Lawson at length moved the rank and file of the army in London. The soldiers placed themselves at the command of their cashiered officers. On the 24th December they marched to Lenthall's house in Chancery Lane, expressed their sorrow for the past, and promised to stand by parliament for the future. On the 26th the Rump was for the second time restored to power.1127Draft petition to the Rump, 28 Dec., 1659.Presentation of petition postponed, 29 Dec., 1659.The citizens had obtained their desire to have once more a parliament, but the parliament they got was far from being the free parliament they had been looking for. They wished to take an early opportunity—lest their action should be misinterpreted—to inform the Rump that the measures they had taken for "settling" the trained bands had been taken before "their honors came together this last time." They desired to explain the reasons for undertaking the work, and to show that in so doing the city had only acted within its rights. A petition was accordingly drawn up on the 28th December, setting forth that disorders in the city had increased "by the exorbitant actings of many of those men who at first being appointed by parliament a Committee of Militia within the city of London for their security and safety, have since their last interruption acted by a[pg 363]commission under the Great Seal of England against the same parliament," and that for the prevention of any disorder that might arise they had fallen back upon their ancient rights and usages, and had put themselves in a posture of defence, not for the purpose of acting against parliament, but for it. Whilst offering these explanations the City was anxious that parliament would receive into its House all such members as were still alive and fill up the places of all who were dead. On the 29th the Common Council resolved that this petition should not be laid before the House until further order.1128The commissioners appointed by the City to confer with Haslerigg, Morley and Walton at Portsmouth had returned, and their report made to the Common Council on that day may have given rise to the postponement.The City's reply to Monk's letter, 29 Dec.Monk's letter to the City, sent in November, had all this time remained unanswered. At last (29 Dec.) a reply was drawn up, and, after receiving the approval of the Common Council, was despatched to the general by the hands of the City Swordbearer.1129A deputation from Parliament to the Court of Aldermen, 31 Dec.On the last day of the year a deputation from the House, including Lenthall, Haslerigg, Morley and others, waited upon the Court of Aldermen to confer with them about the safety of the city. The erection of the city posts and chains, which apparently had been proceeded with, and the calling out of the trained bands troubled parliament. By the 2nd January Haslerigg was able to satisfy parliament on the first head. It was contrary (he said) to the mind of the lord mayor, aldermen and Common Council to[pg 364]have any posts or chains set up, and those that were set up should be taken down.1130Two days later (4 Jan.) the Common Council ordered the settlement of the trained bands to be proceeded with, and nominated a committee to lay before parliament the grounds and reasons for so doing, the committee being instructed to again press for a full and free parliament.1131The attitude of the City towards the restored Rump was keenly watched by royalists abroad. "Let me know certainly the Londoners' intentions about the Rump," wrote secretary Nicholas, "and settling their own militia, and also the proceedings of Monk and Lambert, and how each of them approves the restoring of the Rump."1132The citizens decline to pay taxes until parliament be filled up.The City's anxiety for a return of a full and free parliament in the place of the Rump was occasioned in some degree by the fact that in the existing House they had but a single representative, viz., Alderman Atkin, and without due representation the citizens refused to be subjected to taxation. "They were resolved," Pepys notes in his diary (13 Jan.), "to make no more applications to the parliament, nor to pay any money, unless the secluded members be brought in or a free parliament chosen."Monk's second letter to the City, 6 Jan., 1660.A deputation from the City appointed to meet Monk, 19 Jan., 1660.In the meantime Lambert, who had set out for the north of England with the intention of stopping Monk's passage from Scotland, had been recalled, and by the middle of January Monk and his army were well on their way to London. On the 6th January[pg 365]he had despatched a letter1133to the Common Council by the hands of the City Swordbearer, who having handed to the general the city's late missive, was about to return.1134As Monk approached London Alderman Fowke and two other commissioners were ordered (19 Jan.) to go out to meet him and thank him for his second letter, and for his cheerful concurrence with the declaration of the Common Council, and to desire the continuance of a good understanding between his excellency and the court for the settlement of the nation and peace of the city. By the 30th they had returned and were able to report to the Common Council the result of their interview.1135The nature of their report has not been recorded.Monk desires the removal of certain regiments from London before he will enter.Monk enters London, 3 Feb., 1660.In order to avoid as much as possible the appearance of entering London as a conqueror, Monk brought with him no more than 5,000 men, a force considerably less than that which was quartered in London and Westminster. Having reached St. Albans, he wrote to the Speaker asking that five of the regiments in the capital might be removed to a distance before his arrival lest his troops should become disaffected by intercourse with those who had been so recently engaged in rebellion. The House acquiesced and gave orders to that effect, but the soldiers refused to leave their quarters, swearing that they would not go without their money, and threatening if their pay was not received to "go where they might have it, and[pg 366]that was the city."1136A sum of money having been hastily raised to satisfy their demands, they consented to march out, and the next morning (3 Feb.) Monk entered at the head of his force—"in very good plight and stout officers"—and proceeded to the quarters assigned to him at Whitehall recently occupied by Bradshaw.1137A City deputation to Monk, 8 Feb.Monk was anxious to feel the pulse of the City before committing himself to any definite policy. He had not long to wait before he was assured of its favour. On the 8th February the Common Council agreed to send a deputation to the general to congratulate him upon his coming to London and to thank him for his courtesy to the City's commissioners recently despatched to him, as well as to express a hope that the good understanding which had prevailed between his excellency and the City might continue.1138The Common Council dissolved by order of the Rump, 9 Feb.The friendly attitude of the City towards Monk, and its recent hostile attitude towards parliament—some of the Common Council, we are told, had been "very high" at the last court, and refused to pay taxes until the House should be filled up1139—was so marked that the Rump determined upon dissolving the Common Council, although it commended the "discreet carriage" of the lord mayor in conducting the business of the court.1140Not content with this[pg 367]the House went further, and ordered troops to be quartered in the city "for reducing the city to the obedience of the parliament." The city's gates and portcullises, moreover, were to be removed, and eleven citizens, including an alderman, were ordered into custody.1141Monk in the city.The unenviable task of seeing these orders executed was, by a clever stroke of policy, committed to Monk himself. There was no alternative open to him but to obey, and to carry out the orders of parliament with as little friction to the citizens as was possible. No sooner had he taken up his residence in the city for this purpose than he was asked by the mayor to delay removing the city's gates until the matter should be communicated to the Court of Aldermen.Monk confers with the Court of Aldermen, 10 Feb.A special court having been summoned Monk attended in person (10 Feb.) and informed the members of the commands that had been laid upon him by parliament touching the city's gates and portcullises. Being told that the execution of such commands would be "of very ill consequence both to parliament and the city" the general could only reply that the commands of the House were so positive that he could only hold his hand on one condition, and that was that the city should acknowledge the Rump that so he might have ground for writing to and mediating with the House. The court was allowed to consider the matter whilst Monk withdrew. Upon his return he was informed that the Court of Aldermen could not speak on[pg 368]behalf of the whole body of citizens, "and that the Common Council being now disabled to meet, there was none in capacity to do it." But, said his excellency, the Court of Aldermen might declare their own minds? Again Monk withdrew, only to be told, however, on his return that the court was of opinion that their doing so "would not at this time be a service either to the parliament or city."1142Monk's letter to parliament, 11 Feb.The next day (11 Feb.) the Court of Aldermen again met. Monk, too, was there. He had just despatched a letter to the Speaker of the House complaining of the invidious work he and his soldiers had been set to do—a work which served only to bring them into discredit with the city—and peremptorily demanding that every seat in the House should be filled up by the following Friday (17 Feb.) as a preliminary to the calling together of a new parliament. When the aldermen heard of this letter they were delighted, and ready to accede to anything Monk might suggest. He proposed quartering troops in the city "for a few days." The aldermen raised no objection, but asked his excellency to utilise as far as possible the inns and public victualling houses, "so as may be least offence to the citizens."1143They even displayed a readiness to give up their own houses to the use of the general and his officers, and promised that his soldiers should lack nothing.1144On his quitting the court such a shout was raised of "God bless your excellency" as had been seldom heard. Bonfires were lighted that evening from Cheapside to Temple Bar, bells were set ringing, and rumps carried in mock[pg 369]procession and solemnly roasted in token of the approaching dissolution of parliament. So great was the hospitality offered to the soldiers that most of them got gloriously drunk.1145Monk attends divine service in the city, 12 Feb., 1660.The next day being Sunday (12 Feb.) Monk, whose wife had joined him in his lodgings in the city, attended morning service at St. Paul's, and in the afternoon went to a church in Broad Street, probably that of St. Peter le Poor, in the neighbourhood of his lodgings.1146Interview between Monk and the Court of Aldermen at Drapers' Hall, 13 Feb.On Monday (13 Feb.) he held a conference with the mayor and aldermen at Drapers' Hall, a stone's throw from where he lived, with reference to the peace and safety of the city. Alderman Atkin, a member of parliament, was sent for to be informed of "sundry matters of great danger to the city," of which information had reached the ears of the Court of Aldermen, and which he was to communicate to the House. But particulars are not recorded.1147The Council of State invite Monk to leave the city for Whitehall, 13 Feb.The Council of State were far from being pleased with Monk for taking up his quarters in the city, and repeatedly urged him to leave the city for Whitehall, where they could keep a better watch on his movements. They particularly desired his company at Whitehall on Tuesday morning for the purpose (they said) of consulting him on matters relating to public safety, and in order that they might have an opportunity of communicating to him the recent proceedings of parliament.1148[pg 370]Monk prepares to quit the city, 15 Feb., 1660.Monk was in no hurry to quit the city. On Wednesday (15 Feb.) he sent for Alderman Fowke to say that he purposed marching out of the city with his forces on the following afternoon, but that in so doing he had no intention of receding from his promise to secure the safety of the city. He would also endeavour to bring about a right understanding between parliament and the city. Fowke having reported this to the Court of Aldermen there was great alarm, and a deputation was despatched, with Fowke at its head, to beg the general to let his soldiers remain in the city "if it may consist with his trust." Word was brought next day to the court that in the event of his excellency quitting the city he would leave behind two regiments for its safety, and that if the court would give him the names of persons fit to be officers he would endeavour to get two regiments of their own appointed by parliament.1149Monk remains in the city but changes his quarters.Instead of quitting the city Monk only changed his quarters to the house of William Wale, alderman of the ward of Farringdon Without, whither he caused his goods to be removed from Whitehall, as to a more or less permanent residence.1150There he remained, holding frequent interviews with the leading citizens and preparing to carry into effect the project of restoring the king.1151The return of the excluded members to parliament, 21 Feb.In the meanwhile parliament had been busy completing the bill for the qualifications of electors and candidates for the new parliament, and on the day fixed (17 Feb.) by Monk writs were ready to[pg 371]be issued. According to the qualifications passed by the House, no one could be elected a member of the forthcoming parliament unless pledged to support a republican form of government. As this meant the exclusion of the members shut out by Pride's Purge in 1648 it gave rise to much dissatisfaction, and Monk was appealed to. A deputation of the sitting members met a deputation of the excluded members at Monk's new quarters, when it was decided that the Presbyterian members shut out by Pride's Purge should again be allowed to take their seats. Four days later (21 Feb.) they attended parliament at Monk's invitation and were admitted without opposition.The day passed off without any disturbance, although it was feared that the "secluded" members might attempt to force their way into parliament. It was also feared that if such an attempt were made it would be backed up by some inhabitants of the city. The council had therefore asked Monk to take precautions for securing the freedom of parliament as well as maintaining peace within the city.1152The Common Council restored, 21 Feb., 1660.The recent order of parliament dissolving the Common Council of the city was declared null and void, the municipal authorities were allowed to set up the city's gates and portcullises again, and the imprisoned citizens were liberated.1153That night was a joyous one in the city. Bells were rung and bonfires were lighted, so that the sky was ablaze with illuminations, "a most pleasant sight to see."1154[pg 372]On the 28th February—a day set apart for public thanksgiving—Monk was invited to an entertainment at Grocers' Hall in honour of the restoration of a full parliament and of the Common Council of the city; but party spirit was so rife that it became necessary to warn the general against receiving anything that he might hear "as the sense of the city."1155Bonfires were forbidden to be lighted in the city that night by order of the Council of State, lest some discontented spirits might seize the opportunity to raise a disturbance.1156Parliament desires a loan of £60,000, 22 Feb., 1660.The day that the Common Council re-assembled (22 Feb.) it received a deputation from the restored House asking for a loan. With little hesitation the court voted a sum of £60,000 on the security of the monthly assessments. It was left to the aldermen, deputies and common councilmen of the wards to raise the money by subscription, and they were further instructed to take the best course they could for raising a sum of £100,000 upon the same account.1157It was subsequently (1 March) arranged that the sum of £27,000 should be advanced upon security of the six months' assessment, and in case the same should not be fully collected out of the assessment, the deficit, as well as the cost of repairing and setting up the gates, portcullises, etc., should be secured by Act of Parliament.1158Monk appointed Sergt.-Major-General of the city's forces, 3 March.The House acceded to the City's request that its militia might be placed in the hands of commissioners[pg 373]of its own choice. Monk himself was nominated by the Common Council (3 March) Sergeant-Major-General of the city's forces, a post which he signified his willingness to accept.1159The sooner the militia was settled the sooner would the city be rid of Monk's soldiers, of whose excesses the Common Council had had recent cause to complain.1160Armed once more with parliamentary powers, the commissioners for the militia of the city prepared to raise six regiments of auxiliaries and some cavalry, as well as a month's tax at the rate of £35,000 a month over England for their maintenance or "trophies."1161The Long Parliament dissolved, 16 March, 1660.Having settled the militia of the kingdom as well as that of London, parliament—the Long Parliament, which during its actual or nominal existence for nearly twenty years had experienced every vicissitude of fortune—was at length dissolved (16 March) by its own act, and writs were issued for a fresh parliament to meet on the 25th April.1162The new parliament was known as the Convention Parliament on account of its members having been elected without the king's writs.Application to the City for an advance of £500,000, 26 March.Ten days after the dissolution of the Long Parliament there came to the Common Council of the city a deputation from the Council of State, in whose hands the sole government of the kingdom then lay, with a proposal to borrow the sum of half a million of money (£500,000) upon the security of a moiety of the excise. The court, after deliberation, agreed (2 April) to lend a sum of money (amount not specified) to[pg 374]the Council of State upon security of the moiety of the excise "and the honour of the said Council of State," and ordered that subscriptions should at once be set on foot in the several wards.1163The king's restoration freely spoken of.Scarcely had the House broken up before people began to talk freely of the king and his probable restoration, a subject on which they had hitherto dared only to speak in a whisper. So bold indeed did they become that on the very day of the dissolution a man came with a ladder to the Exchange—not "Royal," but "Great" Exchange—in the city and obliterated with a brush the inscription,Exit Tyrannus Regum Ultimus, which had been set up in August, 1650, near the site of the late king's statue, destroyed by order of the then Council of State, as already narrated. Before the end of the month another statue was in course of making to take the place of the one that had been thus destroyed.1164As time went on, and Monk's design to bring in Charles became more apparent, the citizens grew yet bolder. The Skinners' Company went so far as to set up again the royal arms in their hall on the occasion of an entertainment given to Monk himself.1165The City's declaration and vindication, 30 April, 1660.Towards the close of April, when it was evident that the king's restoration was a mere question of time, the Common Council showed an anxiety to place on record an account of the attitude taken up by the City, and to vindicate its action throughout the late troublous times. It appointed (26 April) a committee "to peruse the records of this court and[pg 375]report what of them are fit to be considered of, and their opinions thereupon; and also to prepare a narrative for the vindication of this court and city touching the same." The committee at once set to work, and in four days were ready with a draft of "a declaration and vindication of the lord mayor, aldermen and commons of the city of London in Common Council assembled," which received the approval of the court (30 April), and a printed copy of which was ordered to be sent to every member of parliament and Council of State.1166After expressions of satisfaction at the thought of an end having been put to the distractions of the kingdom by General Monk, and at the hopeful prospect of a return to the old form of government by king, lords and commons, under which the country had so long prospered at home and been respected abroad, this declaration proceeded to disavow the various Acts of the Common Council as established in 1648, when, "in the general deluge of disorder introduced upon these kingdoms" in that year, the government of the city passed into the hands of "men of loose and dangerous principles," who proceeded to pass Acts "tending to the murder of the late king and total extinguishment of kingly government," and who by no means were a fair representation of the city. It set forth various proceedings of the Common Council in connection with parliament and the city's Engagement to guarantee the personal safety of the late king[pg 376]from the 22nd June, 1648, down to the 13th January, 1649, when the lord mayor Reynardson was constrained to leave the council. The terms of this Engagement the City was prepared to carry out, "but it pleased Almighty God to permit their good intentions and endeavours to be frustrated by the destructive counsels and actings of those who had designed to build upp their dominion and fortunes on the ruin of the king and kingdom." The House of Lords was dissolved, and all the best members excluded from the House of Commons. By "pretended ordinances" of parliament, all those worthy citizens who, according to their allegiance and covenant, had engaged to procure and secure a personal treaty with the king, were rendered incapable to be elected into the Common Council or any other office of trust in the city.What could be expected of a body thus emasculated? They declare themselves unable to find words to express their abhorrence of the proceedings that had taken place in the Common Council of the 13th January, 1649, and "profess their thankful memory of the noble gallant resolutions of the then lord mayor, Alderman Reynardson, and his brethren the aldermen, who so valiantly resisted the turbulent disorders of thatmechanicke junctoduring many hours' assault and at last prudently retreated and washed their hands from the guilt of those bloody resolves." In conclusion they express a hope and trust that since the recovery of the right of free election the Common Council had manifested an eagerness to act cordially and strenuously with parliament in everything tending towards good government, and[pg 377]that soon, by the aid of the parliament recently convened, they would be put under the protection of the first and fundamental government of hereditary monarchy according to the ancient laws of the nation.Letter from Charles to the City read before the Common Council, 1 May, 1660.The City's declaration and vindication was scarcely printed and published before a letter from Charles himself1167was brought to the Common Council by Lord Mordaunt and Sir John Grenville (1 May), in which the prince expressed a wish that the City should know how little he desired revenge and how convinced he was that the peace, happiness and security of the kingdom were only to be secured by gaining the hearts and affections of his subjects. He felt that he could count upon the City to assist him in re-establishing those fundamental laws upon which the happiness of the country so much depended, and he avowed a "particular affection" for his native city, the charters of which he was not only ready to renew and confirm, but to grant such new favours as might advance its trade, wealth and honour.The Declaration of Breda, 4 April.Enclosed in this letter was a declaration known as the Declaration of Breda, from the place where Charles had signed it on the 4th April (o.s.)1168It offered a general pardon to all except those specially exempted by parliament and promised liberty of conscience in matters of religion. Charles further expressed his willingness to leave questions of title to estates acquired during the late troublous times to be decided by parliament. He assured the soldiers of arrears of pay and promised to continue them in his service on the same terms as they then enjoyed.[pg 378]

A fresh committee appointed, 22 Dec., 1659.

On the 22nd a fresh committee was appointed to consult for the peace and safety of the city as well as to consider what answers should be sent to Monk, to the officers at Portsmouth and to Lawson, who was in command of a squadron in the Thames, all of whom were opposed to the army in London and in favour of a parliament.

Recommendation of the committee, 23 Dec.

No time was lost; on the following day (23 Dec.) the committee reported to the Common Council recommending, among other things, that six regiments of trained bands should be at once called out and placed under the command of officers, whose commissions should be under the common seal of the city; that commissioners should be appointed to confer with Haslerigg, Morley, Walton and Vice-Admiral Lawson touching the safety of the city and the peace and settlement of the nation, and "in due time" to give an answer to General Monk's letter; and that the commissioners should be authorised to propound the convening of a free parliament according to the late "declaration" of the court. These recommendations being approved, commissioners were there[pg 361]and then appointed, and instructions drawn up for their guidance.1123

Nomination of officers for the trained bands, 24 Dec., 1659.

The next day (Saturday, 24 Dec.) the Common Council was busy nominating officers of the trained bands. It also ordered the city's chains and posts to be set up in the several precincts, and the gates, portcullises and posterns to be looked to; but the council afterwards changed their minds on this matter, and the order was countermanded before the court rose.1124

The royalists' hopes centred in the city.

The revival of the city's militia was a welcome sign to the royalists. "What does the city?" wrote secretary Nicholas from Brussels about this time. "We know they talk of setting up a militia of their own, and that some of them say, as they helped to drive out the father, they will help to bring in the son."1125And again, a few days later, "The city should be made to understand how much their interests are concerned to suppress the illegal and boundless authority usurped by the army which cannot be done but by force, and by no force so well as that of the city and counties adjacent; for if the army shall ... get again to be absolute masters in London, no citizen or inhabitant there will be secure of anything they possess longer than it pleases the soldiery, which will soon make the citizens their absolute slaves." Once more, "The city cannot be secure," he repeats, "if the army continue their quarter and soldiers still among them, nor can any[pg 362]parliament be free whilst awed by an army.... Until it [the army] shall be made to obey orders from a power superior to it, there can be no security or peace, either in city or country."1126

The Rump again restored, 26 Dec., 1659.

The spirit that had moved Haslerigg, Morley, Walton and Lawson at length moved the rank and file of the army in London. The soldiers placed themselves at the command of their cashiered officers. On the 24th December they marched to Lenthall's house in Chancery Lane, expressed their sorrow for the past, and promised to stand by parliament for the future. On the 26th the Rump was for the second time restored to power.1127

Draft petition to the Rump, 28 Dec., 1659.

Presentation of petition postponed, 29 Dec., 1659.

The citizens had obtained their desire to have once more a parliament, but the parliament they got was far from being the free parliament they had been looking for. They wished to take an early opportunity—lest their action should be misinterpreted—to inform the Rump that the measures they had taken for "settling" the trained bands had been taken before "their honors came together this last time." They desired to explain the reasons for undertaking the work, and to show that in so doing the city had only acted within its rights. A petition was accordingly drawn up on the 28th December, setting forth that disorders in the city had increased "by the exorbitant actings of many of those men who at first being appointed by parliament a Committee of Militia within the city of London for their security and safety, have since their last interruption acted by a[pg 363]commission under the Great Seal of England against the same parliament," and that for the prevention of any disorder that might arise they had fallen back upon their ancient rights and usages, and had put themselves in a posture of defence, not for the purpose of acting against parliament, but for it. Whilst offering these explanations the City was anxious that parliament would receive into its House all such members as were still alive and fill up the places of all who were dead. On the 29th the Common Council resolved that this petition should not be laid before the House until further order.1128The commissioners appointed by the City to confer with Haslerigg, Morley and Walton at Portsmouth had returned, and their report made to the Common Council on that day may have given rise to the postponement.

The City's reply to Monk's letter, 29 Dec.

Monk's letter to the City, sent in November, had all this time remained unanswered. At last (29 Dec.) a reply was drawn up, and, after receiving the approval of the Common Council, was despatched to the general by the hands of the City Swordbearer.1129

A deputation from Parliament to the Court of Aldermen, 31 Dec.

On the last day of the year a deputation from the House, including Lenthall, Haslerigg, Morley and others, waited upon the Court of Aldermen to confer with them about the safety of the city. The erection of the city posts and chains, which apparently had been proceeded with, and the calling out of the trained bands troubled parliament. By the 2nd January Haslerigg was able to satisfy parliament on the first head. It was contrary (he said) to the mind of the lord mayor, aldermen and Common Council to[pg 364]have any posts or chains set up, and those that were set up should be taken down.1130Two days later (4 Jan.) the Common Council ordered the settlement of the trained bands to be proceeded with, and nominated a committee to lay before parliament the grounds and reasons for so doing, the committee being instructed to again press for a full and free parliament.1131The attitude of the City towards the restored Rump was keenly watched by royalists abroad. "Let me know certainly the Londoners' intentions about the Rump," wrote secretary Nicholas, "and settling their own militia, and also the proceedings of Monk and Lambert, and how each of them approves the restoring of the Rump."1132

The citizens decline to pay taxes until parliament be filled up.

The City's anxiety for a return of a full and free parliament in the place of the Rump was occasioned in some degree by the fact that in the existing House they had but a single representative, viz., Alderman Atkin, and without due representation the citizens refused to be subjected to taxation. "They were resolved," Pepys notes in his diary (13 Jan.), "to make no more applications to the parliament, nor to pay any money, unless the secluded members be brought in or a free parliament chosen."

Monk's second letter to the City, 6 Jan., 1660.

A deputation from the City appointed to meet Monk, 19 Jan., 1660.

In the meantime Lambert, who had set out for the north of England with the intention of stopping Monk's passage from Scotland, had been recalled, and by the middle of January Monk and his army were well on their way to London. On the 6th January[pg 365]he had despatched a letter1133to the Common Council by the hands of the City Swordbearer, who having handed to the general the city's late missive, was about to return.1134As Monk approached London Alderman Fowke and two other commissioners were ordered (19 Jan.) to go out to meet him and thank him for his second letter, and for his cheerful concurrence with the declaration of the Common Council, and to desire the continuance of a good understanding between his excellency and the court for the settlement of the nation and peace of the city. By the 30th they had returned and were able to report to the Common Council the result of their interview.1135The nature of their report has not been recorded.

Monk desires the removal of certain regiments from London before he will enter.

Monk enters London, 3 Feb., 1660.

In order to avoid as much as possible the appearance of entering London as a conqueror, Monk brought with him no more than 5,000 men, a force considerably less than that which was quartered in London and Westminster. Having reached St. Albans, he wrote to the Speaker asking that five of the regiments in the capital might be removed to a distance before his arrival lest his troops should become disaffected by intercourse with those who had been so recently engaged in rebellion. The House acquiesced and gave orders to that effect, but the soldiers refused to leave their quarters, swearing that they would not go without their money, and threatening if their pay was not received to "go where they might have it, and[pg 366]that was the city."1136A sum of money having been hastily raised to satisfy their demands, they consented to march out, and the next morning (3 Feb.) Monk entered at the head of his force—"in very good plight and stout officers"—and proceeded to the quarters assigned to him at Whitehall recently occupied by Bradshaw.1137

A City deputation to Monk, 8 Feb.

Monk was anxious to feel the pulse of the City before committing himself to any definite policy. He had not long to wait before he was assured of its favour. On the 8th February the Common Council agreed to send a deputation to the general to congratulate him upon his coming to London and to thank him for his courtesy to the City's commissioners recently despatched to him, as well as to express a hope that the good understanding which had prevailed between his excellency and the City might continue.1138

The Common Council dissolved by order of the Rump, 9 Feb.

The friendly attitude of the City towards Monk, and its recent hostile attitude towards parliament—some of the Common Council, we are told, had been "very high" at the last court, and refused to pay taxes until the House should be filled up1139—was so marked that the Rump determined upon dissolving the Common Council, although it commended the "discreet carriage" of the lord mayor in conducting the business of the court.1140Not content with this[pg 367]the House went further, and ordered troops to be quartered in the city "for reducing the city to the obedience of the parliament." The city's gates and portcullises, moreover, were to be removed, and eleven citizens, including an alderman, were ordered into custody.1141

Monk in the city.

The unenviable task of seeing these orders executed was, by a clever stroke of policy, committed to Monk himself. There was no alternative open to him but to obey, and to carry out the orders of parliament with as little friction to the citizens as was possible. No sooner had he taken up his residence in the city for this purpose than he was asked by the mayor to delay removing the city's gates until the matter should be communicated to the Court of Aldermen.

Monk confers with the Court of Aldermen, 10 Feb.

A special court having been summoned Monk attended in person (10 Feb.) and informed the members of the commands that had been laid upon him by parliament touching the city's gates and portcullises. Being told that the execution of such commands would be "of very ill consequence both to parliament and the city" the general could only reply that the commands of the House were so positive that he could only hold his hand on one condition, and that was that the city should acknowledge the Rump that so he might have ground for writing to and mediating with the House. The court was allowed to consider the matter whilst Monk withdrew. Upon his return he was informed that the Court of Aldermen could not speak on[pg 368]behalf of the whole body of citizens, "and that the Common Council being now disabled to meet, there was none in capacity to do it." But, said his excellency, the Court of Aldermen might declare their own minds? Again Monk withdrew, only to be told, however, on his return that the court was of opinion that their doing so "would not at this time be a service either to the parliament or city."1142

Monk's letter to parliament, 11 Feb.

The next day (11 Feb.) the Court of Aldermen again met. Monk, too, was there. He had just despatched a letter to the Speaker of the House complaining of the invidious work he and his soldiers had been set to do—a work which served only to bring them into discredit with the city—and peremptorily demanding that every seat in the House should be filled up by the following Friday (17 Feb.) as a preliminary to the calling together of a new parliament. When the aldermen heard of this letter they were delighted, and ready to accede to anything Monk might suggest. He proposed quartering troops in the city "for a few days." The aldermen raised no objection, but asked his excellency to utilise as far as possible the inns and public victualling houses, "so as may be least offence to the citizens."1143They even displayed a readiness to give up their own houses to the use of the general and his officers, and promised that his soldiers should lack nothing.1144On his quitting the court such a shout was raised of "God bless your excellency" as had been seldom heard. Bonfires were lighted that evening from Cheapside to Temple Bar, bells were set ringing, and rumps carried in mock[pg 369]procession and solemnly roasted in token of the approaching dissolution of parliament. So great was the hospitality offered to the soldiers that most of them got gloriously drunk.1145

Monk attends divine service in the city, 12 Feb., 1660.

The next day being Sunday (12 Feb.) Monk, whose wife had joined him in his lodgings in the city, attended morning service at St. Paul's, and in the afternoon went to a church in Broad Street, probably that of St. Peter le Poor, in the neighbourhood of his lodgings.1146

Interview between Monk and the Court of Aldermen at Drapers' Hall, 13 Feb.

On Monday (13 Feb.) he held a conference with the mayor and aldermen at Drapers' Hall, a stone's throw from where he lived, with reference to the peace and safety of the city. Alderman Atkin, a member of parliament, was sent for to be informed of "sundry matters of great danger to the city," of which information had reached the ears of the Court of Aldermen, and which he was to communicate to the House. But particulars are not recorded.1147

The Council of State invite Monk to leave the city for Whitehall, 13 Feb.

The Council of State were far from being pleased with Monk for taking up his quarters in the city, and repeatedly urged him to leave the city for Whitehall, where they could keep a better watch on his movements. They particularly desired his company at Whitehall on Tuesday morning for the purpose (they said) of consulting him on matters relating to public safety, and in order that they might have an opportunity of communicating to him the recent proceedings of parliament.1148

Monk prepares to quit the city, 15 Feb., 1660.

Monk was in no hurry to quit the city. On Wednesday (15 Feb.) he sent for Alderman Fowke to say that he purposed marching out of the city with his forces on the following afternoon, but that in so doing he had no intention of receding from his promise to secure the safety of the city. He would also endeavour to bring about a right understanding between parliament and the city. Fowke having reported this to the Court of Aldermen there was great alarm, and a deputation was despatched, with Fowke at its head, to beg the general to let his soldiers remain in the city "if it may consist with his trust." Word was brought next day to the court that in the event of his excellency quitting the city he would leave behind two regiments for its safety, and that if the court would give him the names of persons fit to be officers he would endeavour to get two regiments of their own appointed by parliament.1149

Monk remains in the city but changes his quarters.

Instead of quitting the city Monk only changed his quarters to the house of William Wale, alderman of the ward of Farringdon Without, whither he caused his goods to be removed from Whitehall, as to a more or less permanent residence.1150There he remained, holding frequent interviews with the leading citizens and preparing to carry into effect the project of restoring the king.1151

The return of the excluded members to parliament, 21 Feb.

In the meanwhile parliament had been busy completing the bill for the qualifications of electors and candidates for the new parliament, and on the day fixed (17 Feb.) by Monk writs were ready to[pg 371]be issued. According to the qualifications passed by the House, no one could be elected a member of the forthcoming parliament unless pledged to support a republican form of government. As this meant the exclusion of the members shut out by Pride's Purge in 1648 it gave rise to much dissatisfaction, and Monk was appealed to. A deputation of the sitting members met a deputation of the excluded members at Monk's new quarters, when it was decided that the Presbyterian members shut out by Pride's Purge should again be allowed to take their seats. Four days later (21 Feb.) they attended parliament at Monk's invitation and were admitted without opposition.

The day passed off without any disturbance, although it was feared that the "secluded" members might attempt to force their way into parliament. It was also feared that if such an attempt were made it would be backed up by some inhabitants of the city. The council had therefore asked Monk to take precautions for securing the freedom of parliament as well as maintaining peace within the city.1152

The Common Council restored, 21 Feb., 1660.

The recent order of parliament dissolving the Common Council of the city was declared null and void, the municipal authorities were allowed to set up the city's gates and portcullises again, and the imprisoned citizens were liberated.1153That night was a joyous one in the city. Bells were rung and bonfires were lighted, so that the sky was ablaze with illuminations, "a most pleasant sight to see."1154

On the 28th February—a day set apart for public thanksgiving—Monk was invited to an entertainment at Grocers' Hall in honour of the restoration of a full parliament and of the Common Council of the city; but party spirit was so rife that it became necessary to warn the general against receiving anything that he might hear "as the sense of the city."1155Bonfires were forbidden to be lighted in the city that night by order of the Council of State, lest some discontented spirits might seize the opportunity to raise a disturbance.1156

Parliament desires a loan of £60,000, 22 Feb., 1660.

The day that the Common Council re-assembled (22 Feb.) it received a deputation from the restored House asking for a loan. With little hesitation the court voted a sum of £60,000 on the security of the monthly assessments. It was left to the aldermen, deputies and common councilmen of the wards to raise the money by subscription, and they were further instructed to take the best course they could for raising a sum of £100,000 upon the same account.1157It was subsequently (1 March) arranged that the sum of £27,000 should be advanced upon security of the six months' assessment, and in case the same should not be fully collected out of the assessment, the deficit, as well as the cost of repairing and setting up the gates, portcullises, etc., should be secured by Act of Parliament.1158

Monk appointed Sergt.-Major-General of the city's forces, 3 March.

The House acceded to the City's request that its militia might be placed in the hands of commissioners[pg 373]of its own choice. Monk himself was nominated by the Common Council (3 March) Sergeant-Major-General of the city's forces, a post which he signified his willingness to accept.1159The sooner the militia was settled the sooner would the city be rid of Monk's soldiers, of whose excesses the Common Council had had recent cause to complain.1160Armed once more with parliamentary powers, the commissioners for the militia of the city prepared to raise six regiments of auxiliaries and some cavalry, as well as a month's tax at the rate of £35,000 a month over England for their maintenance or "trophies."1161

The Long Parliament dissolved, 16 March, 1660.

Having settled the militia of the kingdom as well as that of London, parliament—the Long Parliament, which during its actual or nominal existence for nearly twenty years had experienced every vicissitude of fortune—was at length dissolved (16 March) by its own act, and writs were issued for a fresh parliament to meet on the 25th April.1162The new parliament was known as the Convention Parliament on account of its members having been elected without the king's writs.

Application to the City for an advance of £500,000, 26 March.

Ten days after the dissolution of the Long Parliament there came to the Common Council of the city a deputation from the Council of State, in whose hands the sole government of the kingdom then lay, with a proposal to borrow the sum of half a million of money (£500,000) upon the security of a moiety of the excise. The court, after deliberation, agreed (2 April) to lend a sum of money (amount not specified) to[pg 374]the Council of State upon security of the moiety of the excise "and the honour of the said Council of State," and ordered that subscriptions should at once be set on foot in the several wards.1163

The king's restoration freely spoken of.

Scarcely had the House broken up before people began to talk freely of the king and his probable restoration, a subject on which they had hitherto dared only to speak in a whisper. So bold indeed did they become that on the very day of the dissolution a man came with a ladder to the Exchange—not "Royal," but "Great" Exchange—in the city and obliterated with a brush the inscription,Exit Tyrannus Regum Ultimus, which had been set up in August, 1650, near the site of the late king's statue, destroyed by order of the then Council of State, as already narrated. Before the end of the month another statue was in course of making to take the place of the one that had been thus destroyed.1164As time went on, and Monk's design to bring in Charles became more apparent, the citizens grew yet bolder. The Skinners' Company went so far as to set up again the royal arms in their hall on the occasion of an entertainment given to Monk himself.1165

The City's declaration and vindication, 30 April, 1660.

Towards the close of April, when it was evident that the king's restoration was a mere question of time, the Common Council showed an anxiety to place on record an account of the attitude taken up by the City, and to vindicate its action throughout the late troublous times. It appointed (26 April) a committee "to peruse the records of this court and[pg 375]report what of them are fit to be considered of, and their opinions thereupon; and also to prepare a narrative for the vindication of this court and city touching the same." The committee at once set to work, and in four days were ready with a draft of "a declaration and vindication of the lord mayor, aldermen and commons of the city of London in Common Council assembled," which received the approval of the court (30 April), and a printed copy of which was ordered to be sent to every member of parliament and Council of State.1166

After expressions of satisfaction at the thought of an end having been put to the distractions of the kingdom by General Monk, and at the hopeful prospect of a return to the old form of government by king, lords and commons, under which the country had so long prospered at home and been respected abroad, this declaration proceeded to disavow the various Acts of the Common Council as established in 1648, when, "in the general deluge of disorder introduced upon these kingdoms" in that year, the government of the city passed into the hands of "men of loose and dangerous principles," who proceeded to pass Acts "tending to the murder of the late king and total extinguishment of kingly government," and who by no means were a fair representation of the city. It set forth various proceedings of the Common Council in connection with parliament and the city's Engagement to guarantee the personal safety of the late king[pg 376]from the 22nd June, 1648, down to the 13th January, 1649, when the lord mayor Reynardson was constrained to leave the council. The terms of this Engagement the City was prepared to carry out, "but it pleased Almighty God to permit their good intentions and endeavours to be frustrated by the destructive counsels and actings of those who had designed to build upp their dominion and fortunes on the ruin of the king and kingdom." The House of Lords was dissolved, and all the best members excluded from the House of Commons. By "pretended ordinances" of parliament, all those worthy citizens who, according to their allegiance and covenant, had engaged to procure and secure a personal treaty with the king, were rendered incapable to be elected into the Common Council or any other office of trust in the city.

What could be expected of a body thus emasculated? They declare themselves unable to find words to express their abhorrence of the proceedings that had taken place in the Common Council of the 13th January, 1649, and "profess their thankful memory of the noble gallant resolutions of the then lord mayor, Alderman Reynardson, and his brethren the aldermen, who so valiantly resisted the turbulent disorders of thatmechanicke junctoduring many hours' assault and at last prudently retreated and washed their hands from the guilt of those bloody resolves." In conclusion they express a hope and trust that since the recovery of the right of free election the Common Council had manifested an eagerness to act cordially and strenuously with parliament in everything tending towards good government, and[pg 377]that soon, by the aid of the parliament recently convened, they would be put under the protection of the first and fundamental government of hereditary monarchy according to the ancient laws of the nation.

Letter from Charles to the City read before the Common Council, 1 May, 1660.

The City's declaration and vindication was scarcely printed and published before a letter from Charles himself1167was brought to the Common Council by Lord Mordaunt and Sir John Grenville (1 May), in which the prince expressed a wish that the City should know how little he desired revenge and how convinced he was that the peace, happiness and security of the kingdom were only to be secured by gaining the hearts and affections of his subjects. He felt that he could count upon the City to assist him in re-establishing those fundamental laws upon which the happiness of the country so much depended, and he avowed a "particular affection" for his native city, the charters of which he was not only ready to renew and confirm, but to grant such new favours as might advance its trade, wealth and honour.

The Declaration of Breda, 4 April.

Enclosed in this letter was a declaration known as the Declaration of Breda, from the place where Charles had signed it on the 4th April (o.s.)1168It offered a general pardon to all except those specially exempted by parliament and promised liberty of conscience in matters of religion. Charles further expressed his willingness to leave questions of title to estates acquired during the late troublous times to be decided by parliament. He assured the soldiers of arrears of pay and promised to continue them in his service on the same terms as they then enjoyed.

Back to Index Next