Richmond Park restored to Charles II, 2 June, 1660.On the afternoon of Saturday, the 2nd June (1660), the mayor and aldermen, accompanied by the Recorder, waited upon the king to congratulate him on his return and to restore to him Richmond Park, according to a resolution of the Common Council.1179Speaking on behalf of the City, the Recorder expressly declared that it was done by way of restitution and not as a gift. He assured the king that it was well that the park had been in the City's hands, for they had preserved the wood, vert and game. Not to be outdone in courtesy the king replied that "the city of London were still loading him with their kindness, and that he looked upon the said park to be kept for him, and that he accepted it not as restored, but as freely given unto him by the city, and thanked them for the same."1180The citizens take the oath of allegiance and supremacy.The early days of June were busy days for lord mayor Aleyne, to whose house the citizens flocked in order to signify their acceptance of his majesty's offer of pardon.1181On the 5th June the mayor himself and those aldermen who were not barred by the Statute of Indemnity and Oblivion (12 Charles II, c. 11), subscribed a declaration of pardon, whilst members of the Common Council took the oaths of supremacy and allegiance[pg 382]pursuant to the king's orders.1182Later on the master and wardens of the livery companies, the presidents of the hospitals, the president and governors of the Irish Society, as well as the governors of the Merchant Adventurers and other trading companies, were called upon to do the like.1183Sir John Weld restored to office of town clerk.Sir John Weld, who had been dismissed in 1642 from the office of town clerk1184for failing to attend the Common Council, a duty which he was rendered incapable of fulfilling owing to his having been appointed at that time high-sheriff of Shropshire, seized the opportunity of presenting a petition to the court of Common Council (5 June) to be re-instated in office. A committee to whom the matter was referred reported to the council that they found that it had been by special command of the late king that Weld had been prevented carrying out his duties, and recommended that he should now be restored. The court, however, seemed loth to re-instate him, and it was not until after the receipt of a letter from secretary Nicholas and a writ of restitution had been issued that it consented (21 Sept.) to re-admit him to office, and then only by deputy.1185Sadler, town clerk, removed.John Sadler, who held the office of town clerk at the time, was promptly got rid of on a charge of having given judgment in "a late pretended court of justice," and of having signed the death-warrant of[pg 383]Christopher Love, a zealous Presbyterian and minister of the church of St. Lawrence, Jewry, who had been accused of treason in 1651 and beheaded on Tower Hill in the midst of ominous thunderings and clouds of darkness.1186The deposed aldermen restored pursuant to the king's wishes, 4 Sept., 1660.On the 4th September the king wrote to the City stating that as by the passing of the Act of Indemnity many of the aldermen were rendered incapable of continuing in office, it was his wish that their places should be filled by restoring those aldermen who had in times past been removed for their allegiance to him. As many of the latter had submitted to pay fines rather than continue in office against their conscience, he further recommended that these fines should be returned to them.1187Pursuant to the king's wishes, the Common Council formally declared "that Sir Thomas Adams, Sir Abraham Reynardson, Sir Thomas Soame, Sir John Langham, Sir James Bunce and Sir Richard Browne are aldermen of this city," and called upon them to take upon themselves the execution of their respective places.1188Langham excused on his own petition.One of these, Sir John Langham, then in his seventy-eighth year, wrote from Crosby House to the Court of Aldermen asking to be excused on the score of his advanced age. He had been, he said, laid aside about twelve years since and imprisoned in the Tower[pg 384]by order of parliament1189(24 Sept., 1647), chiefly to prevent his being chosen lord mayor, and had been released on the following 6th June without any effort being made on his part. He had afterwards (7 April, 1649) been removed from office with Sir John Gayer, Alderman Adams and "brother" Bunce by resolution of "that remain of a House of Commons that presumed to sit as a parliament," and others had been chosen in their stead.1190The Court of Aldermen acceded to the veteran's request1191Reynardson re-elected mayor, but declines office, 1 Oct., 1660.At Michaelmas the citizens would again have placed the royalist Reynardson in the mayoralty chair, but he excused himself on the ground of ill-health,1192and the gallant Alderman Sir Richard Browne was elected in his stead. A twelvemonth later Reynardson was dead, having passed away on the 4th October, 1661.The king and parliament entertained in the city, 5 July.In the meantime (5 July) the king and parliament had been entertained at dinner by the City with great magnificence. The day was unfortunately rainy, and Pepys, who seems never to have quite forgotten that he was the son of a tailor, and never put on a new suit of clothes without recording the fact in his diary, remarks that the rain that day "spoiled many a fine suit of clothes." The entertainment on this occasion took place at the Guildhall instead of at the hall of one of the great city companies. The mayor took the opportunity in the course of the dinner to present[pg 385]the king with a "welcome cupp according to the usuall custome," as a token of loyalty and duty. On the following day the members of the Common Council and the masters and wardens of those companies which had advanced money to defray the cost of the entertainment dined together in the hall, when there was "the same musicke as was the day before at the entertainment of his majesty."1193Sir Richard Browne major-general of the city's forces,viceMonk resigned, 6 July, 1660.When the Entertainment Committee waited on his majesty to thank him for his condescension in accepting the City's entertainment and to crave his pardon for whatever had gone amiss, they took the opportunity of satisfying him on certain matters—viz., the repair of St. Paul's and the building a drawbridge on London bridge—about which his majesty desired to be informed. They at the same time reported the City's choice of Sir Richard Browne to be major-general of the City's forces in the place of Monk, recently created Duke of Albemarle, who had been obliged to resign his commission "by reason of the multiplicity of affairs in his majesty's service."1194Demand of a loan of £100,000, 14 Aug.On the 14th August a deputation from the Lords and Commons attended a court of Common Council and desired a loan of £100,000 on the security of the poll tax. The court declined to commit itself to any promise. It was much dissatisfied, and more especially with the inequality of the poll tax; it therefore preferred submitting the matter to a committee for investigation before giving an answer.1195A committee was then and there nominated to consider the question.[pg 386]By October matters were so pressing that Charles himself wrote to the City, insisting upon the money being advanced within ten days upon the security of the Act for two months' assessment about to be levied on the whole kingdom, and out of which he solemnly promised, "on the word of a king," that the loan, both principal and interest, should be repaid before any other disbursements were made. The money was wanted for the purpose, he said, of disbanding the army.1196The city companies' petition touching their Irish estates, Sept.The king's gracious reply, Oct., 1660.Notwithstanding this pecuniary difficulty and the existence of certain grievances of which the City complained, more especially the abolition of the Court of Wards,1197for which the king was to receive another £100,000 by way of compensation, the good relationship between Charles and the City still continued; so that when a deputation waited on him with a petition from the livery companies relative to their Irish estates, the following gracious reply was given:—"That his majesty would perform what his father had promised and more, and that his majesty would deny the city nothing; that his majesty found they dealt honestly with him, and his majesty would deny them nothing."1198Outbreak of fanatics or Fifth Monarchy men. 6 Jan., 1661.Thus far all had gone well with Charles. Within a month of his first letters from Breda he had recovered his father's throne without shedding one drop of blood. Of his enemies the more powerful were either in prison or had fled the country, whilst others had paid the penalty for their implication in the death of the late king with their own heads.[pg 387]Danger, however, lurked where least expected. A small band of fanatics known by the name of Fifth Monarchy men, who believed in the immediate coming of Christ upon earth to rule the world, were in the habit of holding meetings in Coleman Street. On Sunday, the 6th January, 1661, excited by a harangue uttered by their leader, a wine-cooper named Venner, they broke out, and with arms in their hands hurried to St. Paul's. There they posted sentries, and demanded of passers-by whom were they for? Upon one of them replying that he was for King Charles, he was at once shot by the fanatics, who cried out that they were for King Jesus. Luckily the city was at the time in the hands of that staunch soldier Sir Richard Browne. Upon his appearance on the scene with an armed force the rioters retreated to Highgate, but not before they had killed at least half-a-dozen men. During the next two days the streets were strongly patrolled; travellers abroad were strictly examined as to the nature of their business before being allowed to pass on their way, and suspected persons were disarmed and compelled to take the oaths of allegiance and supremacy.1199Every moment the return of the rioters was expected, but Monday and Tuesday passed and none appeared. One of their meeting houses (probably that in Coleman Street) was ordered to be pulled down. At six o'clock on Wednesday morning the inhabitants were aroused by hearing again the cry of the fanatics, "The King Jesus and their heads upon the gates," as they madly attacked the king's life guards. Their whole[pg 388]number, it is said, did not amount to much more than thirty, of whom twenty were killed, whilst Venner and nearly all the rest were made prisoners. When questioned the prisoners one and all refused to make any confession, saying that they would not betray the servants of the Lord Jesus.1200Ten days later they expiated their crime on the scaffold, and the lord mayor, having received orders to seize all suspected persons in the city, proceeded to imprison a number of Quakers. These he kept in confinement until the following March, when all fear of further disturbance having passed away, they were discharged.1201Vote of thanks to mayor and sheriffs for stopping outbreak, 25 Jan., 1661.The Common Council passed a vote of thanks (25 Jan.) to the lord mayor and sheriffs for their vigilant conduct during the outbreak,1202and appointed a deputation to wait on his majesty to know his pleasure as to when a day of public thanksgiving should be kept for its timely suppression. It also appointed a committee (28 Jan.) to enquire as to the number killed and the best means of raising money for the relief of their widows and children.1203A loan for paying off the navy, 11 March.Having successfully paid off and disbanded the army,1204the king turned his attention to paying off the[pg 389]navy, for which purpose he sent a deputation from the Privy Council to the City (11 March) with a letter asking for a speedy loan of £100,000. The city fathers at once took steps to raise the money in the several wards, and any able inhabitant refusing to subscribe was ordered to be reported to the lord mayor; but three days later the king again wrote saying that, as money was coming in from the country quicker than had been anticipated, the loan would not be required.1205Another loan, 9 April, 1661.A month had scarcely passed before the Duke of Albemarle, the Earl of Manchester, the Earl of Sandwich, Viscount Valentia, Denzill Holles, and Sir Anthony Ashley Cooper appeared before the court of Common Council (9 April) with a letter from the king asking for another loan of £60,000. As the City was anxious to have its rights and liberties ratified and confirmed by a new charter, it did wisely in giving an unanimous assent to this demand, more especially as the loan was to be made upon parliamentary security.1206Preparations for the coronation.The City had other expenses to meet. The day fixed for the king's coronation (23 April) was drawing near, and preparations had been going on since February.1207The sum of £6,000 had already been spent in "preparing ornaments for his majesty's[pg 390]passage through the city to his coronation," and £3,000 more was wanted. The money was immediately voted.1208On the 1st April the Court of Aldermen nominated twelve citizens to assist the chief butler on the day of the coronation,1209whilst the court of Common Council voted a sum of £1,000 in gold as a gift to be made by the City to the king on that occasion.1210Alderman Vyner commissioned to provide new regalia for the occasion.The old regalia having been dispersed, broken up or lost after the death of Charles I, a commission was given to Sir Robert Vyner, alderman of the city and the king's goldsmith, to make a new set for the coronation of Charles II. This was accordingly done, care being taken to follow the old patterns as far as possible. The new regalia comprised two crowns, three sceptres, an orb, a mace and a quantity of collars, Georges and garters for the order of St. George. Vyner also supplied the king with plate for new year's gifts and for his majesty's own use, the entire cost amounting to over £30,000.1211Procession from the Tower to Whitehall, 22 April. 1661.On the day before the ceremony (22 April) Charles set out from the Tower to Whitehall. The procession was one of exceptional splendour as it passed through the streets new gravelled for the occasion.1212[pg 391]A special gallery was erected in Cheapside for the city aldermen, as well as a triumphal arch.1213Pepys, who dearly loved a gala day as affording him an excuse for putting on new finery, was lost in admiration at the sight which presented itself to his eyes as he viewed the procession from the windows of "Mr. Young's, the flagmaker," in Cornhill, and declared it to be "impossible to relate the glory of this day, expressed in the clothes of them that rid and their horses and horse-clothes." The mayor himself was provided with a crimson velvet gown for the occasion.1214Coronation day, 23 April.Accident to a former City Recorder.The coronation ceremony was carried out the next day with all the customary formalities, and the evening was given up to bonfires and fireworks, not to mention also a considerable amount of tippling. Even Pepys himself was obliged to confess that he got to his bed only "pretty well." There was but one accident worth mentioning during the entire day. Sergeant Glyn, who had formerly been the City's Recorder, and had afterwards been raised to the Bench, was nearly killed by his horse falling on him whilst riding in the cavalcade with Maynard, another eminent lawyer. Had they both been killed the populace (we are told) would have only looked upon it as a judgment of a just God for their action under the Commonwealth.1215The meeting of the Cavalier Parliament, 8 May, 1661.Meanwhile the Convention Parliament had been dissolved and a new one summoned to meet in May (1661). When the elections took place there was a hot contest in the city between Presbyterians and[pg 392]Episcopalians, resulting in the discomfiture of the latter, "who went away cursing and swearing and wishing they had never come."1216One writer describes the election as having been "the greatest appearance that ever the oldest men alive saw."1217Great efforts were made to obtain the re-election of those who had served the city in the last parliament.1218Unfortunately their names are not known to us with any certainty. The successful candidates consisted of three aldermen, viz., William Thompson, William Love and John Fowke and Captain John Jones. Thompson and Love are described as "godly men and of good parts, Congregationalists," Captain Jones as "a Presbyterian man," and Fowke as one "not much noted for religion, but a countenancer of good ministers," and as "deeply engaged in Bishop's lands."1219Pepys,1220who lived in the heart of the city, was himself surprised at the "strange election," and at the discomfiture of the Episcopalian party, "that thought themselves so strong. It do so make people to feare it may come to worse by being an example to the country to do the same. And, indeed, the bishops are so high that very few do love them."The City an example to the rest of the country.Others besides Pepys recognised the effect likely to be produced in the country by the example set by London; and those who, unlike Pepys, were of a[pg 393]Presbyterian turn of mind freely expressed their hopes that the keynote of the election struck by the City would be taken up by the country at large. "God has overruled the hearts of men and heard the prayers of his people in the city election, though the Episcopals were high and thought to have the day; a precedent is given to the whole country," writes a contemporary to a friend.1221"The city of London has set a good example," writes another.1222Another expresses a hope that "other places will be encouraged by the example of this to choose sober and moderate men for parliament men"; whilst another declares "the city was very unanimous and courageous in its choice," and that "if the country do the same, profaneness and superstition will no longer prevail, but Godly magistrates and ministers be settled in every place."1223The court party afraid.Letters intercepted at the post office.That the court party were afraid of the effect that the result of the city election would have upon the rest of the kingdom, where elections were still going on, is evidenced by the fact that these letters just cited, as well as numerous others despatched to various parts of the country with details of the election, were intercepted at the post office.1224Neither the hopes of the one party nor the fears of the other as to the effect of the City's choice of members upon others were destined to be realised to the extent anticipated. The electors proved loyal, and the[pg 394]members returned to the new parliament which met on the 8th May were for the most part too young to remember the tyranny of the Stuarts.The Corporation Act, 1661.The new parliament agreed that neither House could claim the command of the militia nor lawfully make war upon the king. Act after Act was passed against those who refused to conform to the Established Church. Before the close of the year (1661) the Corporation Act received the assent of both Houses.1225Thenceforth no one was to be allowed to hold any municipal office unless he renounced the covenant, took the oath of non-resistance, and received the Sacrament according to the rites of the Church of England. By thus excluding Nonconformists (or "Dissenters," as they began now to be called) from municipal corporation, parliament indirectly excluded them from seats in the House of Commons.Petition for confirmation of City's charter, 9 July, 1661.On the 9th July the Common Council approved of the presentation of a petition to the king for a confirmation of the City's charter.1226The time was not inopportune, inasmuch as a "free and voluntary present" to Charles had recently been set on foot,1227and the maxim ofdo ut deswas one well understood between the City and the Crown. It is not surprising, therefore, that on the 17th an Order in Council was[pg 395]passed to the effect that the lord treasurer should assure the City that his majesty was highly sensible of their loyalty and affection, and would renew their charter with additions if desired and found fit.1228The lord chancellor happening to be in the city one day (8 Aug.) on the business of the "free and voluntary present," the civic authorities embraced the opportunity of urging him to press their suit with the king, whereupon "it pleased my lord chancellor to express much affection and forwardness to this great concernment of the city," and he promised to see the king on the matter that same evening, and to get the attorney-general, who was about to leave town, to defer his journey if the City would at once forward its old charter to Mr. Attorney for the purpose of renewal. This the Common Council readily agreed to do.1229In spite, however, of the exertions of the lord chancellor and of the City, no renewal of the charter of Charles I was obtained until nearly two years had elapsed.The mayor and aldermen attend the king touching renewal of charter, Oct., 1661.In October the mayor, aldermen and recorder attended his majesty in council, by request, when Charles repeated the promise made in his letter from Breda not to diminish or alter the rights of the City; but at the same time he informed them of his intention to make one exception,pro hac vice, by removing four or five of the aldermen who had been "faulty in the late troubles," and of putting others "of known worth and ability" in their places. He promised also to safeguard the City's interest in the Act then pending in parliament relative to corporations.1230The City[pg 396]could not do otherwise than submit,1231and the king carried out his threat. The commissioners who had been appointed under the Great Seal to "regulate" the Corporation removed at least two of the aldermen, viz., Tempest Miller, of Candlewick ward, and William Love, of Portsoken, who had recently been elected one of the city's representatives in parliament, their places being filled up by Sir Thomas Rich and Sir Thomas Bludworth, the king's own nominees.1232Fear of more disturbance by Presbyterians and fanatics, Sept., 1661.Pending the negotiations for a renewal of the City's charter, the Presbyterians of the city and their ultra-radical brethren the Fifth Monarchy men again caused disquietude. The latter had been "scotched not killed" after Venner's outbreak: "they are as bold in their meetings as before Venner's plot; Fifth Monarchy men preach and visit with Presbyterians, and encourage the people to withstand the common prayer and the oppression and idolatry of the court."1233The mayor had recently succeeded in breaking up a meeting and capturing ten men and thirty women, whom he lodged in Newgate. When remonstrated with they told the mayor that they had met to serve God, and when told that he best served God who obeyed the king, replied that they were not bound to obey him when the Spirit commanded the contrary.1234It was reported that there were no less[pg 397]than 3,000 men about the city maintained by Presbyterian ministers.1235The danger was increased by the large number of cashiered officers and soldiers who frequented the city.1236The king became anxious and wrote to the lord mayor (24 Oct.) complaining of the want of care and vigilance in setting the night watches, which consisted chiefly of feeble men unable to suppress such disorders as were likely to arise in those seditious times, and who broke up their watch some hours before daybreak, thereby giving encouragement to thieves and robbers. He therefore desired that the number of men should be increased, that only able men should be appointed, and that the watch should continue until daybreak.1237Election of Sir John Frederick, mayor, 29 Sept., 1661.On Michaelmas-day Sir Richard Browne was succeeded in the mayoralty chair by Sir John Frederick.1238The banquet of the mayor and sheriffs, which had been allowed to drop in the time of trouble and scarceness, was again held at the Guildhall,1239and the new mayor revived the ancient custom of visiting St. Paul's on the day of his taking the oath of office, and offering a prayer for the soul of the good bishop by whose kind offices the citizens obtained their first charter from the Conqueror.1240Charles did not attend[pg 398]the banquet which took place on the 29th October, but viewed the pageants on lord mayor's day from the windows of a private house in Cheapside, where he was supplied with refreshments at the City's charge.1241

Richmond Park restored to Charles II, 2 June, 1660.

On the afternoon of Saturday, the 2nd June (1660), the mayor and aldermen, accompanied by the Recorder, waited upon the king to congratulate him on his return and to restore to him Richmond Park, according to a resolution of the Common Council.1179Speaking on behalf of the City, the Recorder expressly declared that it was done by way of restitution and not as a gift. He assured the king that it was well that the park had been in the City's hands, for they had preserved the wood, vert and game. Not to be outdone in courtesy the king replied that "the city of London were still loading him with their kindness, and that he looked upon the said park to be kept for him, and that he accepted it not as restored, but as freely given unto him by the city, and thanked them for the same."1180

The citizens take the oath of allegiance and supremacy.

The early days of June were busy days for lord mayor Aleyne, to whose house the citizens flocked in order to signify their acceptance of his majesty's offer of pardon.1181On the 5th June the mayor himself and those aldermen who were not barred by the Statute of Indemnity and Oblivion (12 Charles II, c. 11), subscribed a declaration of pardon, whilst members of the Common Council took the oaths of supremacy and allegiance[pg 382]pursuant to the king's orders.1182Later on the master and wardens of the livery companies, the presidents of the hospitals, the president and governors of the Irish Society, as well as the governors of the Merchant Adventurers and other trading companies, were called upon to do the like.1183

Sir John Weld restored to office of town clerk.

Sir John Weld, who had been dismissed in 1642 from the office of town clerk1184for failing to attend the Common Council, a duty which he was rendered incapable of fulfilling owing to his having been appointed at that time high-sheriff of Shropshire, seized the opportunity of presenting a petition to the court of Common Council (5 June) to be re-instated in office. A committee to whom the matter was referred reported to the council that they found that it had been by special command of the late king that Weld had been prevented carrying out his duties, and recommended that he should now be restored. The court, however, seemed loth to re-instate him, and it was not until after the receipt of a letter from secretary Nicholas and a writ of restitution had been issued that it consented (21 Sept.) to re-admit him to office, and then only by deputy.1185

Sadler, town clerk, removed.

John Sadler, who held the office of town clerk at the time, was promptly got rid of on a charge of having given judgment in "a late pretended court of justice," and of having signed the death-warrant of[pg 383]Christopher Love, a zealous Presbyterian and minister of the church of St. Lawrence, Jewry, who had been accused of treason in 1651 and beheaded on Tower Hill in the midst of ominous thunderings and clouds of darkness.1186

The deposed aldermen restored pursuant to the king's wishes, 4 Sept., 1660.

On the 4th September the king wrote to the City stating that as by the passing of the Act of Indemnity many of the aldermen were rendered incapable of continuing in office, it was his wish that their places should be filled by restoring those aldermen who had in times past been removed for their allegiance to him. As many of the latter had submitted to pay fines rather than continue in office against their conscience, he further recommended that these fines should be returned to them.1187Pursuant to the king's wishes, the Common Council formally declared "that Sir Thomas Adams, Sir Abraham Reynardson, Sir Thomas Soame, Sir John Langham, Sir James Bunce and Sir Richard Browne are aldermen of this city," and called upon them to take upon themselves the execution of their respective places.1188

Langham excused on his own petition.

One of these, Sir John Langham, then in his seventy-eighth year, wrote from Crosby House to the Court of Aldermen asking to be excused on the score of his advanced age. He had been, he said, laid aside about twelve years since and imprisoned in the Tower[pg 384]by order of parliament1189(24 Sept., 1647), chiefly to prevent his being chosen lord mayor, and had been released on the following 6th June without any effort being made on his part. He had afterwards (7 April, 1649) been removed from office with Sir John Gayer, Alderman Adams and "brother" Bunce by resolution of "that remain of a House of Commons that presumed to sit as a parliament," and others had been chosen in their stead.1190The Court of Aldermen acceded to the veteran's request1191

Reynardson re-elected mayor, but declines office, 1 Oct., 1660.

At Michaelmas the citizens would again have placed the royalist Reynardson in the mayoralty chair, but he excused himself on the ground of ill-health,1192and the gallant Alderman Sir Richard Browne was elected in his stead. A twelvemonth later Reynardson was dead, having passed away on the 4th October, 1661.

The king and parliament entertained in the city, 5 July.

In the meantime (5 July) the king and parliament had been entertained at dinner by the City with great magnificence. The day was unfortunately rainy, and Pepys, who seems never to have quite forgotten that he was the son of a tailor, and never put on a new suit of clothes without recording the fact in his diary, remarks that the rain that day "spoiled many a fine suit of clothes." The entertainment on this occasion took place at the Guildhall instead of at the hall of one of the great city companies. The mayor took the opportunity in the course of the dinner to present[pg 385]the king with a "welcome cupp according to the usuall custome," as a token of loyalty and duty. On the following day the members of the Common Council and the masters and wardens of those companies which had advanced money to defray the cost of the entertainment dined together in the hall, when there was "the same musicke as was the day before at the entertainment of his majesty."1193

Sir Richard Browne major-general of the city's forces,viceMonk resigned, 6 July, 1660.

When the Entertainment Committee waited on his majesty to thank him for his condescension in accepting the City's entertainment and to crave his pardon for whatever had gone amiss, they took the opportunity of satisfying him on certain matters—viz., the repair of St. Paul's and the building a drawbridge on London bridge—about which his majesty desired to be informed. They at the same time reported the City's choice of Sir Richard Browne to be major-general of the City's forces in the place of Monk, recently created Duke of Albemarle, who had been obliged to resign his commission "by reason of the multiplicity of affairs in his majesty's service."1194

Demand of a loan of £100,000, 14 Aug.

On the 14th August a deputation from the Lords and Commons attended a court of Common Council and desired a loan of £100,000 on the security of the poll tax. The court declined to commit itself to any promise. It was much dissatisfied, and more especially with the inequality of the poll tax; it therefore preferred submitting the matter to a committee for investigation before giving an answer.1195A committee was then and there nominated to consider the question.

By October matters were so pressing that Charles himself wrote to the City, insisting upon the money being advanced within ten days upon the security of the Act for two months' assessment about to be levied on the whole kingdom, and out of which he solemnly promised, "on the word of a king," that the loan, both principal and interest, should be repaid before any other disbursements were made. The money was wanted for the purpose, he said, of disbanding the army.1196

The city companies' petition touching their Irish estates, Sept.

The king's gracious reply, Oct., 1660.

Notwithstanding this pecuniary difficulty and the existence of certain grievances of which the City complained, more especially the abolition of the Court of Wards,1197for which the king was to receive another £100,000 by way of compensation, the good relationship between Charles and the City still continued; so that when a deputation waited on him with a petition from the livery companies relative to their Irish estates, the following gracious reply was given:—"That his majesty would perform what his father had promised and more, and that his majesty would deny the city nothing; that his majesty found they dealt honestly with him, and his majesty would deny them nothing."1198

Outbreak of fanatics or Fifth Monarchy men. 6 Jan., 1661.

Thus far all had gone well with Charles. Within a month of his first letters from Breda he had recovered his father's throne without shedding one drop of blood. Of his enemies the more powerful were either in prison or had fled the country, whilst others had paid the penalty for their implication in the death of the late king with their own heads.[pg 387]Danger, however, lurked where least expected. A small band of fanatics known by the name of Fifth Monarchy men, who believed in the immediate coming of Christ upon earth to rule the world, were in the habit of holding meetings in Coleman Street. On Sunday, the 6th January, 1661, excited by a harangue uttered by their leader, a wine-cooper named Venner, they broke out, and with arms in their hands hurried to St. Paul's. There they posted sentries, and demanded of passers-by whom were they for? Upon one of them replying that he was for King Charles, he was at once shot by the fanatics, who cried out that they were for King Jesus. Luckily the city was at the time in the hands of that staunch soldier Sir Richard Browne. Upon his appearance on the scene with an armed force the rioters retreated to Highgate, but not before they had killed at least half-a-dozen men. During the next two days the streets were strongly patrolled; travellers abroad were strictly examined as to the nature of their business before being allowed to pass on their way, and suspected persons were disarmed and compelled to take the oaths of allegiance and supremacy.1199Every moment the return of the rioters was expected, but Monday and Tuesday passed and none appeared. One of their meeting houses (probably that in Coleman Street) was ordered to be pulled down. At six o'clock on Wednesday morning the inhabitants were aroused by hearing again the cry of the fanatics, "The King Jesus and their heads upon the gates," as they madly attacked the king's life guards. Their whole[pg 388]number, it is said, did not amount to much more than thirty, of whom twenty were killed, whilst Venner and nearly all the rest were made prisoners. When questioned the prisoners one and all refused to make any confession, saying that they would not betray the servants of the Lord Jesus.1200Ten days later they expiated their crime on the scaffold, and the lord mayor, having received orders to seize all suspected persons in the city, proceeded to imprison a number of Quakers. These he kept in confinement until the following March, when all fear of further disturbance having passed away, they were discharged.1201

Vote of thanks to mayor and sheriffs for stopping outbreak, 25 Jan., 1661.

The Common Council passed a vote of thanks (25 Jan.) to the lord mayor and sheriffs for their vigilant conduct during the outbreak,1202and appointed a deputation to wait on his majesty to know his pleasure as to when a day of public thanksgiving should be kept for its timely suppression. It also appointed a committee (28 Jan.) to enquire as to the number killed and the best means of raising money for the relief of their widows and children.1203

A loan for paying off the navy, 11 March.

Having successfully paid off and disbanded the army,1204the king turned his attention to paying off the[pg 389]navy, for which purpose he sent a deputation from the Privy Council to the City (11 March) with a letter asking for a speedy loan of £100,000. The city fathers at once took steps to raise the money in the several wards, and any able inhabitant refusing to subscribe was ordered to be reported to the lord mayor; but three days later the king again wrote saying that, as money was coming in from the country quicker than had been anticipated, the loan would not be required.1205

Another loan, 9 April, 1661.

A month had scarcely passed before the Duke of Albemarle, the Earl of Manchester, the Earl of Sandwich, Viscount Valentia, Denzill Holles, and Sir Anthony Ashley Cooper appeared before the court of Common Council (9 April) with a letter from the king asking for another loan of £60,000. As the City was anxious to have its rights and liberties ratified and confirmed by a new charter, it did wisely in giving an unanimous assent to this demand, more especially as the loan was to be made upon parliamentary security.1206

Preparations for the coronation.

The City had other expenses to meet. The day fixed for the king's coronation (23 April) was drawing near, and preparations had been going on since February.1207The sum of £6,000 had already been spent in "preparing ornaments for his majesty's[pg 390]passage through the city to his coronation," and £3,000 more was wanted. The money was immediately voted.1208On the 1st April the Court of Aldermen nominated twelve citizens to assist the chief butler on the day of the coronation,1209whilst the court of Common Council voted a sum of £1,000 in gold as a gift to be made by the City to the king on that occasion.1210

Alderman Vyner commissioned to provide new regalia for the occasion.

The old regalia having been dispersed, broken up or lost after the death of Charles I, a commission was given to Sir Robert Vyner, alderman of the city and the king's goldsmith, to make a new set for the coronation of Charles II. This was accordingly done, care being taken to follow the old patterns as far as possible. The new regalia comprised two crowns, three sceptres, an orb, a mace and a quantity of collars, Georges and garters for the order of St. George. Vyner also supplied the king with plate for new year's gifts and for his majesty's own use, the entire cost amounting to over £30,000.1211

Procession from the Tower to Whitehall, 22 April. 1661.

On the day before the ceremony (22 April) Charles set out from the Tower to Whitehall. The procession was one of exceptional splendour as it passed through the streets new gravelled for the occasion.1212[pg 391]A special gallery was erected in Cheapside for the city aldermen, as well as a triumphal arch.1213Pepys, who dearly loved a gala day as affording him an excuse for putting on new finery, was lost in admiration at the sight which presented itself to his eyes as he viewed the procession from the windows of "Mr. Young's, the flagmaker," in Cornhill, and declared it to be "impossible to relate the glory of this day, expressed in the clothes of them that rid and their horses and horse-clothes." The mayor himself was provided with a crimson velvet gown for the occasion.1214

Coronation day, 23 April.

Accident to a former City Recorder.

The coronation ceremony was carried out the next day with all the customary formalities, and the evening was given up to bonfires and fireworks, not to mention also a considerable amount of tippling. Even Pepys himself was obliged to confess that he got to his bed only "pretty well." There was but one accident worth mentioning during the entire day. Sergeant Glyn, who had formerly been the City's Recorder, and had afterwards been raised to the Bench, was nearly killed by his horse falling on him whilst riding in the cavalcade with Maynard, another eminent lawyer. Had they both been killed the populace (we are told) would have only looked upon it as a judgment of a just God for their action under the Commonwealth.1215

The meeting of the Cavalier Parliament, 8 May, 1661.

Meanwhile the Convention Parliament had been dissolved and a new one summoned to meet in May (1661). When the elections took place there was a hot contest in the city between Presbyterians and[pg 392]Episcopalians, resulting in the discomfiture of the latter, "who went away cursing and swearing and wishing they had never come."1216One writer describes the election as having been "the greatest appearance that ever the oldest men alive saw."1217Great efforts were made to obtain the re-election of those who had served the city in the last parliament.1218Unfortunately their names are not known to us with any certainty. The successful candidates consisted of three aldermen, viz., William Thompson, William Love and John Fowke and Captain John Jones. Thompson and Love are described as "godly men and of good parts, Congregationalists," Captain Jones as "a Presbyterian man," and Fowke as one "not much noted for religion, but a countenancer of good ministers," and as "deeply engaged in Bishop's lands."1219Pepys,1220who lived in the heart of the city, was himself surprised at the "strange election," and at the discomfiture of the Episcopalian party, "that thought themselves so strong. It do so make people to feare it may come to worse by being an example to the country to do the same. And, indeed, the bishops are so high that very few do love them."

The City an example to the rest of the country.

Others besides Pepys recognised the effect likely to be produced in the country by the example set by London; and those who, unlike Pepys, were of a[pg 393]Presbyterian turn of mind freely expressed their hopes that the keynote of the election struck by the City would be taken up by the country at large. "God has overruled the hearts of men and heard the prayers of his people in the city election, though the Episcopals were high and thought to have the day; a precedent is given to the whole country," writes a contemporary to a friend.1221"The city of London has set a good example," writes another.1222Another expresses a hope that "other places will be encouraged by the example of this to choose sober and moderate men for parliament men"; whilst another declares "the city was very unanimous and courageous in its choice," and that "if the country do the same, profaneness and superstition will no longer prevail, but Godly magistrates and ministers be settled in every place."1223

The court party afraid.

Letters intercepted at the post office.

That the court party were afraid of the effect that the result of the city election would have upon the rest of the kingdom, where elections were still going on, is evidenced by the fact that these letters just cited, as well as numerous others despatched to various parts of the country with details of the election, were intercepted at the post office.1224Neither the hopes of the one party nor the fears of the other as to the effect of the City's choice of members upon others were destined to be realised to the extent anticipated. The electors proved loyal, and the[pg 394]members returned to the new parliament which met on the 8th May were for the most part too young to remember the tyranny of the Stuarts.

The Corporation Act, 1661.

The new parliament agreed that neither House could claim the command of the militia nor lawfully make war upon the king. Act after Act was passed against those who refused to conform to the Established Church. Before the close of the year (1661) the Corporation Act received the assent of both Houses.1225Thenceforth no one was to be allowed to hold any municipal office unless he renounced the covenant, took the oath of non-resistance, and received the Sacrament according to the rites of the Church of England. By thus excluding Nonconformists (or "Dissenters," as they began now to be called) from municipal corporation, parliament indirectly excluded them from seats in the House of Commons.

Petition for confirmation of City's charter, 9 July, 1661.

On the 9th July the Common Council approved of the presentation of a petition to the king for a confirmation of the City's charter.1226The time was not inopportune, inasmuch as a "free and voluntary present" to Charles had recently been set on foot,1227and the maxim ofdo ut deswas one well understood between the City and the Crown. It is not surprising, therefore, that on the 17th an Order in Council was[pg 395]passed to the effect that the lord treasurer should assure the City that his majesty was highly sensible of their loyalty and affection, and would renew their charter with additions if desired and found fit.1228The lord chancellor happening to be in the city one day (8 Aug.) on the business of the "free and voluntary present," the civic authorities embraced the opportunity of urging him to press their suit with the king, whereupon "it pleased my lord chancellor to express much affection and forwardness to this great concernment of the city," and he promised to see the king on the matter that same evening, and to get the attorney-general, who was about to leave town, to defer his journey if the City would at once forward its old charter to Mr. Attorney for the purpose of renewal. This the Common Council readily agreed to do.1229In spite, however, of the exertions of the lord chancellor and of the City, no renewal of the charter of Charles I was obtained until nearly two years had elapsed.

The mayor and aldermen attend the king touching renewal of charter, Oct., 1661.

In October the mayor, aldermen and recorder attended his majesty in council, by request, when Charles repeated the promise made in his letter from Breda not to diminish or alter the rights of the City; but at the same time he informed them of his intention to make one exception,pro hac vice, by removing four or five of the aldermen who had been "faulty in the late troubles," and of putting others "of known worth and ability" in their places. He promised also to safeguard the City's interest in the Act then pending in parliament relative to corporations.1230The City[pg 396]could not do otherwise than submit,1231and the king carried out his threat. The commissioners who had been appointed under the Great Seal to "regulate" the Corporation removed at least two of the aldermen, viz., Tempest Miller, of Candlewick ward, and William Love, of Portsoken, who had recently been elected one of the city's representatives in parliament, their places being filled up by Sir Thomas Rich and Sir Thomas Bludworth, the king's own nominees.1232

Fear of more disturbance by Presbyterians and fanatics, Sept., 1661.

Pending the negotiations for a renewal of the City's charter, the Presbyterians of the city and their ultra-radical brethren the Fifth Monarchy men again caused disquietude. The latter had been "scotched not killed" after Venner's outbreak: "they are as bold in their meetings as before Venner's plot; Fifth Monarchy men preach and visit with Presbyterians, and encourage the people to withstand the common prayer and the oppression and idolatry of the court."1233The mayor had recently succeeded in breaking up a meeting and capturing ten men and thirty women, whom he lodged in Newgate. When remonstrated with they told the mayor that they had met to serve God, and when told that he best served God who obeyed the king, replied that they were not bound to obey him when the Spirit commanded the contrary.1234It was reported that there were no less[pg 397]than 3,000 men about the city maintained by Presbyterian ministers.1235The danger was increased by the large number of cashiered officers and soldiers who frequented the city.1236The king became anxious and wrote to the lord mayor (24 Oct.) complaining of the want of care and vigilance in setting the night watches, which consisted chiefly of feeble men unable to suppress such disorders as were likely to arise in those seditious times, and who broke up their watch some hours before daybreak, thereby giving encouragement to thieves and robbers. He therefore desired that the number of men should be increased, that only able men should be appointed, and that the watch should continue until daybreak.1237

Election of Sir John Frederick, mayor, 29 Sept., 1661.

On Michaelmas-day Sir Richard Browne was succeeded in the mayoralty chair by Sir John Frederick.1238The banquet of the mayor and sheriffs, which had been allowed to drop in the time of trouble and scarceness, was again held at the Guildhall,1239and the new mayor revived the ancient custom of visiting St. Paul's on the day of his taking the oath of office, and offering a prayer for the soul of the good bishop by whose kind offices the citizens obtained their first charter from the Conqueror.1240Charles did not attend[pg 398]the banquet which took place on the 29th October, but viewed the pageants on lord mayor's day from the windows of a private house in Cheapside, where he was supplied with refreshments at the City's charge.1241

Back to Index Next