(M176)
Although the aldermen had been prevailed upon to give their assent to
Hervy's election to the mayoralty, his democratic tendencies made him an
object of dislike, more especially to Fitz-Thomas. When, therefore, that
chronicler records that throughout Hervy's year of office he did not allow
any pleading in the Husting for Pleas of Land except very rarely, for the
reason that the mayor himself was defendant in a suit brought against him
by Isabella Bukerel,(280) we hesitate to place implicit belief in his
statement.(281) We are inclined, moreover, to give less credit to anything
that Fitz-Thedmar may say against the mayor when we bear in mind that the
former had a personal grievance against the latter.(282)
(M177)
Hervy was a worthy successor to Fitz-Thomas, and, under his government,
the craft guilds improved their position. Fresh ordinances for the
regulation of various crafts were drawn up, and to these the mayor, on his
own responsibility, attached the city seal.(283) When Hervy's year of
office expired--these so-called "charters" were called in question as
having been unauthorised by the aldermen of the city and as tending to
favour the richer members of the guilds to the prejudice of the poorer.
After a "wordy and most abusive dispute" carried on in the Guildhall
between the ex-mayor and Gregory de Rokesley who acted as spokesman for
the body of aldermen, Hervy left the hall and summoned the craft-guilds to
meet him in Cheapside. There he told them that it was the wish of Henry le
Galeys (or Waleys) the mayor and others to infringe their charters, but
that if they could stand by him he would maintain those charters in all
their integrity.
Fearing lest a riot might follow, the chancellor--Walter de Merton, through
whose mediation Hervy had been at last accepted as mayor by the
aldermen--ordered his arrest. This was on the 20th December, 1273. Hervy
was, accordingly, attached but released on bail, and early in the
following January (1274), his charters were duly examined in the Husting
before all the people, and declared void. Thenceforth, every man was to
enjoy the utmost freedom in following his calling, always provided that
his work was good and lawful.(284)
(M178)
When the mayor removed certain butchers' and fishmongers' stalls from
Cheapside, in order that the main thoroughfare of the city might present a
creditable appearance to the king on his return from abroad, the owners of
the stalls, who complained of being disturbed in their freeholds--"having
given to the sheriff a great sum of money for the same"--found a champion
in Hervy. Their cause was pleaded at the Guildhall, and such "a wordy
strife" arose between Hervy and the mayor, that the session had to be
broken up, and Hervy's conduct was reported to the king's council. The
next day, upon the resumption of the session, a certain roll was produced
and publicly read, in which "the presumptuous acts and injuries, of most
notorious character" which Hervy was alleged to have committed during his
mayoralty were set forth at length.
(M179) (M180)
The charges against him were eight in number, of which some at least
appear to be in the last degree frivolous. He had on a certain occasion
borne false witness; he had failed on another occasion to attend at
Westminster upon a summons; he had failed to observe all the assizes made
by the aldermen and had allowed ale to be sold in his ward for three
halfpence a gallon; he had taken bribes for allowing corn and wine to be
taken out of the city for sale, and he had misappropriated a sum of money
which had been raised for a special purpose. Such was the general run of
the charges brought against him, in addition to which were the charges of
having permitted the guilds to make new statutes to their own advantage
and to the loss of the city and all the realm, as already narrated, and of
having procured "certain persons of the city, of Stebney, of Stratford,
and of Hakeneye" to make an unjust complaint against the mayor, "who had
warranty sufficient for what he had done, namely, the council of his
lordship the king." This last charge had reference to the recent removal
of tradesmen's stalls from Chepe. No defence appears to have been allowed
Hervy. The charges were read, and he was then and there declared to be
"judicially degraded from his aldermanry and for ever excluded from the
council of the city"; a precept being at the same time issued for the
immediate election of a successor, to be presented at the next court.(285)
(M181)
From this time forward nothing more is heard of Hervy. The same cloud
envelopes his later history, that gathered round the last years of his
predecessor and political tutor Thomas Fitz-Thomas. The misfortune of both
of these men was that they lived before their age. Their works bore fruit
long after they had departed. The trade or craft guilds, as distinguished
from the more wealthy and influential mercantile guilds, eventually played
an important part in the city. Under Edward II, no stranger could obtain
the freedom of the city (without which, he could do little or nothing),
unless he became a member of one of these guilds, or sought the suffrages
of the commonalty of the city, before admission to the freedom in the
Court of Husting.(286)
The normal and more expeditious way of obtaining the freedom was thus
through a guild. If Hervy or Fitz-Thomas lived till the year 1319, when
the Ordinances just cited received the king's sanction, he must have felt
that the struggle he had made to raise the lesser guilds had not been in
vain. The mercantile element in the city, which had formerly overcome the
aristocratic element,(287) in its turn gave way to the numerical
superiority and influence of the craft and manufacturing element. Hence it
was that in 1376--when the number of trade or craft guilds in the city
compared with the larger mercantile guilds was as forty to eight--the
guilds succeeded in wresting for a while from the wards the right of
electing members of the city's council.(288)
(M182)
In the meantime, King Edward I, arrived in London (18th August, 1274),
where he was heartily welcomed by the citizens,(289) and was crowned the
following day. He had expected to have returned much earlier, and had
addressed a letter to the mayor, sheriffs, and commonalty of the City of
London, eighteen months before, informing them of his purposed speedy
return, and of his wishes that they should endeavour to preserve the peace
of the realm.(290) He was, however, detained in France.
(M183)
Edward's right to succeed his father was never disputed. For the first
time in the annals of England, a new king commences to reign immediately
after the death of his predecessor. _Le Roi est mort, vive le_ _Roi_!
Within a week of his father's decease, a writ was issued, in which the
hereditary right of succession was distinctly asserted as forming Edward's
title to the crown.(291)
(M184)
Before setting sail for England, Edward despatched a letter (3rd April),
"to his well-beloved, the mayor, barons, and reputable men of London,"
thanking them for the preparations he understood they were making for the
ceremony of his coronation, and bidding them send a deputation of four of
the more discreet of the citizens, to him at Paris, for the purpose of a
special conference.(292)
(M185)
The difficulty which gave rise to this conference and to the signal mark
of distinction bestowed upon the citizens of London, proved to be of a
commercial character, and, as such, one upon which the opinions of the
leading merchants of London would be of especial value. Ever since the
year 1270, the commercial relationship between England and Flanders had
been strained. The Countess of Flanders had thought fit to lay hands upon
the wool and other merchandise belonging to English merchants found within
her dominions, and to appropriate the same to her own use. Edward's
predecessor on the throne had thereupon issued a writ to the mayor and
sheriffs of London, forbidding in future the export of wool to any parts
beyond sea whatsoever,(293) but this measure not having the desired
effect, he shortly afterwards had recourse to reprisals.
On the 28th June, 1270, a writ had been issued to the same parties
ordering them to seize the goods of all Flemings, Hainaulters, and other
subjects of the Countess, for the purpose of satisfying the claims of
English merchants; and all subjects of the Countess, except those workmen
who had received express permission to come to England for the purpose of
making cloth, and those who had taken to themselves English wives, and had
obtained a domicile in this country, were to quit the realm by a certain
date.(294) Those Flemings who neglected this injunction were to be seized
and kept in custody until further orders, and the same measures were to be
taken with those who harboured them. In the meantime, an inquisition was
ordered to be made as to the amount and value of the goods seized by the
Countess, and the English merchants were to lodge their respective claims
for compensation.
(M186)
The interruption of trade between England--at that time the chief
wool-exporting country in the world--and Flanders where the cloth-working
industry especially flourished, caused much tribulation; and the King of
France, the Duke of Brabant, and other foreign potentates, whose subjects
began to feel the effect of this commercial disturbance, addressed letters
to the King of England, requesting that their merchants might enter his
realm and stay, and traffic there as formerly. They had never offended the
King or his people; the Countess of Flanders was the sole offender, and
she alone ought to be punished. The matter having received due
consideration, the embargo on the export of wool was taken off with
respect to all countries, except Flanders, with the proviso that no wool
should be exported out of the kingdom without special license from the
king.(295)
By the month of October, 1271, the inquisitors, who had been appointed to
appraise the goods and chattels of Flemings in England, were able to
report to parliament that their value amounted to L8,000 "together with
the king's debt," whilst the value of merchandise belonging to English
merchants and seized by the countess amounted to L7,000, besides chattels
of other merchants. Parliament again sat in January of the new year to
consider the claims of English merchants, when those whose goods had been
taken in Flanders, "and the Londoners more especially," appeared in
person. Each stated the amount of his loss and the amount of goods
belonging to Flemings which he had in hand, and a balance was struck. An
inquisition was, at the same time, taken in each of the city wards, as to
the number of merchants who bought, sold, exchanged, or harboured the
goods of persons belonging to the dominion of the Countess; and also as to
who had taken wools out of England to the parts beyond the sea, contrary
to the king's prohibition.(296) Many Flemings, still lurking in the city,
were arrested, and only liberated on condition they abjured the realm so
long as the dispute between England and Flanders should continue. Nearly
six months elapsed before any further steps were taken by either party in
the strife. The Countess then showed signs of giving way. Envoys from her
arrived in England. She was willing to make satisfaction to all English
merchants for the losses they had sustained, but this was to be subject to
the condition that the king should bind himself to discharge certain
alleged debts, which had been the cause of all the mischief from the
outset, within a fixed time. In the event of the king failing to discharge
these claims, the justice of which he never recognised, the Countess was
to be allowed to distrain all persons coming into her country from England
by their bodies and their goods, until satisfaction should be made for
arrears. This haughty message only made matters worse. The king and his
council became indignant, and contemptuously dismissed the envoys,
commanding them to leave England within three days on peril of life and
limb.(297)
(M187)
Time went on; Henry died, and before his son Edward arrived in England
from the Holy Land to take up the reins of government, his chancellor,
Walter de Merton, had caused a proclamation to be made throughout the
city, forbidding any Fleming to enter the kingdom, under penalty of
forfeiture of person and goods. The proclamation was more than ordinarily
stringent, for it went on to say that if perchance any individual had
received special permission from the late king to sojourn and to trade
within the realm, such permission was no longer to hold good, but the
foreigner was to pack up his merchandise, collect his debts, and leave the
country by Christmas, 1273, at the latest.(298)
(M188)
The Countess had probably hoped that a change of monarch on the English
throne would have favoured her cause. This proclamation was sufficient to
show her the character of the king with whom she had in future to deal,
and destroyed any hope she may have entertained in this direction. She
therefore took the opportunity of Edward's passing through Paris to
London, to open negotiations for the purpose of restoring peace between
England and Flanders; and it was to assist the king in conducting these
negotiations, that he had summoned a deputation of citizens of London to
meet him at Paris.
(M189)
The choice of the citizens fell upon Henry le Waleys, their mayor for the
time being, one who was known almost as well in France as in the city of
London, if we may judge from the fact of his filling the office of Mayor
of Bordeaux in the following year. With him were chosen Gregory de
Rokesley who, besides being a large dealer in wool, was also a goldsmith
and financier, and as such was shortly to be appointed master of the
exchange throughout England;(299) John Horn, whose name bespeaks his
Flemish origin,(300) and who may on that account have been appointed, as
one who was intimate with both sides of the question under discussion; and
Luke de Batencurt, also of foreign extraction, who was one of the Sheriffs
of London this same year.
(M190)
These four accordingly set out to confer with the king at Paris, having
previously seen to the appointment of wardens over the city, and of
magistrates to determine complaints which might arise at the fair to be
held at St. Botolph's, or Boston, in Lincolnshire, during their
absence.(301) The deputation were absent a month. On the 19th July,
Gregory de Rokesle and certain others whose names are not mentioned again
set out in compliance with orders received from the king; the object of
their journey being, as we are expressly told, to treat of peace between
the king and the Countess of Flanders at Montreuil.(302) A month later
Edward himself was in England.
(M191)
The king ruled the city, as indeed he ruled the rest of the kingdom, with
a strong hand. Londoners had already experienced the force of his arm and
his ability in the field, when he scattered them at Lewes; they were now
to experience the benefit of his powers of organization in time of peace.
Fitz-Thedmar's chronicle now fails us, but we have a new source of
information in the letter books(303) of the Corporation.
(M192)
The first and the most pressing difficulty which presented itself to
Edward, was the re-organization of finance. Without money the barons could
not be kept within legitimate bounds. Having won their cause against the
usurpations of the crown, they began to turn their arms upon each other,
and it required Edward's strong hand not only to impose order upon his
unruly nobles, but also, to bring Scotland and Wales into submission. The
country was flooded with clipt coin. This was called in, and new money
minted at the Tower, under the supervision of Gregory de Rokesley as
Master of the Exchange.(304) Parliament made large grants to the king; and
he further increased his resources by imposing knighthood upon all
freeholders of estates worth L20 a year.(305) When the Welsh war was
renewed in 1282, the city sent him 6,000 marks by the hands of Waleys and
Rokesley.(306)
(M193)
In 1283 an extraordinary assembly--styled a parliament by some
chroniclers--was summoned to meet at Shrewsbury to attend the trial of
David, brother of Llewelyn, Prince of Wales. To this so-called parliament
the city sent no less than six representatives, viz.: Henry le Waleys, the
mayor, Gregory de Rokesley, Philip Cissor, or the tailor, Ralph Crepyn,
Joce le Acatour, or merchant, and John de Gisors.(307) Their names are
worthy of record, inasmuch as they are the first known representatives of
the city in any assembly deserving the name of a parliament, the names of
those attending Simon de Montfort's parliament not having been transmitted
to us. David was convicted and barbarously executed, his head being
afterwards carried to London, and set up on the Tower, where his brother's
head, with a mock crown of ivy, had recently been placed.(308)
(M194)
Of Ralph Crepyn, one of the city's representatives at Shrewsbury, a tragic
story is told. Meeting, one day, Laurence Duket, his rival in the
affections of a woman known as "Alice atte Bowe," the two came to blows,
and Crepyn was wounded. The affray took place in Cheapside, and Duket,
fearing he had killed his man, sought sanctuary in Bow Church. Crepyn's
friends, hearing of the matter, followed and having killed Duket, disposed
of their victim's body in such a way as to suggest suicide. It so
happened, however, that the sacrilegious murder had been witnessed by a
boy who informed against the culprits and no less than sixteen persons
were hanged for the part they had taken in it. Alice, herself, was
condemned to be burnt alive as being the chief instigator of the murder;
others, including Ralph Crepyn, were sent to the Tower, and only released
on payment of heavy fines.(309) The church was placed under interdict, the
doors and windows being filled with thorns until purification had been
duly made. Duket's remains, which had been interred as those of a suicide,
were afterwards taken up and received the rights of Christian burial in
Bow Churchyard.
(M195)
The year 1285 was a memorable one both for London and the kingdom. It
witnessed the passing of two important statutes. In the first place the
statute _De Donis_ legalised the principle of tying up real estate, so as
to descend, in an exclusive perpetual line; in other words, it sanctioned
entails, and its effect is still experienced at the present day in every
ordinary settlement of land. In the next place the Assise of Arms of Henry
II was improved so as to secure for the king a national support in the
time of danger. In every hundred and franchise each man's armour was to be
viewed twice a year; and defaults reported to the king "who would find a
remedy." The gates of walled towns were to be closed from sun-set to
sun-rise, and watch and ward were to be kept as strictly as in times past,
"that is to wit, from the day of the Ascension until the day of S.
Michael, in every city by six men at every gate; in every borough, twelve
men; every town, six or four, according to the number of the inhabitants
of the town, and they shall watch the town continually all night from the
sun-setting unto the sun-rising."(310) Three years previous to the passing
of this statute the mayor, alderman and chamberlain had made very similar
provisions for the keeping of the City of London, the city's gates, and
the river Thames.(311)
(M196)
For the city, the year was a memorable one, owing to the suspension of its
franchise. The circumstances which caused the loss of its liberties for a
period of thirteen years (1285-1298) were these. The king's justiciars
were sitting at the Tower, where the mayor, sheriffs, and aldermen of the
city had been summoned to attend. Owing to some informality in the
summons, Gregory de Rokesley, the Mayor, declined to attend in his
official capacity, but formally "deposed himself" at the Church of All
Hallows Barking--the limit of the city jurisdiction-- by handing the city's
seal to Stephen Aswy or Eswy, a brother alderman. On entering the chamber
where sat the justiciars, the mayor excused his unofficial appearance on
the ground of insufficient notice. This was not what the justiciars had
been accustomed to. On the contrary, the citizens had usually shown
studied respect towards the justiciars whenever they came to the Tower for
the purpose of holding pleas of the crown.
(M197)
The rules of procedure on such occasions are fully set out in the city's
"Liber Albus,"(312) and they contain, curiously enough, a provision
expressly made for cases where the full notice of forty days had not been
given. In such an event the prescribed rule was to send some of their more
discreet citizens to the king and his council to ask for the appointment
of another day. Whether Rokesley had taken this step before resorting to
the measures he did we are not told. It was also the custom on such
occasions for the citizens to gather at Barking Church, clothed in their
best apparel, and thence proceed in a body to the Tower. A deputation was
appointed--selected members of the common council--who should also proceed
to the Tower for the purpose of giving an official welcome to the
justiciars on behalf of the citizens. It was not thought to be in any way
derogatory to secure the goodwill of the king's justiciars by making ample
presents. It had been done time out of mind. The sheriffs and aldermen
were to attend with their respective sergeants and beadles, the benches at
the Tower were to be examined beforehand and necessary repairs carried
out, all shops were to be closed and no business transacted during the
session. In a word, everything was to be done that could add to the
dignity of the justiciars and the solemnity of the occasion. In contrast
with all this, Rokesley's conduct was indeed strange, and leads us to
suppose that his action was caused by some other and stronger reason than
the mere omission to give the usual notice of the coming of the king's
justiciars.
(M198)
Be this as it may, the king's treasurer, who may possibly have been
forewarned of what was about to take place, at once decided what course to
take. He declared the city to be there and then taken into the king's
hands, on the pretext that it was found to be without a mayor, and he
summoned the citizens to appear on the morrow before the king at
Westminster. When the morrow came, the citizens duly appeared, and about
eighty of them were detained. Those who accompanied Rokesley to Barking
Church on the previous day were confined in the Tower, but after a few
days they were all set at liberty, with the exception of Stephen Aswy, who
was removed in custody to Windsor.(313)
(M199)
The king appointed Ralph de Sandwich _custos_ or warden of the city,
enjoining him at the same time to observe the liberties and customs of the
citizens, and for the next thirteen years (1285-1298) the city continued
to be governed by a warden in the person of Sandwich or of John le Breton,
whilst the sheriffs were sometimes appointed by the Exchequer and
sometimes chosen by the citizens.(314)
(M200)
In May, 1286, the king went to Gascony, leaving the country in charge of
his nephew, Edmund, Earl of Cornwall, and did not return until August,
1289. He was then in sore straits for money, as was so often the case with
him, and was glad of a present of L1,000 which the citizens offered by way
of courtesy (_curialitas_). The money was ordered (14th October) to be
levied by poll,(315) but many of the inhabitants were so poor that they
could only find pledges for future payment, and these pledges were
afterwards sold for what they would fetch.(316) A twelve-month later
(October, 1290) when Edward visited London, he was fain to be content with
the smaller sum of 1,000 marks.(317)
(M201)
The expulsion of the Jews in 1290 increased Edward's difficulties, for on
them he chiefly depended for replenishing his empty exchequer. Their
expulsion was not so much his own wish as the wish of his subjects, who,
being largely in debt to the Jews, regarded them as cruel tyrants. The
nation soon discovered that it had made a mistake in thus getting rid of
its creditors, for in the absence of the Jews, Edward was compelled to
resort to the Lombard merchants. It may possibly have been owing to some
monetary transactions between them that the king was solicitous of getting
a life interest in the city's Small Beam made over to a lady known as
Jacobina la Lumbard. No particulars are known of this lady, but to judge
from her name she probably came of a family of money-lenders, and if so,
the king's action in writing from Berwick (28th June, 1291) to the warden
and aldermen of the city--at a time when he was completely in the hands of
the Italian goldsmiths and money-lenders--soliciting for her a more or less
lucrative post is easily intelligible.(318) The king's request was
refused, notwithstanding the city being at the time in charge of a
_custos_ of his own choice instead of a mayor elected by the citizens
themselves. Such requests produced friction between the king and the city,
and the former's financial relations with the foreign merchants were
fraught with danger to himself and to his son.(319)
(M202)
Edward's anxiety was in the meanwhile increased by domestic troubles. In
1290 he suffered a bitter disappointment by the death of a Scottish
princess who was affianced to his son, the Prince of Wales, and thus a
much-cherished plan for establishing friendly relations between the two
countries was frustrated. But this disappointment was quickly cast in the
shade by the more severe affliction he suffered in the loss of his wife.
In November Queen Eleanor died. Her corpse was brought from Lincoln to
Westminster, and the bereaved husband ordered a memorial cross to be set
up at each place where her body rested. One of these crosses was erected
at the west end of Cheapside. After the Reformation the images with which
the cross was ornamented, like the image of Becket set over the gate of
the Mercers' Chapel, roused the anger of the iconoclast, who took delight
in defacing them.
(M203)
Time only increased the king's pecuniary difficulties. In February, 1292,
all freeholders of land of the annual value of L40 were ordered to receive
knighthood, and in the following January the estates of defaulters were
seized by the king's orders.(320) In June, 1294, war was declared against
France. Money must be had. Every monastery and every church throughout
England was ransacked for treasure, and the sum of L2,000, found in St.
Paul's Church, was appropriated for the public service.(321) The dean was
seized with a fit (_subita percussus passione_) and died in the king's
presence.(322)
(M204)
Instead of invading France, Edward found his own shores devastated by a
French fleet, whilst at the same time his hands were full with fresh
difficulties from Scotland and Wales. In the summer of 1295, the city
furnished the king with three ships, the cost being defrayed by a tax of
twopence in the pound charged on chattels and merchandise. John le Breton,
then warden, advanced the sum of L40, which the aldermen and six men of
each ward undertook to repay.(323) In the following year (1296) the city
agreed, after some little hesitation, to furnish forty men with
caparisoned horses, and fifty arbalesters for the defence of the south
coast, under the king's son, Edward of Carnarvon.(324)
(M205)
Edward again turned his attention to Scotland, and, having succeeded in
reducing Balliol to submission, he carried off from Scone the stone which
legend identifies with Jacob's pillow, and on which the Scottish kings had
from time immemorial been crowned,(325) By Edward's order the stone was
enclosed in a stately seat, and placed in Westminster Abbey, where it has
since served as the coronation chair of English sovereigns.
(M206)
From Berwick Edward issued (26 Aug., 1296,) writs for a Parliament to meet
at Bury St. Edmund's, in the following November. The constitution of this
Parliament was the same as that which had met at Westminster in November
of the previous year (1295) and which was intended to serve as a model
parliament, a pattern for all future national assemblies. The city was
represented by two aldermen, namely, Sir Stephen Aswy, or Eswy, who had
been confined in Windsor Castle ten years before for his conduct towards
the king's justiciars at the Tower, and Sir William de Hereford.(326) From
this time forward down to the present day we have little difficulty in
discovering from one source or another the names of the city's
representatives in successive parliaments. Edward, of course, wanted
money. The barons and knights increased their former grants; so also did
the burgesses. The clergy, on the other hand, declared themselves unable
to make any grant at all in the face of a papal prohibition,(327) and the
king was at last driven to seize the lay fees of the clergy of the
province of Canterbury. In the spring of the following year he proceeded
to seize all the wool of the country, paying for it by tallies, and to
levy a supply of provisions on the counties. The act was only justifiable
on the plea of necessity, and led to measures being taken to prevent its
repetition.(328)
(M207)
It was an easier matter for Edward to raise money than to get the barons
to accompany him abroad. To leave them behind was to risk the peace of the
country. He therefore spared no efforts to persuade them to join in a
projected expedition, and when persuasion failed tried threats. It was his
desire that the barons should go to Gascony, whilst he took the command in
Flanders. This was not at all to the taste of the barons, who declined to
go abroad, except in the personal retinue of the king himself. "With you,
O king," said Roger Bigod, "I will gladly go; as belongs to me by
hereditary right, I will go in front of the host, before your face;" but
without the king he positively declined to move. "By God, earl," cried the
king, fairly roused by the obstinacy of his vassal, "you shall either go
or hang;" to which the earl replied, with equal determination, "By the
same token, O king, I will neither go nor hang."(329)
Nothing daunted, the king issued writs (15 May) for a military levy of the
whole kingdom for service abroad, to meet at London on the 7th July, a
measure as unconstitutional as the seizure of wool and the levying of
taxes without the assent of Parliament. On the day appointed, the barons,
who had received a large accession of strength from the great vassals,
appeared with their forces at St. Paul's; but instead of complying with
the king's demands--or rather requests, for the king had altered his
tone--they prepared a list of their grievances.
(M208)
With difficulty civil war was avoided, and in August Edward set sail for
Flanders. No sooner was his back turned, than the barons and the Londoners
made common cause in insisting upon a confirmation and amplification of
their charters.(330) Prince Edward, the king's son, who had been appointed
regent in his father's absence, granted all that was asked, and on the
10th October (1297), the _Confirmatio Cartarum_, as it was called, was
issued in the king's name.(331) Thenceforth, no customs duties were to be
exacted without the consent of parliament.
(M209)
In view of the king's return to England in March (1298), the warden of the
city, Sir John Breton, the aldermen, and a deputation from the wards met
together and resolved that every inhabitant of the city, citizen and
stranger, should pay to the king's collectors the sum of sixpence in the
pound of all their goods up to L100.(332) In the following month Edward
issued letters patent (11th April), restoring to the citizens their
franchises and the right of again electing their mayor.(333) The choice of
the citizens fell upon Henry le Waleys, who was duly admitted by the
Barons of the Exchequer after presentation to the king.(334)
(M210)
In the summer Edward marched to Scotland for the purpose of putting down
the rising under Wallace. An account of the battle of Falkirk, fought on
the 22nd July, was conveyed to the mayor, aldermen, and "barons" of
London, by letter from Walter Langton, Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry,
or, as he was then styled, Bishop of Chester, who wrote as an eye-witness,
if not indeed as a partaker in that day's work.(335) It was the first
battle of any consequence in which the English long-bow was brought into
prominence. Edward's victory was complete. The enemy's loss was great, the
number that perished, according to the bishop's information, being two
hundred men-at-arms and twenty thousand foot soldiers. Edward was unable,
however, to follow up his success for want of supplies, and so retreated.
In 1304, he again marched northward, notwithstanding the defection of many
nobles. He had previously resorted once more to the questionable practice
of talliaging the city of London,(336) levying from the citizens the
fifteenth penny of their moveable goods and the tenth penny of their
rents.(337) The campaign was eminently successful. Sterling surrendered
after a siege of two months, and Wallace himself shortly afterwards fell
into his hands, having refused the terms of an amnesty which Edward had
generously offered.
(M211)
He was carried to London, where a crowd of men and women flocked out to
meet one, of whose gigantic stature and feats of strength they had heard
so much. He was lodged in the house of William de Leyre, an alderman of
the city, situate in the parish of All Hallows at the Hay or All Hallows
the Great. Having been tried at Westminster and condemned to death on
charges of treason, sacrilege and robbery, he was hanged, drawn, and
quartered, and his head set up on London Bridge.(338)
(M212)
No sooner was Wallace disposed of than another claimant to the Scottish
crown appeared in the person of Bruce. Before Edward took the field
against the new foe, he conferred knighthood upon his son and nearly three
hundred others, including John le Blound the mayor. The number of knights
within the small compass of the city was reckoned at that time to be not
less than a thousand.(339) Knighthood, as we have seen, was one of the
means Edward resorted to for raising money, and on this occasion the
citizens of London are said to have made him a free gift of L2,000, in
recognition of the honour bestowed on their mayor.(340)
(M213)
In the summer of 1307, Edward set out to execute the vow of vengeance
against Bruce that he had made on the occasion of the knighthood of his
son, but the hand of death was upon him, and before lie reached the
Scottish border he died (7th July).