(M258)
Edward III was only fourteen years of age when he succeeded to the throne.
For the first three years of his reign the government of the country was
practically in the hands of Mortimer, his mother's paramour; and it was no
doubt by his advice and that of the queen-mother that the young king
rewarded the citizens of London, who had shown him so much favour, by
granting them not only a general pardon(423) for offences committed since
he set foot in England in September, 1326, but also a charter confirming
and enlarging their ancient liberties.(424)
This latter charter, which has been held to be of the force of an Act of
Parliament,(425) established (among other things) the ferm of the
Sheriffwick of London and Middlesex at the original sum of L300 per annum,
instead of the increased rental of L400 which had been paid since
1270;(426) it appointed the mayor one of the justices at the gaol delivery
of Newgate, as well as the king's escheator of felon's goods within the
city; it gave the citizens the right of devising real estate within the
city; it restored to them all the privileges they had enjoyed before the
memorable Iter of the last reign; and granted to them a monopoly of
markets within a circuit of seven miles of the city.(427) These two
charters--the charter of pardon and the charter of liberties--together with
another charter(428) releasing the citizens from all debts due to the late
king, were publicly read and explained in English to the citizens
assembled at the Guildhall by Andrew Horn, the Chamberlain, on the 9th
March.(429)
(M259)
Scarcely was he knighted and crowned king before necessity compelled him
to take the field against the Scots. The Londoners were, as usual, called
upon to supply a contingent towards the forces which had been ordered to
assemble at Newcastle-upon-Tyne.(430) They responded to the king's appeal
by sending 100 horsemen fully equipped, each one supplied with the sum of
100 shillings at least for expenses, and a further contingent of 100
foot-men. They made their rendezvous at West Smithfield, whence they
proceeded to "la Barnette."(431)
(M260)
Whilst furnishing this aid to the king the citizens were anxious that
their liberality should not be misconstrued, or tend to establish a
precedent in derogation of their chartered privileges. Their fears on this
score were set at rest by the receipt of letters patent from the king
declaring that their proceedings on this occasion should not be to their
prejudice.(432)
(M261)
A parliament held in September, at Lincoln, in which the citizens were
represented by Benedict de Fulsham and Robert de Kelseye,(433) granted the
king an aid of a twentieth to defray expenses; and Hamo de Chigwell, among
others, was appointed by the king to collect the tax from the
citizens.(434)
(M262)
The City's representatives were accompanied to Lincoln by the mayor,
Richard de Betoyne, who was the bearer of letters under the seal of the
commonalty addressed to the king, the queen, and members of the king's
council praying that the courts of King's Bench and Exchequer might not be
removed from Westminster to York.(435) The removal was inconvenient to the
city merchants, whatever advantage might accrue to those dwelling in the
north of England. Negotiations between the City and the king on this
subject were protracted for some weeks; the king at length promising that
the courts should return to Westminster as soon as the country was in a
more settled state.(436)
(M263)
The campaign against the Scots brought little credit to either side, and
terminated in a treaty, the terms of which were for the most part arranged
by Mortimer and the queen-mother. One of the articles of peace stipulated
for the surrender of all proofs of the subjection of Scotland; and
accordingly the abbot of Westminster received orders to deliver up the
stone of Scone to the Sheriffs of London for transmission to Isabel, who
was in the north.(437) This the abbot refused to do--"for reasons touching
God and the church,"--without further instructions from the king and his
council.(438)
When negotiations were opened in 1363 for the union of the kingdoms of
England and Scotland, it was proposed that Edward should be crowned king
at Scone on the royal seat (_siege roial_) which he should cause to be
returned from England. These negotiations, however, fell through, and the
stone remains in Westminster Abbey to this day.(439)
The treaty which had been arranged at Edinburgh (17 March, 1328), was
afterwards confirmed by a Parliament held at Northampton, in which the
city was represented by Richard de Betoyne and Robert de Kelseye.(440)
(M264)
When the terms of this treaty of Northampton (as it was called) came to be
fully understood, the nation began to realise the measure of disgrace
which they involved, and Mortimer and the queen became the objects of
bitter hatred. Henry, Earl of Lancaster, the king's nominal guardian, had
grown weary of his false position, and of serving only as Mortimer's tool.
Determined to throw off the yoke, he refused to attend a parliament which
met at Salisbury in October (1328),(441) unless certain changes in the
government and in the king's household were first made. In the meantime,
Bishop Stratford of Winchester and Thomas, Lord Wake, two of his
supporters, had paid a visit to the city and had endeavoured to rouse the
citizens to action. The king, hearing of this, wrote to the municipal
authorities for an explanation. They frankly acknowledged, in reply, that
the bishop had been in the city for the purpose of discussing the ill
state of affairs, and themselves expressed a hope, amid vows of the utmost
loyalty, that the king would redress the grievances under which the nation
suffered.(442)
(M265)
Instead of attending the parliament at Salisbury, the earl marched in full
force to Winchester. On the 5th November he wrote to the citizens from
Hungerford, to the effect that he had made known to parliament his
honourable intentions, but had received no reply; that the parliament had
been adjourned to London; that he had been informed of certain matters
about which he could not write, but which the bearer would communicate to
them; and he concluded with assuring them that he desired nothing so much
as the king's honour and the welfare of the kingdom, and declaring his
implicit confidence in their loyalty.(443)
(M266)
The mayor of the city at this time was John de Grantham. His election had
taken place but recently, and was the result of a compromise. Chigwell,
who had again been chosen mayor at the expiration of Betoyne's year of
office in 1327, was a decided favourite with the citizens, notwithstanding
a certain want of firmness of character, and he was again put up as a
candidate for the mayoralty in October, 1328. He had enemies, of course.
Towards the close of his last mayoralty he was ill-advised enough to sit
in judgment upon a brother alderman on a charge of having abused him two
years previously. During the troublous times of 1326, John de Cotun,
alderman of Walbrook ward, was alleged to have described Chigwell, who was
then mayor, as "the vilest worm that had been in the city for twenty
years," adding that the city would know no peace so long as Chigwell was
alive, and that it would be a blessing if he lost his head.(444) After
some hard swearing on both sides, leading to the discovery of bad blood
existing between the informer and the alderman, the charge was dismissed.
At the outset it appeared that Chigwell's reelection was assured; but the
city as well as the country was in a disturbed state, and political
reasons may have led to an endeavour to force another candidate in the
person of Benedict de Fulsham over his head. Be that as it may, it is
certain that when Chigwell's name was proposed to the assembled citizens
at the Guildhall, the cry was raised of "Fulsham! Fulsham!" So high did
party spirit run, that the election had to be postponed, and eventually it
was thought best that both candidates should be withdrawn. This having
been done, the choice of the electors fell on John de Grantham, a
pepperer.(445)
(M267)
On the 8th November the new mayor despatched a letter to the king,
expressing the joy of the city at the news of a proposed visit, and the
prospect of the next parliament being held in London. His majesty might be
assured of the city's loyalty.(446) Four days later (12 November), Edward
despatched a messenger from Reading with a letter to John de Grantham,
bidding him cause a deputation to be nominated for the purpose of
proceeding to Windsor. The messenger arrived late on Sunday evening, and
the deputation was to be at Windsor on the following Tuesday. A meeting
was therefore summoned on Monday, when six aldermen and six commoners were
nominated to meet the king. On Thursday the deputation returned and
reported the result of the interview. It appears that Edward had
complained to the deputation of armed men having left the city to join the
earl at Winchester. He was also desirous to know if the city was in a
proper state of defence and the king's peace preserved therein. On these
points the mayor endeavoured to satisfy him by letter of the 18th
November. As to armed men having left the city for Winchester, his majesty
was informed that none had so left with the knowledge of the municipal
authorities, and if any should be found to have done so, they would most
assuredly be punished.(447)
(M268)
Early in December the king and queen came to London, accompanied by the
queen-mother and Mortimer, and took up their quarters at Westminster. The
whole of the city went forth to welcome them, and they were made the
recipients of valuable gifts. Their stay, however, lasted but one short
week.(448)
(M269)
By the 16th the king was at Gloucester, where he wrote to the Mayor of
London, enclosing a copy of particulars of all that had passed between
himself and the Earl of Lancaster--the charges made by the earl and his own
replies--in order, as he said, that the citizens might judge for themselves
of the rights of the quarrel between them. These particulars, the mayor
was desired to have publicly read at the Guildhall.(449) This was
accordingly done (20 Dec.), in the presence of some of the earl's
supporters, who took the opportunity of explaining the earl's
position.(450)
(M270)
Whilst notifying the king that his wishes had been complied with, the
mayor and commonalty besought him that all measures of hostility between
himself and the barons might be suspended until parliament should meet.
The city became the headquarters of the dissatisfied bishops and nobles.
The Sunday before Christmas, the pulpit in St. Paul's was occupied by the
primate, who was equally anxious with the civic authorities that matters
should be left to be adjusted by parliament.(451)
(M271)
The barons in the city, in the meanwhile, awaited the arrival of the Earl
of Lancaster. On New Year's day he came, and on the 2nd January (1329) a
conference of bishops and barons took place at St. Paul's.(452) The
futility of an attempt to form a confederation soon became apparent. The
city stood fast to the king; some of the barons wavered, and nothing was
left to Lancaster but to make the best terms he could. Edward had already
offered pardon to all who should submit before the 7th January, with
certain exceptions.(453)
(M272)
Now that the king, or rather, we should say, Mortimer, was once more
master of the situation, the citizens who had favoured the constitutional
party became the objects of retribution. On Sunday, the 22nd January
(1329), the mayor and twenty-four citizens were ordered to meet the king
at St. Albans. They returned on the following Thursday with instructions
to see if the city was prepared to punish those who had favoured
Lancaster. No sooner were the king's wishes made known, than an enquiry
was at once set on foot. On Wednesday (1st February), the deputation
returned to the king, who was then at Windsor, to report the sense of the
city; and on the following Sunday (4th February), the king's justices
commenced to sit at the Guildhall for the trial of those implicated in the
late abortive attempt to overthrow Mortimer. Three days were consumed in
preliminary proceedings; and it was not until Wednesday (8th February)
that the real business of the session commenced. By that time the king
himself had come to London, and had taken up his headquarters at the
Tower, having passed through the city accompanied by his consort, the
queen-mother, and many of the nobility.(454) It does not appear that
Mortimer came with them.
(M273)
Among those who were brought to trial at the Guildhall was Chigwell. He
was accused of being implicated in the abduction of the Abbot of Bury St.
Edmunds, and of feloniously receiving two silver basins as his share of
the plunder. Being convicted, he claimed the benefit of clergy, and the
Bishop of London, after some delay, was allowed to take possession of him
on the ground that he was a clerk. His life was thus saved and he was
conveyed to the episcopal prison amid general regret, although, as we have
already seen, he was not a universal favourite. "Many said, he is a good
man; others, nay, but he deceiveth the people."(455) He was kept for some
months in honourable confinement at the bishop's manor of Orset, co.
Essex, and early in 1330 was admitted to purgation. Thus encouraged, he
hastened once more to return to the city. He was still popular with a
large body of the citizens, who, on hearing of his approach, flocked to
meet him, his re-entry into the city being made to resemble a triumphal
progress. Both Isabel and her son were seized with alarm; and a writ was
forthwith issued for his arrest.(456) He was, however, forewarned, and
able to make his escape. Little is known of his subsequent career; Stow
places his death in or about 1328, but this must be a mistake. By his will
dated 1332, he left some real estate in the city to the dean and chapter
of St. Paul's Cathedral for the maintenance of a chantry.(457)
(M274)
Mortimer's vengeance was not confined to a few leading citizens.
Lancaster's life was spared, but he was mulcted in a heavy fine. Many of
his associates took refuge in flight. The Earl of Kent, the king's uncle,
was shortly afterwards charged with treason, into which he had been drawn
by the subtlety of Mortimer, and made to pay the penalty with his head.
This, more than anything else, opened the king's eyes to Mortimer's true
character, and at length (Oct., 1339,) he caused him to be privily seized
in the castle of Nottingham.(458) Thence he was carried to London, and
hanged at the Elms in Smithfield.
(M275)
Queen Isabel, who witnessed the seizure of her favourite and whose prayers
to spare the "gentle Mortimer" were of no avail, was made to disgorge much
of the wealth she had acquired during her supremacy, and was put on an
allowance. The rest of her life, a period of nearly thirty years, she
spent in retirement. Before her death(459) she gave the sum of forty
shillings to the Abbess and Minoresses of Aldgate of the Order of St.
Clare, for the purpose of purchasing for themselves two pittances or doles
on the anniversaries of the decease of her husband the late king and of
Sir John de Eltham his son.(460) The removal of Mortimer corresponded very
closely with the king's coming of age. He was now eighteen years old, and
thenceforth he "ruled as well as reigned."
(M276)
The king's marriage with Philippa of Hainault, which had taken place at
York on the 30th January, 1328, had been popular with the city(461) as
tending to open up trade with Flanders. Hitherto nearly all the wool
produced by this country had been sent to Flanders for manufacture, the
export trade being so large that the king is said to have received more
than L30,000 in a single year from duties levied on this commodity
alone.(462) We have already seen how, in order to punish the Countess of
Flanders for injuries inflicted upon English merchants, the king's
grandfather resorted, in 1270, to the expedient of forbidding all export
of wool to her country.(463) The misery which her half-starved people were
then compelled to suffer soon induced the Countess to come to terms. It
was also in no small measure owing to the fear of a similar stoppage by
the intervention of the French fleet, that the Flemings laid aside their
neutrality in 1339, and openly assisted Edward in his war with France.
(M277)
Towards the close of the last reign the "staples" or market towns for the
sale of certain commodities, but more especially of wool, had been removed
from the continent and established at various places in England, Ireland
and Wales.(464) London was one of those places. No wool was to be exported
abroad until it had remained at one or another of the staples for a period
of forty days. This rule appears however to have been relaxed by Edward
II, in favour of all staple towns but London; merchants being allowed to
remove their goods from other staples after a stay of only fifteen days.
The London merchants, therefore, were under the disadvantage of finding
the market always forestalled. Edward III had not long been on the throne
before they took the opportunity of submitting this hardship not only to
the king, but also to the queen-mother, and prayed that the relaxation of
the rule touching the forty days with respect to other staples might be
withdrawn.(465) Their prayer, however, would seem to have had but little
effect, for within a week of the petition to the king we find that monarch
issuing an order to the collector of customs on wool, leather and
wool-fells in the port of London, to enforce the delay of forty days
before goods could be removed.(466)
(M278)
Nor was this the only grievance that the London merchants had. In order to
raise money to put down the rebellion of the Scots which had broken out
soon after his accession, he had recourse to an extra tax upon wool,
leather, and wool-fells. The money thus raised was to be considered a
loan, receipts being given to the merchants under the king's seal, known
as "Coket," and the merchants in return were to be allowed absolute free
trade from the 2nd July, 1327, the date of the writ, up to the following
Christmas.(467) The Londoners objected altogether to this impost, on the
grounds that they had never been consulted on the matter, and had never
given their assent.(468)
A compromise was subsequently effected. In consideration of the good
service which the citizens of London had already done to the king in times
past, and for the good service which they were prepared to render again in
the future, they were released of arrears of the tax due from 2nd July to
the 23rd September, provided they were willing to pay it for the remainder
of the term.(469) After Christmas the restrictions upon free trade were
again enforced.(470)
(M279)
On the 11th December (1327), Edward issued a writ(471) to the Sheriffs of
London to choose two representatives to attend on behalf of the citizens
at a parliament to be held at York, on Sunday next after the Feast of the
Purification (2 Feb., 1328). Instead, however, of sending only two members
as directed, the citizens appear on this occasion to have sent no less
than four, viz.: Richard de Betoyne, Robert de Kelseye, John de Grantham,
and John Priour the Younger.(472)
One of the questions to be determined was the advisability of again
removing the Staple from England to the continent. On this question, there
appears to have arisen some difference of opinion among the city
representatives. Betoyne, who had formerly enjoyed the office of Mayor of
the Staple beyond the seas, favoured a return to the old order of things,
whilst his colleagues were opposed to any such proceeding. Notification of
Betoyne's disagreement with his colleagues was made to the mayor and
commonalty of the City by letter from the mayor and commonalty of York, to
which reply was made that Betoyne's action was entirely unauthorised.(473)
A letter was sent the same day to Betoyne himself, enjoining him to do
nothing in the matter opposed to the wish of the commonalty of
London(474); and another to Betoyne's colleagues informing them of the
City's action, and bidding them to exert themselves to the utmost to keep
the Staple in England.(475)
The account of Betoyne's difference with his colleagues, as related in the
letter from the City of York, was subsequently found to require
considerable modification, when a letter was received by the Mayor of
London from two of his colleagues, Grantham and Priour.(476) Their account
of what had actually taken place was to the effect that Betoyne had been
publicly requested by a number of representatives from various towns,
assembled in the Chapter House at York, to resign his mayoralty (of the
Staple) and to deliver up the charters which had been acquired at no
little expense. Betoyne replied that the charters were in the possession
of John de Charleton,(477) who refused to give them up, but that he had
himself, four years since, caused a transcript of the charters to be made,
which he was prepared to give up to them if they so wished. Thereupon,
there suddenly appeared upon the scene the Mayor of York, hand in hand
with John de Charleton himself, and followed by a number of burgesses of
York. The appearance of John de Charleton was eminently distasteful to
Betoyne, and he got up and left the room, declining to take any further
part in the discussion so long as Charleton was present. That was
practically all that had occurred, and the writers expressed themselves as
much hurt if anything more than this had been reported from the mayor and
commonalty of York, for in their opinion Betoyne had never shown himself
otherwise than diligent in his duty. The letter concluded with a report of
general news, the chief item being the announcement of the death of the
King of France, and the writers expressed a wish that the same publicity
might be given to their letter as was given to the letter received from
the Mayor of York.
(M280)
Betoyne on the same day sent home his own account of what had taken place
at York.(478) It agrees in the main with the account sent by his
colleagues, but contains some particulars of interest not mentioned in the
latter. He relates how he had been asked to retire from the Mayoralty of
the Staple beyond the seas, and to give up the charters and other
muniments which the several towns had obtained at considerable cost. To
this he had replied that many charters he had left behind on the
continent, but he had brought over with him the charters of the franchises
of the staples which had been purchased of the late king. These were in
the hands of John de Charleton, who refused to give them up. He had
himself, however, gone to Dover in the eighteenth year of Edward II, when
the king himself was there, and had caused a duplicate of the charters to
be made, which he had expressed his readiness to show them. He encloses a
copy. As a proof of the bad feeling (_la malencolye_) which the burgesses
of York entertained towards him, he proceeds to relate how the Mayor of
York, maliciously and without any warning, had appeared at the assembly
with four or five of his suite, accompanied by John de Charleton, clothed
in the mayor's livery, and by a crowd of citizens, to the terror of the
assembled merchants. Thereupon, Bretoyne had declared that he would not
sit nor remain where Charleton was, and had left the meeting; for, said
he, he would never make peace with Charleton except with the assent of the
Mayor and Commonalty of London. He concluded by asking that his character
might not be allowed to suffer by anything which the Mayor of York may
have written. By a postscript he informs the Mayor of London, that on the
eve of the Purification (the day fixed for the re-assembly of parliament)
the Mayor of York had come to his hostel, accompanied by many others, and
had accused him of having come to the city for the express purpose of
annoying their fellow-burgess John de Charleton, which he had denied. This
insult, he is advised, touches not only himself, but the Corporation of
London whose representative he was.
(M281)
Both these letters were laid before the commonalty of London assembled at
the Guildhall on the 19th February, when Betoyne's action was approved,
and on the following day a letter was addressed to him to that effect. The
Mayor and Commonalty of York received also a missive in which their late
conduct to Betoyne was severely criticised.(479) Betoyne's recent services
were recognized by the grant, at his own request, of a handsome coverlet
furred with minever, in part payment of his expenses incurred in attending
the parliament at York.(480)
(M282)
The king, finding that the opposition to the removal of the staple
displayed not only by London but by York, Winchester, Bristol and Lincoln
was too great to be overcome, abolished staples altogether (August, 1328),
and re-established free-trade.(481) He even invited Flemish weavers to
settle in England so as to give a stimulus to the manufacture of woollen
fabrics. These he took under his special protection,(482) for the native
looked askance upon all foreigners, traders or craftsmen.
(M283)
One of the last political acts of Mortimer had been to send Edward over to
France to do homage to Philip of Valois, the new king, for his possessions
in that country. This homage Edward paid in 1329, but subject to certain
reservations.(483) In 1330 he was making preparations for war, and took
the opportunity of the presence of Stephen de Abyndone and John de
Caustone, the City's representatives in the parliament held that year at
Westminster, to ask them what assistance the City would be likely to
afford him. The City members asked leave to consult the commonalty on the
matter. Eventually the sum of 1,000 marks was offered, a sum so trifling
that Edward consented to accept it only as a free gift, and plainly
intimated that he looked for more substantial aid in the future.(484)
In July, he summoned the mayor and twenty-four of the leading citizens to
attend him at Woodstock. The mayor (Simon de Swanlonde) would have had
them excused on the ground of the disturbed state of the city, but the
king was not to be denied. Substitutes were appointed for the mayor during
his absence, and he and seven aldermen and sixteen commoners went to
Woodstock, where they gave assurances of the City's loyalty.(485) In 1331,
after Mortimer's fall, when Edward was his own master, lie again visited
France, and a peace was concluded between the two kings.(486)
(M284)
From 1332 to 1335 the king was chiefly occupied with Scotland. It was part
of the policy of Philip of Valois to encourage disturbance in the north of
England, as a means of recovering his lost possessions in France.(487) The
period of four years during which peace had been assured by Edward with
Scotland by the treaty of Northampton had now elapsed,(488) and active
operations on both sides re-commenced. In 1334 the city voted 1,000 marks,
afterwards raised to 1,200, for raising 100 horsemen and as many
men-at-arms to assist the king for a period of forty days.(489)
A spy was also despatched to Normandy and Brabant to see how matters were
going there, and gifts were made to the courts of Juliers and Namur to
secure their favour. The parliament which sat at York in May, 1335,(490)
having decided in favour of a fresh expedition to Scotland,(491) the king
sent orders to the City to hold its forces in readiness to march under the
leadership of two of its aldermen, John de Pulteney and Reginald de
Conduit.(492) A commission to seize ships in the port of London to the
king's use, resulted in the detention of six ships.(493)
(M285)
At length, the friendly attitude which Philip of Valois had taken up
towards Scotland, much to Edward's prejudice, determined the latter to go
in person to France for the purpose, not only of defending his possessions
there, but also of enforcing his claim to the French crown. The year 1337
was devoted to active preparations for the struggle. The City of London,
in spite of its franchise, was called upon to furnish 500 men at arms, and
to send them to Portsmouth by Whitsuntide.(494) The date was subsequently
altered to Trinity Sunday.(495) The king took occasion to find fault with
the city's dilatoriness in executing his demands, as well as with the
physique of the men that were being supplied. At the request of the mayor,
Sir John de Pulteney (he had recently received the honour of
knighthood(496)), the number of men to be furnished was reduced to 200,
the rest to be supplied on further notice.(497)
(M286)
When Parliament met in London in February, the City made presents of money
to the king, the queen, the chancellor, the treasurer, and others,(498)
for no other purpose apparently, but to win their favour. In the following
month the City obtained a charter declaring its liberties and customs to
be unaffected by the recent statute establishing free trade,(499) when
presents in money or kind were again made to the officers of state.(500)
(M287)
The services which the mayor had done the city in the work of obtaining
this charter were acknowledged by a gift of two silver basins and the sum
of L20 from his fellow citizens.(501) It was by Pulteney's influence that
the king consented to allow a sum of 1,000 marks to be taken into account
at a future assessment for a fifteenth, instead of insisting upon its
being a free gift from the citizens.(502)
(M288)
In March, 1337, a statute forbade the importation of wool, as a
preliminary to the imposition of an additional custom, and in the
following year parliament granted the king half the wool of the
kingdom.(503) The Londoners having no wool of their own, paid a
composition,(504) and were often reduced to sore straits. Thus in April,
1339, an assessment had to be made in the several wards of the City to
discharge a debt to the king of 1,000 marks. The men of Aldersgate ward
refused to pay their quota of L9. A precept was thereupon issued to the
sheriffs to levy the larger sum of L16 10s., on the lands, tenements,
goods, and chattels of the ward, and pay the same into the Chamber of the
Guildhall by a certain day.(505) The citizens of London, and the nation
generally, would the more willingly have borne these exactions if any
adequate good had resulted from them. But Edward's first campaign resulted
in nothing more than the assumption by him of the name and arms of the
King of France, at a cost of L300,000.(506)
(M289)
Among the ships which had been prepared for the king's expedition to
France, three were known as "La Jonette," of London; "La Cogge," of All
Hallows; and "La Sainte Marie Cogge." The last mentioned belonged to
William Haunsard,(507) an ex-sheriff of London, who subsequently did
signal service in the great naval battle of Sluys. Prior to the king's
departure, measures were taken for the safe custody of the city during his
absence.(508) The City had difficulties in raising a contingent of
soldiers, for many of the best men had joined the retinue of nobles, and
all that could be mustered amounted to no more than 100 men, viz: 40
men-at-arms, and 60 archers.(509)
(M290)
After the king's departure (12 July, 1338) the City laid in provisions for
transmission abroad, 500 quarters of corn and 100 carcases of oxen to be
salted down. In addition to which it purchased 1,000 horseshoes and 30,000
nails.(510) In October steps were taken to protect London from attack by
sea and land. Piles were driven into the bed of the river to prevent the
approach of a hostile fleet; the wharves were "bretasched" with boards,
and springalds set at different gates and posterns.(511)
(M291)
In February, 1339, the citizens received the king's orders to furnish four
ships with 300 men, and four scummars(512) with 160 men, victualled for
three months, to proceed to Winchester. Upon some demur being made to this
demand, the number of ships was reduced to two, well equipped with men and
arms. Pursuant to these orders each ward was assessed for the purpose of
levying 110 men armed with haketon, plates, bacinet with aventail, and
gloves of plate; and sixty men armed with only haketon and bacinet. The
pay of the men was to be threepence a day each for two months. The vessels
were to be joined by ships from various other ports, and proceed to sea in
charge of Sir William Trussel by the middle of March to intercept, if
possible, the enemy's fleet.(513)
(M292)
By Easter time the danger appeared more imminent, and the mayor and
aldermen met hurriedly in the Guildhall, on Easter Sunday afternoon after
dinner. An immediate attack up the Thames was expected. The mayor and
aldermen agreed to take it in turns to watch the river night and day. On
the following Wednesday, each alderman was ordered to enquire as to the
number of arbalesters, archers, and men capable of bearing arms in his
ward. A number of carpenters were sworn on the same day to safe-guard the
engines of war laid up in the new house near Petywales.(514) This new
house appears to have been known as "La Bretaske," and was used for
storing springalds, quarels, and other war material.(515)
(M293)
At this period there were kept in the chamber of the Guildhall six
instruments called "gonnes," which were made of latten, a metal closely
resembling brass, five "teleres" or stocks for supporting the guns, four
cwt. and a half of pellets of lead, and thirty-two pounds of gunpowder by
way of ammunition.(516) The mention of "teleres" and the small amount of
ammunition favours the assumption that the instruments were rather
hand-guns than heavy pieces, as has been supposed.(517) A "telere" or
tiller was a common name for the stock of a cross-bow,(518) and the
earliest hand-guns or fire-arms known consisted of a simple tube of metal
with touch-hole, fixed on a straight stick or shaft, which when used was
passed under the arm so as to afford a better grip of the weapon.
(M294)
The danger blew over, and before the close of the year the king was
expected to return to England.(519) He did not return however before
February, 1340, having intimated his intention to the mayor of London, by
letter from Sluys, dated Sunday the 20th.(520) Notwithstanding his long
absence, he had accomplished little or nothing.
(M295)
He had come to the end of his resources and was in want of money to carry
on the war. The City was asked to lend him L20,000. It offered 5,000
marks. This was contemptuously refused, and the municipal authorities were
bidden to re-consider the matter, or in the alternative to furnish the
king with the names of the wealthier inhabitants of the City. At length
the City agreed to advance the sum of L5,000 for a fixed period, and this
offer the king was fain to accept.(521) At the close of 1339, the chief
towns of Flanders had entered into an offensive and defensive alliance
with Edward, and an arrangement was made for paying the sum of L1,500 out
of the L5,000 to Jacques van Arteveldt, the king's agent at Bruges.(522)
Three aldermen and nine commoners were appointed to make the necessary
assessment for the loan, for the repayment of which John de Pulteney was
one of the king's sureties.(523)
(M296)
Provided with this and other money supplied by parliament, Edward again
set out for the continent (June, 1340). With him went a contingent of 283
men-at-arms, furnished by the City, 140 of them being drawn from that part
of the city which lay on the east side of Walbrook, and 143 from the
western side. It had been intended to raise 300 men, and the better class
of citizens had been called upon to supply each a quota, or in default to
serve in person; but eleven had failed in their duty and, on that account,
had been fined 50 shillings each, whilst six others, making up the
deficit, had set out in the retinue of Henry Darcy, the late mayor.(524)
(M297)
The names of the transport ships and the number of men-at-arms supplied by
each city, the number of mariners and serving-men (_garzouns_), which were
about to take part in the great battle fought off Sluys (24 June), are on
record.(525) Although the French fleet was superior to his own in numbers
and equipment, Edward did not hesitate to attack. The struggle was long
and severe, lasting from noon on one day until six o'clock the next
morning. If any one person was more conspicuous for valour on that
occasion than another, it was William Haunsard, an ex-sheriff of London,
who came with "a ship of London" and "did much good."(526)
An account of the battle was despatched by the king to his son the Prince
Regent, dated from his ship, the "Cogg Thomas," the 28th June.(527)