In that curious medley commonly designated, after Hearne, _Arnold's
Chronicle_, and which was probably first printed in 1502 or 1503, we
find the following passages. I make "notes" of them, from their peculiar
interest at the moment when sanatory bills, having the same objects, are
occupying the public attention so strongly; especially in respect to the
Smithfield Nuisance and the Clergy Discipline bill.
1. In a paper entitled "The articles dishired bi y'e comonse of the cety
of London, for reformacyo of thingis to the same, of the Mayer,
Aldirmen, and Comon Counsell, to be enacted," we have the following:--
"Also that in anoyding the corupte savours and lothsom innoyaunc
(caused by slaughter of best) w'tin the cyte, wherby moche
people is corupte and infecte, it may plese my Lord Mayr,
Aldirmen, and Comen Counsaile, to put in execucion a certaine
acte of parlement, by whiche it is ordeigned y't no such
slaughter of best shuld be vsed or had within this cite, and
that suche penaltees be leuyed vpo the contrary doers as in the
said acte of parlement ben expressed.
"Also in anoyding of lyke annoyauce. Plese it my Lord Mair,
Alderme, and Como Councell, to enact that noo manor pulter or
any other persone i this cytee kepe from hinsforth, within his
hous, swans, gies, or dowk, upon a peyn therfore to be
ordeigned."--pp. 83, 84, 3d. ed.
I believe that one item of "folk-faith" is that "farm-yard odours are
healthy." I have often {100} heard it affirmed at least; and, indeed,
has not the common councilman, whom the _Times_ has happily designated
as the "defender of filth", totally and publicly staked his reputation
on the dogma in its most extravagant shape, within the last few months?
It is clear that nearly four centuries ago, the citizens of London
thought differently; even though "the corupte savours and lothsom
innoyaunc" were infinitely less loathsome than in the present Smithfield
and the City slaughter-houses.
It would be interesting to know to what act of parliament Arnold's
citizens refer, and whether it has ever been repealed. It is curious to
notice, too, that the danger from infuriated beasts running wild through
the streets is not amongst the evils of the system represented. They go
further, however, and forbid even the _killing_ within the city.
Moreover, it would really seem that the swan was not then a mere
ornamental bird, either alive or dead, but an ordinary article of
citizen-dinners, it being classed with "gies and dowks" in the business
of the poulterer. At the same time, no mention being made of swine in
any of these ordonnances or petitions, would at first sight seem to show
that the flesh of the hog was in abhorrence with the Catholic citizen,
as much perhaps as with the Jews themselves; at any rate, that it was
not a vendible article of food in those days. When did it become so?
This conclusion would, however, be erroneous; for amongst "the articles
of the good governaûce of the cite of London" shortly following we have
this:--
"Also yf ony persone kepe or norrysh hoggis, oxen, kyen, or
mallardis within the ward, in noyoying of ther neyhbours."--p.
91.
The proper or appointed place for keeping hoggis was Hoggistone, now
Hoxton; as Houndsditch[2] was for the hounds.
There is another among these petitions to the Lord Mayor and
corporation, worthy of notice, in connection with sanatory law.
"Also in avoydîg ye abhomynable savours causid by ye kepîg of ye
kenell in ye mote and ye diches there, and î especiall by sethig
of ye houndes mete wt roten bones, and vnclenly keping of ye
hoûdes, wherof moche people is anoyed, soo yt when the wynde is
in any poyte of the northe, all the fowle stynke is blowen ouer
the citee. Plese it mi Lord Mair, Aldirmen, and Comen Coûcell,
to ordeigne that the sayd kenell be amoued and sett in sô other
côuenient place where as best shall seme them. And also that the
said diches mai be clensed from yere to yere, and so kepte yt
thereof folowe non annoyaunce."--p. 87.
Of course "Houndsditch" is here meant; but for what purpose were the
hounds kept? And, indeed, what kind of hounds were they, that thus
formed a part of the City establishment? Were they bloodhounds for
tracking criminals, or hounds kept for the special behoof and pleasure
of the "Lord Mair, Aldermen, and Comen Coûsel?" The Houndsditch of that
time bore a strong resemblance to the Fleet ditch of times scarcely
exceeding the memory of many living men.