London and the Kingdom - Volume 2 / A History Derived Mainly from the Archives at Guildhall in the Custody of the Corporation of the City of London.

by Reginald R. Sharpe

CHAPTER XXXI.

The Accession of James II, 6 Feb., 1685.

"They will never kill me, James, to make you king," the late king is said to have cynically remarked to his brother; and, indeed, the accession of the Duke of York was accepted by the nation in general, as well as by the City of London in particular, with considerable foreboding. The new king for a short while was content to feel his way before plunging into the headstrong course of action which eventually lost him the crown. Although suspected of being a Catholic at heart, it was only during his last moments that Charles had accepted the ministrations of the Roman Church. The new king had for years been an avowed Catholic; nevertheless, in his first speech to the Privy Council he announced his intention of maintaining the established government, both in Church and State. This speech, made within an hour of the late king's death, was received with rapturous applause. It was quickly followed by a proclamation of his majesty's wish that all persons in office at the time of the decease of the late king should so continue until further notice.[1556] Another document proclaiming the death of the late king and the devolution of the crown to the Duke of York was at the same time drawn up by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, with the assistance of the privy council, the mayor, aldermen and citizens of London and others.[1557] This[pg 507] document did not bear the signature of the mayor as that proclaiming James I had done.

The question of continuation of customs and excise.

James had not been many days on the throne before the question of supply had to be settled. More than one-half of the whole revenue of the crown was derived from the customs, and these had been settled on Charles for life only, and could not therefore be exacted by his successor without the assent of parliament. No parliament had been summoned since the dissolution of the parliament at Oxford four years since (28 March, 1681). As time was pressing and some delay must have taken place before a new parliament could meet, James took the advice of Chief Justice Jeffreys, and did violence to the constitution by proclaiming (9 Feb.) the continuation of the payment of customs as a matter of necessity, whilst at the same time he intimated his intention of speedily calling a parliament.[1558] The pill thus gilded was swallowed without protest. The excise duties was another matter and was dealt with differently. The "additional excise," like the customs, had been given to the late king for life, but there was a clause in the Act which empowered the Lords of the Treasury to let them to farm for a term of three years without any limitation as to their being so long due. A lease was now propounded as having been made during the late king's life (the document bearing date the 5th February, the day preceding his decease), although there was every reason for supposing it to have been made after his death and to have been post-dated. The judges were[pg 508] appealed to, and with every desire to curry favour with the new king, the majority pronounced the document to be good in law. Thus fortified, James no longer hesitated to issue a proclamation (16 Feb.) for the continuation of the excise.[1559]

The coronation of king and queen, 23 April, 1685.

A parliament was summoned for the 9th April, but did not meet until the 19th May. In the meantime the king and queen had been crowned at Westminster on St. George's day (23 April). The City put in their customary claim,[1560] but this was at first disallowed "in regard of the judgment upon the Quo Warranto for seizure of the cities franchise." Upon appeal being made, however, to the king himself the claim was allowed, and the mayor, aldermen and citizens were treated with high honour both in the Abbey and at the banquet in Westminster Hall, the mayor being presented by the king with the cup of pure gold and cover, weighing in all upwards of twenty ounces, with which he had served his majesty with wine.[1561] A few days before the banquet took place Sir Robert Vyner sent to the mayor to borrow the City's plate for the occasion. The matter was laid before the Court of Aldermen and permission was granted the lord mayor to lend such plate as could be spared.[1562]

A Tory parliament, 1685.

When parliament met (19 May) the majority in favour of the court party was enormous. This was in no small measure due to the reformation that had been forced on other corporate towns besides the city of London. They had been made to surrender their[pg 509] charters, and the late king had in return granted them new charters in which Tories alone were named as members of the corporations. Only one more step was necessary in order to secure the return of a Tory parliament when the time for fresh elections should arrive, and that step was taken. The parliamentary franchise in boroughs was restricted to members of the corporations.[1563] In London the Whigs were kept down by fear, and the Tory party reigned supreme. The mayor and half the Court of Aldermen were nominees of the Crown, acting by royal commission. No Common Council sat, or if it did it was only for the purpose of enrolling a proclamation by the king or a precept by the mayor. As the election drew near the king, in order to render the result in his favour more sure, authorized the Court of Aldermen to grant liveries to several of the city companies, taking care that such only should be admitted to the livery as were of "unquestionable loyalty" for the purpose of voting.[1564] By this means four of the most pronounced Tories in the city were returned, all of them being aldermen. These were Sir John Moore and Sir William Pritchard, both of whom had been placed in the mayoralty chair, one after the other (in 1681 and 1682), by court influence, Sir Peter Rich, who had served as sheriff with Dudley North in 1682, and Sir Samuel Dashwood, who filled the same office the following year with Peter Daniel, both of them, like their immediate predecessors, being nominees of the Crown.[pg 510] As soon as the House met the Commons unanimously granted the king the full revenue which had been enjoyed by his brother.[1565]

Oates and Dangerfield whipt at the cart's tail, May, 1685.