The Bill rejected by Common Council.
In the spring of the next year (5 April, 1692) the Court of Aldermen had before them a Bill, the object of which was to settle the election and confirmation of sheriffs for the future. After due deliberation amongst themselves, and after consulting the attorney-general upon its provisions, the Bill was recommended to the Common Council to be passed as an Act of that court.[1741] Of the particulars of the Bill we are not informed. It was laid for the first time before the Common Council on the 6th May, when it was referred to a committee. On the 26th ult. it was read the first time and on the 31st a second time, but upon the question being put[pg 566] whether the Bill should be then read a third time it passed in the negative,[1742] and nothing more is heard of it.
Act of Common Council for regulating elections at wardmotes, 26 Oct., 1692.
A Bill for regulating the election of members of the Common Council itself met with better success. Of late years divers inhabitants of the city who were not freemen (and among them the doctors and other gentlemen of Doctors' Commons) had been in the habit of exercising the franchise at wardmotes, to the prejudice of freemen, to whom alone belonged the right of voting. Many complaints having been made to the Common Council of the rights of freemen having been thus infringed,[1743] an Act was at length passed (26 Oct., 1692) declaring that the nomination of aldermen and the election of common councilmen for the several wards of the city appertained only to freemen, being householders in the city, and paying scot and bearing lot, a list of whom was thenceforth to be prepared and kept by the beadle of each ward, as well as a separate list of the other householders. A copy of the Act was to be appended to all precepts for wardmotes, and the provisions of the Act were to be publicly read to the assembled electors.[1744] At the next election of a Common Council, which took place in December, the Whigs, we are told, were, after a hard fight, returned by "above 50 more voices than last year."[1745]
The king's return, Oct., 1691.
When William returned from abroad in October, 1691, it was to find Ireland completely subjugated. The mayor and aldermen waited upon his majesty at Whitehall, as usual, to congratulate him upon his[pg 567] safe arrival. The king thanked them for the care they had taken of the city during his absence, and more particularly for supplying the queen with the sum of £200,000 to enable her to carry on the necessary affairs of the kingdom, and bestowed the honour of knighthood on Richard Levett, one of the sheriffs, Sir William Ashurst, the other sheriff, being already knighted. Leaving Whitehall, the mayor and aldermen next proceeded to Kensington to offer their compliments to the queen and to thank her majesty for her good government during the king's absence.[1746] A fortnight later (4 Nov.) the Common Council resolved to pay their respects also to the king and to congratulate him upon the success of his arms in Ireland.[1747]
Again sets out for Holland, March, 1692.
The king did not long remain in England. Early in March of the following year (1692) he returned to the Hague to make preparations for renewing the war against France both by sea and land, leaving the queen to carry on the government in England. On the morning of the 12th March the mayor and aldermen, accompanied by the recorder, proceeded to Whitehall to offer the queen their congratulations upon the receipt of news of the king's safe arrival in Holland, as well as of her majesty's assumption of the reins of government. The recorder assured her of the City's loyalty, and desired her only to put it to the test.[1748]
City loan of £200,000 to the queen, 18 March, 1692.
The City had not long to wait. Within a week (18 March) application was made to the Common Council, on behalf of the queen, for a loan of[pg 568] £200,000.[1749] This was the first of the three loans of that amount already mentioned as having been advanced this year. The council readily consented to raise the money, and so successful were their efforts that within four days one-half of the whole loan was already paid into the exchequer. By the king's orders the whole of the £200,000 was kept intact "for some extraordinary occasion."[1750]