About the same time, the City of London was excited in no slight degree, because the King exacted some liberties from the citizens for the benefit of the abbot of Westminster, to their enormous loss, and the injury of their liberties. The mayor of the city and the whole of the community in general, as far as lay in their power, opposed the wish (or rather violence and raving) of the King; but he proved harsh and inexorable to them. The citizens, therefore, in a state of great excitement, went with sorrowful complaints to Earl Richard, the earl of Leicester, and other nobles of the Kingdom, telling them how the King, perhaps bent into a bow of wickedness, by the pope's example, shamelessly violated their charters, granted to them by his predecessors. The said nobles were much disturbed at this, fearing that the King would attempt a similar proceeding with them; they therefore severely reproached him, adding threats to their reproaches, and strongly blamed the abbot, who, they believed, was the originator and promoter of this wrong, heaping insult upon insult on him; which, however, it does not become us to relate, out of respect to the order. Thus the prudence of the nobles happily recalled the King from his conceived design.
INTERFERENCE BY BARONS (1258).
When, in medieval England, the central authority was weak, injustice and oppression were rife throughout the country, and at such times the men of London were often hard pressed to maintain intact their privileges. Under the feeble and vacillating Henry III. there was little restraint upon corrupt and unscrupulous barons, such as the Hugh Bygot of the following passage. The right to attend to the administration of justice within the borders of the City was one of the most essential elements of the citizen's freedom; no interference in this direction could possibly be tolerated if the hardly won charters were to be of any avail. It is not surprising, therefore, that the arbitrary conduct of this justiciar, who pretended to act by royal authority, being a King's servant, aroused great resentment among the citizens.
Source.—Fitz-Thedmar's Chronicle of the Mayors and Sheriffs,
edited by Riley, p. 42.
This year, John de Gizors was chosen Mayor, and that too, even in his absence. This year, after a Parliament held by the Barons at Westminster, Hugh Bygot, the Justiciar, went to Saint Saviour's, and having Roger de Turkelby for his associate, held there all the Pleas which pertain unto the Justiciars Itinerant in the County of Surrey; and not only did he there amerce several bailiffs and others who had been convicted of offences committed against those subject to them, but he caused them to be imprisoned, clerks as well as laymen. And yet he ransomed one person for twenty marks, and certain others for forty marks, and more; while several others, for but trifling reasons, he immoderately aggrieved.
In these pleas the men of Southwark and others of the County of Surrey made complaint against the Sheriffs and citizens of London, that they unjustly took custom without the Stone Gate on the Bridge, seeing that they ought to possess no such rights beyond the Drawbridge Gate. The citizens, coming with their Sheriffs who had been summoned by the Justiciars, appeared at Saint Saviour's, before the Justiciars, and bringing with them their Charters, said that they were not bound to plead there, nor would they plead without the walls of the City; but without formal plea, they were willing to acknowledge that it was quite lawful for the Sheriffs of London to take custom without the gate aforesaid, and that too, even as far as the staples placed there, seeing that the whole water of Thames pertains unto the City, and always did pertain thereto; and that too, sea-ward as far as the New Weir. At length, after much altercation had taken place between the Justiciars and the citizens, the Justiciars caused inquisition to be made, on the oath of twelve knights of Surrey—and this, although the citizens had not put themselves on such inquisition—whether the Sheriffs of London had taken any custom beyond their limits. Who said, upon oath, that the Sheriffs aforesaid might rightfully take custom there, for that as far the staples before-mentioned, the whole pertains unto the City, and no one has any right upon the Thames, as far as the New Weir, save and except the citizens of London.
After this, the Justiciar before-mentioned, having as his associate Roger before-named, came to the Guildhall of London, and there held Pleas from day to day, as to all those who wished to make plaint; and at once, without either making reasonable summons or admitting any lawful excuses, determined the same, observing no due procedure of justice; and that too against the laws of the City, as also against the laws and customs of every freeman of the English realm. This, however, the citizens persistently challenged, saying that no one except the Sheriffs of London ought to hold pleadings in the City as to trespasses there committed; but to no purpose. Still however, the citizens had judgment done upon all persons abiding in the City, who had been convicted, or had been cast in making a false charge. At the same time also, the Justiciar summoned before himself and before the Earl of Gloucester all the bakers of the City who could be found, together with their loaves; and so, by some few citizens summoned before them, judgment was given in reference to their bread; those whose bread did not weigh according to the assay of the City, not being placed in the pillory, as they used to be, but, at the will of the Justiciar and Earl aforesaid, exalted in the tumbrel, against the ancient usage of the City and of all the realm.
THE STEELYARD (1282).
The Steelyard was the residence of the Hanse Merchants, who obtained a settlement in London as early as 1250. Valuable privileges were granted to them by Henry III., and these were renewed and confirmed by Edward I., who was anxious to encourage the trade of the City by all possible means. Many privileges were also conceded to the Steelyard merchants by the City, in return for which they undertook to maintain Bishopsgate in good repair and to assist in its defence when necessity arose. In spite of the jealousy of the English merchants, the foreigners flourished exceedingly, but towards the end of the sixteenth century their power began to fail. As English traders became more enterprising, the monopoly of the Steelyard merchants disappeared, and finally, in 1598, Elizabeth expelled them from the country.