POLITICAL HISTORY 



the same matter, October 29, I573- 1 A commission was issued by the 

 Council (June 4, 1567) * to William More and others to inquire into the 

 truth of a charge of 'subtle, crafty and vexatious dealings' brought by an 

 inhabitant of Godalming against one of the sub-bailiffs of the town. 3 In 

 July, 1544, the Lords of the Council committed the 'lewd and naugh- 

 tie' curate of Witley to examination in the Tower by Sir Christopher 

 More. His offence consisted in having 'used words,' but what words 

 we are not told. What is remarkable is that the obscure fault of an 

 obscure man is so gravely dealt with. On October 7, 1562,* the return 

 was made to an inquisition taken at Letherhead, set on foot by order 

 under the great seal, and taken by the oath of twelve lawful men, 

 touching 'apparelle of mens wyffes.' The jury found that these were 

 not too extravagantly dressed a verdict more prudent than courageous 

 from women's husbands. No feature of country life was too minute for 

 the all-seeing Council. The relief of the poor, the checking of 'regrat- 

 ing and forestalling' of corn, the supply of corn in the markets, were 

 closely looked after, farmers being compelled to bring a certain propor- 

 tion of their stock every week, and to sell it at prices to suit the poor. 

 The justices had to undertake the supervision of all markets to compel 

 cheap sale, and were to commit to prison without bail farmers who ' re- 

 pyned.' 5 They were ordered to restrain the 'brewing of beer of greater 

 strength in this tyme of scarcely than was used in other tymes when 

 mault was good cheape ' ; matters of purveyance for the needs of the 

 court ; the reduction of the number of sellers of poultry, butter and 

 eggs, as they caused prices to be raised for their supplies an odd 

 effect of competition the punishment of riotous apprentices in South- 

 wark ; the revoking and regranting of pedlars' licences ; all formed 

 subjects of the letters and orders of the Council. When the central 

 Government grasped at such a minute control in every county, it is 

 obvious that the leading men in each, such as the Mores, the Lord 

 Montague, the Lords Howard of Effingham and such like in Surrey, 

 must have exercised immense local influence upon the fortunes and daily 

 life of their neighbours. The Council was really forced to trust to them 

 and to their representations for what was or should be done. 



It is easy to understand both how the central Government might be 

 looked to as a refuge from the caprice of local rulers, and how the whole 

 system might be violently resisted if once confidence were lost in the 

 capacity and good intentions of the central power. The hopes of Went- 

 worth at his best, and the action of the Long Parliament before it became 

 itself despotic, are both to be clearly forecast from the history of the 

 local administration in Surrey. The justices themselves were educated 

 in a knowledge of affairs which enabled them at last to criticize and 

 resist the Council in Parliament. 



1 Loseley MSS. 8 Ibid, dates cited. 



3 It is an interesting example of how matters cognizable in the ordinary courts were brought before 

 the Council, and remitted by them to special commissioners. 



4 Loseley MSS. date cited. 6 Ibid. August 3, 1596, vii. i8. 



381 



