64 
L O N D O N. 
time appointed ; hut were unexpectedly affaulted by a' 
great number of armed men, who killed and wounded 
many, and difperfed the reft. This raifed a great corn- 
motion in the city. The populace breathed revenge ; 
and, by the mitigation of Conftantine Fitz-Arnulph, a 
great favourer of the French party during the troubles in 
'king John’s reign, they proceeded to Weftminfter, and 
pulled down the houfes both of the lleward and abbot. 
Hearing afterwards that the abbot was come into the city 
with his complaint to Philip Daubney the king’s counfel, 
they purfued him, beat his fervants, took away twelve of 
■his horfes, and would have murdered him, had he not ef- 
caped by a back-door. Upon this tumult, Hubert de 
Burg, then chief jufticiary, fummoned the mayor and 
many of the principal citizens to attend him in the Tower 
of London ; and, inquiring for the authors of the riot, 
Conftantine, the ringleader, boldly anfwered, that “ he 
was one; that they had done no more than they ought ; 
and that they were refolved to avow what they had done, 
let the confequence be what it would.” In this he was 
feconded by his nephew and one Geoffery ; but the juf- 
-ticiary, having difmiffed ali the reft, det uned thefe three, 
and ordered them to be banged next morning, though 
-Conftantine offered 15,000 marks for his pardon. Hu¬ 
bert then, coming into the city with a ftrong guard, caufed 
the hands and feet of molt of the principal rioters he could 
feize to be cut off, and their bodies to be burnt: all which 
was executed without any legal proceedings or form of 
•trial. After thefe arbitrary cruelties, he degraded the 
mayor and all the magiftrates; placed a cujlos over the city, 
and obliged thirty perfons of his own choollngto become 
fccurities for the good behaviour of the whole city. Se¬ 
veral thoufand marks were alfo exacted by the king, be¬ 
fore he would confent to a reconciliation. 
This arbitrary behaviour alarmed the whole nation. 
The parliament of 1224 began to be uneafy for themfelves, 
and addrefled bis majelty that he would be pleafed to con¬ 
firm the charter of liberties which he had lworn to obferve^ 
and the confequence of this application was a confirma¬ 
tion of Magna Charta in the full parliament at Weftmin¬ 
fter in the year 1225. At this time alfo, the rights and 
privileges of the citizens were confirmed. They were ex¬ 
empted from profecution for burels, i. e. lilted cloth ; and 
were granted the right of having a common feal. The 
necefiitous circumftances of this monarch, however, made 
him often exaft money arbitrarily as long as he lived. 
We find, however, that under his reign the extent of the 
city increafed confiderably, by the disforefting of part of 
Middlefex; and that the fheriffs received the king’s order 
to repair the prifon of Newgate; from which it Ihould ap¬ 
pear, that Newgate was not at that time under the ma¬ 
nagement of the city. It is remarkable, that, according 
to the mod ancient cuftom, prifons were erected near 
the gates of cities, moft likely in order that they might 
be at hand to receive thofe who had been condemned at 
the tribunal of the judges, who generally fat at the gates 
-of cities from all antiquity, as we read in the fcriptures. 
From this,time alfo we may date the origin of pipes being 
employed to lupply the city with water; and in 1235 be¬ 
gan the memorable cuftom of tendering fix horfe-lhoes, 
with the nails thereunto belonging, by the fheriffs of Lon¬ 
don arid Middlefex, at the time of their being fworn into 
their office before the chief baron of the Exchequer. This 
cuftom arofe from the pofieffiou of a piece of ground in 
the Strand, within the parilh of St. Clement Danes, to 
which they had a right by a grant from Walter de Bruin, 
a farrier, who, in this year, purchafed the fame of the 
crown for ere&ing a forge, on condition of paying the 
faid number of (hoes and nails annually into the Exche¬ 
quer. This piece of ground is not now in the pofleffion 
of the city. 
Btlides feveral kardlhips which the Londoners had 
fuffered under the extorting and oppreffing fceptre of 
Henry III, in 125S, the price of corn was fo exceflive, 
.that a famine enlued ; and, according to the chronicle* 
of Evertiam, 20,000 perfons died of hunger in London 
only. In 1264, another mailacre of the Jews took place } 
on a plea that one of that perfecuted race had taken more 
than legal intereft ; and upwards of five hundred Jews were 
put to death by the populace, and their houfes and fyna- 
gogues deftroyed. See the article Jew, vol. x. p. 808, 9. 
The beginning of king Edward’s reign promifed great 
liappinefs to the city, when civil difeuffion broke out 
amongft the Londoners about the choice of a mayor ; 
which, under a fovereign lefs difpofed to moderation and 
jtiftice, might have proved fatal to their liberties. But 
Edward only interpofed as a friendly moderator, when 
parties ran fo high as to admitof.no compromife, and ap¬ 
pointed a cujlos till they could be brought to reafon. 
However, this convinced the citizens of the danger of 
their inteftine broils ; and lo far wrought upon their paf- 
fions, that they unanimoufiy chofe fir Walter Harvey, i:i 
a folkmote, for mayor, rather than the king ftiould have 
an excufe to intermeddle with their civil government. 
This Harvey was the very man let up by the populace, 
in oppofition to the regular choice of Philip de Taylour. 
But they were foon convinced of his bad practices, and had 
the refolution not only to degrade him from the office of 
an alderman, hut to render him incapable of fitting in the 
city council, and to make him give fufficient fecurity for 
his quiet and peaceable behaviour for the future. 
The grols frauds and impofitions which prevailed at 
this period in the fale of provifions, rendered legidative 
interference neceflary, particularly with refpeCt to the ba¬ 
kers and to the millers, for giving fliort weight and bad 
meafure. The king therefore commanded the mayor and 
fheriffs to enforce the new laws made for the prevention 
of fuch evils in future. By thefe laws, the baker, for his 
firft offence, was to forfeit his bread ; for the fecond to 
fuffer imprifonment; and for the third, to be pilloried. 
Fraudulent millers were to be puniftied by being drawn 
through certain (treets, in a tumbrel, or dung-cart, ex- 
pofed to the derifion of the populace. The magiftrates 
were alfo commanded to regulate the price of provifions, 
efpecially of poultry and fi(h, which had been engrofted 
by a few rapacious huckfters. Accordingly an ordinance 
was Blued by the magiftrates of the city in the following 
form: 
“By the command of the lord the king, and with the 
affent and confent of the gentlemen of the kingdom, and 
citizens aforefaid ; That no huckfter of fowl (or poulterer) 
go out of the city to meet them that bring poultry into 
the city, to make any buying from them ; but buy in the 
city, after the buyers of the lord the king, of the barons, 
and the citizens, have bought and had what (hall be need¬ 
ful for them, namely, after three o’clock, and not before* 
And then let them buy thus : 
The heft hen, at - 
The beft pullet, at - 
The beft capon, at 
The beft goofe, from Eafter to Whitfunday 
Ditto, from ditto to St. Peter ad Vincula 
The beft goofe, in all other parts of the year 
The beft wild-goofe, at 
The beft young pigeons, three for 
The beft mallard, at - 
The beft cercel, at - 
The beft wild duck, at - 
The beft partridge, at - 
The belt begaters, four for 
The beft larks, a dozen for 
The beft pheafant, at - 
The beft butor, at 
The beft heron, at - 
The beft corliew, at - - 
The beft plover, at - 
The beft fwan, at - 
The beft crane, at - 
The beft peacock, at 
s. d. q, 
03a 
013 
020 
050 
040 
030 
040 
010 
03* 
160 
o 1 3 
03* 
010 
oxo 
040 
060 
060 
o j o 
o 1 o 
300 
300 
o i o 
The 
