<!DOCTYPE ETS PUBLIC "-//UMDLPS//DTD EEBOPROOF 2.0//EN">
<ETS>
<TEMPHEAD>
<REVDESCR>
<CHANGE>
<DATE>2014-05-27</DATE>
<RESPSTMT>
<NAME>Mona Logarbo</NAME>
<RESP>MURP</RESP>
</RESPSTMT>
<ITEM>Proofed and reviewed as part of batch B140414.pdcc.</ITEM>
</CHANGE>
</REVDESCR>
</TEMPHEAD>
<EEBO>
<IDG S="marc" R="UM" ID="B26218">
<STC T="W">L3049</STC>
<BIBNO T="oclc">[ocm]12577135</BIBNO>
<VID>200309</VID>
</IDG>
<TEXT LANG="eng">
<BODY>
<DIV1 TYPE="text">
<PB N="1" REF="1" MS="y">
<HEAD>The Lord Mayor of LONDON'S VINDICATION. Being an An&s;wer to a Pamphlet intituled, <HI>A brief Collection out of the Records of the City, touching the Ele|ction of Sheriffs for the City of</HI> London, <HI>and County of</HI> Middle&s;ex, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></HEAD>
<P>_HAD not that <HI>Pamphlet</HI> termed it &s;elf to be put forth by Order, it was not po&s;&s;ible to have believed, that e|ver a Lord Mayor and Court of Aldermen of <HI>London</HI> &s;hould have under&s;tood them&s;elves and the Law no better, than to have impo&s;ed upon the City &s;uch in|coherent Things: and that, which highly argues it &s;o is, that in one Part of the Pamphlet they who are &s;aid to be the Magi&s;trates, and that ought by their Places to puni&s;h Offenders and Breakers of the Law, do mo&s;t manife&s;tly break it them&s;elves, in calling the late Times to remembrance, by terming it a Rebellion, which the Act of Oblivion never did: (<HI>Vid.</HI> 12. <HI>Car.</HI> 2.) but on the contrary commands all the Actions of the late Times to be buried in utter Oblivion, with Penalties for any that pre&s;ume to breake it, by reviving the Memory of it: And tho &s;uch Expre&s;&s;ions would have well enough befitted <HI>Roger Le&s;trange,</HI> or Prote&s;tant <HI>Nat. Thom&s;on,</HI> yet the Gravity of that Court for &s;uch Acts, may, as well as others, receive a Ble|mi&s;h, if not a Puni&s;hment, from that Law they have &s;o little regarded. And therefore we mu&s;t in Charity judge, that neither his Lord&s;hip nor the Court had any Hand in &s;uch a Thing, but take it to be, as it &s;eems, only a Brat of the Scriblers Brain. As for the Town-Clark, who&s;e Name is to it, we mu&s;t al&s;o believe better Things of him, unle&s;s he were commanded by his Superiours to do it: however we &s;hall not fur|ther di&s;pute about it, but come to the Matter.</P>
<P>Fir&s;t, the Pamphlet &s;aith in the fir&s;t Page, <HI>That the Charters are to the Citizens to chu&s;e their Sheriffs:</HI> (very well,) if &s;o, what need we go any
<PB N="2" REF="2">further? doth the Lord Mayor or Court of Aldermen pretend any Po|wer but what the Charters give them? or can they or any other by a By Law abrige the Charters that give them Life and Motion? Cer|tainly it were the mo&s;t prepo&s;terous Thing in the World to imagine that the Creature &s;hould de&s;troy the Creator. Now if it &s;hould be granted, as this Pamphlet would have it, that the particular By-Laws or new Cu&s;toms &s;hould alter the fundamental Charter, that gives them Life and Being, and which is time out of mind; then the Creature is above the Creator. And yet the Pamphlet goes on, and tells us, That tho it be &s;o by the Charters, yet by u&s;age and particu|lar By-Laws the Choice of Sheriffs have been re&s;trained: (Very well!) then By Laws are above the Charter, which mu&s;t nece&s;&s;arily follow. But that this is a fal&s;e Pre&s;umption, will appear two ways in the Char|ters granted, and which are confirmed by Act of Parliament, and &s;o become Part of the Law of the Land. In that of <HI>Richard the &s;econd</HI> it is provided, that, notwith&s;tanding any Mi&s;u&s;age or Abu&s;age, all their ancient Rights &s;hall be continued to them: if &s;o, then it follows, that altho it &s;hould be admitted, that by By-Laws and new Cu&s;toms of 40, 50, or 100 Years &s;tanding, or more, being Mi&s;u&s;age or Abu&s;age, contrary to the Charter, can never hurt or prejudice the ancient Rights, when the City &s;hall claim them, as they have done &s;everal Times, as the Pamphleteer in the next place &s;hews him&s;elf, in the ca&s;e of Chu&s;ing Sheriffs. But in the next place, that no by Law made by the Power of the Charter can overthrow the Charter it &s;elf, appears by the Char|ter that gives Power to make By-Laws: but all By-Laws &s;aith the Charter, repugnant to, or which tend to abridge the Charter, that gives you Power, is <HI>ip&s;o facto</HI> null and void.</P>
<P>If &s;o, then the chu&s;ing of Sheriffs, or either of them, any other way than as the Charter directs, tho there be a By-law for the &s;ame, is ut|terly incon&s;i&s;tent with the Charter, and the Law of the Land: for the Charter hath pre&s;cribed, that the Citizens &s;hall choo&s;e from among&s;t them&s;elves, and not that the Lord Mayor &s;hould choo&s;e for them. And for that indeed the Barons of <HI>London,</HI> which were the Freemen, cho&s;e Sheriffs by the Name of <HI>Portrieves,</HI> long before a Mayor was in <HI>London,</HI> as may be &s;een by the ancient Records.</P>
<P>But that we may an&s;wer the whole, or what is worthy to be an|&s;wer'd, we &s;hall take notice of what follows.</P>
<P>The Pamphlet tells us, <HI>So it had been u&s;ed for the Lord Mayor to nomi|nate or choo&s;e a Per&s;on, &amp;c. from the</HI> 21&s;t <HI>Year of</HI> Edward the third, <HI>to</HI> 1641, &amp;c. <HI>except</HI> 4 <HI>or</HI> 5 <HI>Years between the Time of</HI> Edward the third <HI>and</HI>
<PB N="3" REF="2">1641. So then, by their own &s;hewing, it was not always taken for granted: it &s;eems neither 4 or 5 Years, by their own Confe&s;&s;ion, the Common Hall would not confirm the Mayor's Nomination, before the Year 41, (now &s;o much harped at.) Well, but what follows: From 41, then the City would not confirm, but cho&s;e their own Sheriffs in Common Hall till 1663. This is &s;till by their own &s;hewing: From whence I ob&s;erve, altho the Pamphleteer would turn the &s;hame of the altering it at 1641, to be occa&s;ioned by the Rebellion, as he calls it, but that is the greate&s;t Fallacy in the World, for in 1641, mo&s;t of the Aldermen of <HI>London</HI> then took Part with the Parliament again&s;t the King; and the then Mayor was, and many that followed after|wards, were &s;uch Enemies to the King's Party at that Time, that they continuing to drink to Per&s;ons to be Sheriffs, according to their Way, the Citizens then, in oppo&s;ition to the Parliaments Party, renewed their antient Rights, and would not any more confirm the Mayor's Nomination; and &s;o it continued 3 Years after his Maje&s;tie's Re&s;taura|tion, <HI>by their own &s;hewing too.</HI>
<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Pag.</HI> 2.</NOTE> And all along to this Day the Pamphle|teer, nor any one for him, can ever &s;hew when ever it was &s;tood upon by the Citizens, that ever any Man held Sheriff that was not cho&s;en by the Citizens, if they oppo&s;ed him: then the Pamphleteer tells us from 1663, it continued, that the Citizens confirmed to this Time, except in the Year 1674 to 1680. So then &s;hould it be admitted that the former was done by the Rebels: yet there, from 1660 to 1674.
<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Pag.</HI> 2.</NOTE> and from thence to 1680. here hath been no Rebellion, and yet by their own &s;hewing the Citizens in this Time would not confirm.</P>
<P>But in the &s;ame &s;econd Page the Pamphlet tells us the Rea&s;on: <HI>Be|cau&s;e the Lord Mayor hath nominated a Per&s;on to be one of the Sheriffs, do the Lord Mayor and Aldermen withdraw,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>leaving the Commons to confirm him, and elect the other,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>as they do upon the Choice of the Lord Mayor,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>but at other Halls they do not withdraw, as at the Choice of Parliament-Men,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
<P>To which I an&s;wer: fir&s;t, If the Lord Mayor's Nomination be good, what need he either withdraw, or he care whether the City confirm him or not; but that it is not good, appears, becau&s;e in all Times and Ages the Precepts &s;ent forth by the Mayors run to chu&s;e Sheriffs, and not a Sheriff, or to confirm, until this Year of Experiments: but what he hath to an&s;wer, that did commit that bold Attempt and Rape upon the City Cu&s;toms and Priviledge, contrary to his Oath, time may di&s;cover: And I doubt not but the Citizens will in due Time re&s;ent it. But let that alone. As to the other Part of confirming, after the Ma|yor
<PB N="4" REF="3">is withdrawn, is a meer Fiction, for the Mayor ought not to be in the Common Hall whil&s;t any Officer is chu&s;ing but Parliament-Men, and that is by Virtue as the Mayor and Aldermen are Freehol|ders of the County, as a Nobleman may give his Voice as a Freeholder for a Commoner to be cho&s;en a Member of Parliament: but otherwi&s;e at no Election or Confirmation of City-Officers in Common Hall are the Mayor or Aldermen by; nor can there be any Rea&s;on for it, becau&s;e the Mayor and Aldermen are of the Upper-Hou&s;e, and ought no more to be with the Commoners in the Choice of their Officers, than the Commoners can do in the Choice of the Officers of their Court.</P>
<P>And as for what the Pamphlet &s;ays about the Records of the City in Ancient Times, it was never known more or otherwi&s;e either in an|cient Times or late Days, by any of the Records, that ever the Ma|yor's pitching upon a Sheriff for the Year in&s;uing, was any more than a Recommendation to the Hall of a Per&s;on fit: and the beginning of Drinking and Recommendation of the Mayor &s;eems to be only upon this Con&s;ideration, that &s;uch Per&s;ons &s;o nominated, might not pretend an Excu&s;e of being out of Town, and keeping out of the Way, again&s;t the Day of Election came; which appears by the Records of the Ci|ty, <HI>(made in the Time of Edward the third)</HI> which &s;ay, That if any ab&s;en|ted them&s;elves to avoid the Office at the Day of Election, they &s;hould forfeit 100 l. and the Ceremony of Drinking aro&s;e from this, that fit|ted Per&s;ons being pitched upon, they might not have an Excu&s;e to avoid the Burthen, having notice beforehand: but never was any one put upon the Citizens whether they would or not. And one other Rea&s;on, why this Drinking and Recommending was encouraged, be|cau&s;e the City wanted Mony, and &s;o they went a birding every Year, and got Fines of &s;everal Men that were pitched upon, rather than &s;uch, &s;o marked out, would hazard their being cho&s;e at the Com|mon Hall: for heretofore we u&s;ed to chu&s;e Sheriffs out of Spight, be|cau&s;e they were rich, and not for love, and becau&s;e of their Abilities to &s;erve, and this Thing we would be at &s;till.</P>
<P>In the next place the Pamphlet tells us very truly I believe, that <HI>in the fourth of</HI> Henry the fifth, <HI>an Act of common Council was made, that the Sheriffs ought to be freely and indifferently cho&s;en by the more &s;ufficient Citizens &s;ummoned to tho&s;e Elections.</HI> (Very well.) Then I perceive what was &s;aid before of continuing the Cu&s;tom of Nomination by the Ma|yor from <HI>Edward the third</HI> to 1641, is a greater Mi&s;take than they that put out the Paper were aware of: for it appears by this Act at this time, and that by their own By-Law, tho it was in&s;ignificant to &s;upport the
<PB N="5" REF="3">Charter, for the Charter was able to &s;tand alone of it &s;elf: yet here what was &s;aid before of the Cu&s;tom continuing to 1641 is not &s;o, for in <HI>Henry the fifth's</HI> Time, (which was near an hundred Years after <HI>Ed|ward the third</HI>) this Law was made to confirm the Citizens Right, &s;o pa&s;&s;ed by the making it, that it had otherwi&s;e been abu&s;ed heretofore: but to blind this, which cuts the Throat of all the Pamphleteer &s;aid be|fore, in the next place he tells us what was done in <HI>Richard the &s;econd's</HI> Time, which was before <HI>Henry the fifth's.</HI> But he brings it in as if it were after this of <HI>Henry the fifth,</HI> to cut off, I &s;uppo&s;e, the Force of this good Act of Common Council, ju&s;t before recited: but if it had been after <HI>Henry the fifth,</HI> as it is not, it helps not the Bu&s;ine&s;s at all, for it faith, <HI>When the Commons have agreed upon a Per&s;on they &s;hall pre|&s;ent to be Sheriff, they &s;hall pre&s;ent him to the Mayor and Aldermen:</HI> which is far from inve&s;ting any Right in the Mayor to chu&s;e him, or to med|dle with the Choice, or to adjourn the Pole, as is this Year done. Certainly the Mayor and his Brethren would take it to be a Riot indeed if the Sheriffs or the Commoners &s;hould come into their Court, and adjourn them whether they would or no; yet with as much Right may it be done, as the Mayor adjourned the Common Hall on Mid&s;um|mer Day: which appears thus, be&s;ides what hath been &s;aid; that is, The City of <HI>London</HI> is an ancient County, and the Sheriffwick is of Fee confirmed by Acts of Parliaments in Abundance; the Sheriffs hold Courts by the &s;ame Power as the County Courts are held; they have the <HI>po&s;&s;e Comitatis;</HI> And as the Ju&s;tices in each County have not to do with the County Court, otherwi&s;e than as Fellow-freeholders: nor can they either adjourn the Court, or command the Sheriff to ad|journ; no more hath my Lord Mayor to do with the Court; For the Court once called, is to fini&s;h the Work of the County, and they who are the Freeholders in a legal way, have only Power to adjourn them|&s;elves with the Sheriffs, who are in the nature of Stewards, or Chief of the Court, to &s;ee fair play, and govern the Pole: and our Court of Common Hall is in nature of the <HI>Oyld Follke Moote.</HI> And all the A|bettors of this Innovation cannot &s;hew any &s;uch Pre&s;ident as hath been acted this Year, in adjourning the Pole by the Mayor. And as for the Act of Common Council the Pamphlet mentions in the nine|teenth Year of <HI>Henry the eighth,</HI> about the ancient Prerogative of the Ma|yor, and of the thirteenth of Queen <HI>Elizabeth,</HI> and the &s;eventh of <HI>Charles the fir&s;t;</HI> It is not material if they had five times as many more, unle&s;s they can &s;hew either an Act of Parliament, to confirm tho&s;e Acts and Cu&s;tomes &s;ince their being made, or the &s;ame proved by the
<PB N="6" REF="4">Charter, otherwi&s;e they are of no value, becau&s;e they are both incon&s;i&s;tent, and directly oppo&s;ite to the Charter it &s;elf, which &s;aith, The Sheriffs &s;hall be cho&s;en by the Citizens, from among&s;t them|&s;elves; nor can tho&s;e pretended By-Acts, if any &s;uch there be, over|throw the Grants by Charter, confirmed by &s;everal Acts of Parlia|ment, and u&s;ed time out of mind. And further, if it &s;hould be al|lowed, that By-Laws could overthrow any part of the Charter, it might by the &s;ame Rule overthrow the whole, which would be a &s;trange A&s;&s;ertion: And the Lord Mayor, nor any other Per&s;on, that &s;tands up for &s;uch By-Laws, cannot-&s;hew any Act of Parliament to confirm them, or the City-Charters, &s;ince <HI>Henry</HI> the Eighth's Time.</P>
<P>And for the Lord Mayor's Prerogative, mentioned in the Act of Common Council, in the 19th Year of <HI>Henry</HI> the Eighth, that can as little help the matter as any thing el&s;e: For unle&s;s his Lord&s;hip can &s;hew a prior Right, which I take to be the true meaning of the word <HI>Prerogative,</HI> to chu&s;e Sheriffs, and to adjourn County-Courts, or Foolk-Moots, further than all the Sheriffs of <HI>England</HI> have for their Power, I cannot imagine what his Prerogative, found out but in <HI>Henry</HI> the Eighth's Time, will do him good, to ju&s;tify the Choice of a Sheriff, or to adjourn the Pole. And as for the u&s;ual Proclamation that begins the Common-Hall, which the Pamphlet tells us of, in declaring that they are &s;ummoned to confirm and chu&s;e Sheriffs, I know not if it be &s;o or not, nor is it material what a Crier &s;aith; our Right is upon Record, and <HI>literis &s;criptis manet.</HI> And be&s;ides, if &s;uch Proclamation be, it is contrary to the Precept that brings them thither to chu&s;e, for that &s;aith otherwi&s;e; and the Prerogative of the Pre|cept &s;eems to be better grounded than the Prerogative of the Procla|mation: But the Pamphleteer may know, that it is in the Power of the Foolk-Moote, or Common-Hall, to meet on the Day of Election, without any Precept at all. And as for the giving Bond, before the Common-Hall chu&s;e them, to hold Sheriffs, &s;eems inco|herent to it &s;elf, if it hath been &s;o ever &s;ince Queen <HI>Elizabeth</HI>'s Time, which I believe cannot be proved, that &s;carce ever it was done before this Year; but if that &s;hould be &s;o, how that will any ways alter the Ca&s;e, I cannot &s;ee. If Men will be &s;o forward, to do a thing incon|&s;i&s;tent with common Sence; for all Men know, that no Man can be a Sheriff, till the Common-Hall do confirm him; and why a Man &s;hould give Bond to hold Sheriff, before he is confirmed, I believe, was never coveted but by Mr. <HI>North,</HI> or our Gazetteer, who exerted his Prerogative, and named him Sheriff Elect, a long time before the Day of Election came.</P>
<PB N="7" REF="4">
<P> But to put it out of all doubt, that it is impo&s;&s;ible for any to be Sheriffs of <HI>London,</HI> but them that are cho&s;en by the Common-Hall, and Citizens of <HI>London;</HI> and that is, fir&s;t from the Words of the Charter, and the Rea&s;on of the Thing, why it cannot be done by any other Power.</P>
<P>The Charters of King <HI>Henry</HI> the Fir&s;t, and the Charters of King <HI>John,</HI> before <HI>Magna Charta,</HI> grant in the&s;e Words, <HI>viz. Know ye, That We have granted, and by this our pre&s;ent Writing confirmed, to Our Citi|zens of</HI> London, <HI>the Sheriffwick of</HI> London <HI>and</HI> Middle&s;ex, <HI>with all the Cu&s;toms and Things to the Sheriffwick belonging, within the City and without, by Land and by Water, to them and their Heirs, for &V;s and Our Heirs, paying therefore</HI> 300 l. <HI>of blank Sterling-Money,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>And fur|ther, We have granted to the &s;aid Citizens of</HI> London, <HI>that they among&s;t them&s;elves may make Sheriffs whom they will, [and may amove them when they will]</HI> (Mark that!) <HI>And they &s;hall pre&s;ent to the Ju&s;tices of Our Exchequer, of the&s;e Things which to the Sheriffwick appertain, whereof they ought to an&s;wer &V;s: And unle&s;s they &s;hall &s;ufficiently an&s;wer &V;s, and &s;atisfy, the Citizens &s;hall an&s;wer and &s;atisfy &V;s the Amercements and Farm,</HI> &amp;c. (Ob&s;erve that!)</P>
<P>Now this is the Law, and the Prerogative of every Citizen of <HI>London,</HI> far beyond the Mayor's Prerogative, or indeed before there was a Mayor of <HI>London;</HI> from whence ought to be con&s;idered three things.</P>
<P>Fir&s;t; It appears plain, the Sheriffs are a free Election of the Ci|tizens, as is above &s;hewn; and not only &s;o, but the Sheriffs &s;o cho&s;en, the Citizens have power, upon any Mi&s;-behaviour, to amove them at their plea&s;ure: So are the Words, <HI>May amove them when they will.</HI> If &s;o, then &s;hall my Lord Mayor come and &s;ay, Gentlemen, I have cho&s;e a Sheriff, he &s;hall hold whether you will or no, and you &s;hall not amove him at your plea&s;ure, for I have cho&s;en him, and not you. Would not this be a prodigious Piece of Non&s;ence, that tho we can remove our Sheriffs we cho&s;e our &s;elves at plea&s;ure, by virtue of the Charter, yet we &s;hall not amove my Lord Mayor's Sheriff at plea&s;ure, but mu&s;t be forced to continue him in, whether we will or no, becau&s;e he hath been drunk to by the Mayor? Certainly no Man will hold this Principle, nor will any Man &s;ay, That it is true, you may remove your Sheriffs, when they are in, at your plea&s;ure; but you &s;hall be forced to take him to be your Sheriff at fir&s;t, that is put upon you by the Lord Mayor. This would be as &s;trange as the re&s;t, that we &s;hall have power to remove, but not to reject.</P>
<PB N="8" REF="5" MS="y">
<P> But in the next place, the Charters &s;ay, The Sheriffs &s;hall an&s;wer the King of all Defaults in the Exchequer for the Sheriffwicks; and if the Sheriffs be not able to make the King &s;atisfaction, the Citizens &s;hall. If this be the Law, as no Man can deny but it is, then in what a &s;ad Condition are the Citizens of <HI>London,</HI> when every individual Man is liable to make good the Damage that comes to the King, by default or neglect of the Sheriffs, and yet tho&s;e very Sheriffs &s;hall be impo&s;ed on them, be they good or bad? This were a &s;ure way to un|do the whole City, or at lea&s;t &s;uch Men in it as are mo&s;t eminent: For if the Mayor heretofore, or in Time to come, &s;hould prove but a Knave, and he chu&s;e a Per&s;on to be a Sheriff, like him&s;elf, to do Mi&s;chief, in what a Condition then is the City? even liable to be undone, and no Redre&s;s can be had. This Evil would be ten times wor&s;e than if we had no Sheriffs at all of our own Election; for in|&s;tead of being in a better Condition, (as we are now by our chu&s;ing our own Sheriffs,) than other Places, we &s;hould be in a far wor&s;e Con|dition than the other Counties, who&s;e Sheriffs are now, &s;ince the Statute of <HI>Lincoln,</HI> elected by the Chancellor, and Barons of the Ex|chequer; for tho&s;e Sheriffs &s;o cho&s;en in the Country, the Country is not liable for their Mi&s;demeanors or In&s;ufficiencies, which we in <HI>Lon|don</HI> are. But the&s;e Things, and the&s;e Proceedings, which have hap|pened this Year, we mu&s;t not believe that our pre&s;ent Lord-Mayor, or any Man that pretends to Common-Sence and Hone&s;ty, is guilty of, except mi&s;led by pernicious Coun&s;el, and that they will not proceed in their Error any longer: I &s;hall therefore add no more, but give you this Caution&mdash;</P>
<EPIGRAPH>
<Q LANG="lat">Errores tempe&s;tiv&egrave; corrigantur, optimi ver&ograve; &s;unt Errores breves.</Q>
</EPIGRAPH>
</DIV1>
<TRAILER>FINIS.</TRAILER>
</BODY>
<BACK>
<DIV1 TYPE="colophon">
<P><HI>LONDON,</HI> Printed for <HI>E. Smith.</HI> 1682.</P>
</DIV1>
</BACK>
</TEXT>
</EEBO>
</ETS>
