with whom they were content, and none other should come to the 1 elections of mayors and sheriffs; that the greater companies should not elect more than six, the lesser four and the least two. Fortyseven companies nominated 156 members. In 1383 the right of election reverted to the wards, but was obtained again by the livery companies in 1467.
The Common Hall was the successor of the folkmote, the meetings of which were originally held in the open air at the east end of St C Paul's and afterwards in the Guildhall. These general H';';”'“°" assemblies of the citizens are described in the old city records as immensa communitas or immensa multitude civiurn. The elections in Common Hall were by the whole body of citizens until Edward I.'s reign, »citizens were then specially summoned to Common Hall by the mayor. In Edward IV.'s reign the elections of mayor, sheriffs and other officers and members of parliament were transferred to liverymen. Various alterations were subsequently made and now the qualification of electors at the election of the corporate offices of lord mayor, sherilis, chamberlain and minor offices in Common Hall is that of being a liveryman of a livery company and an enrolled freeman of London. The election of aldermen and common councilmen takes place in the ward motes. The recorder, the chief official, is appointed for life. He was formerly appointed by the city, but since the Local Government Act of 1888 he is nominated by the city and approved by oxifds the lord chancellor. The common sergeant was formerly °” ° appointed by the city, but since 1888 by the lord C -V' chancellor. The town clerk is appointed by the city and re-elected annually.
The chamberlain or Comptroller of the king's chamber is appointed by the livery. He was originally a king's officer and the office was probably instituted soon after the Conquest. The remembrance is appointed by the common council.
The common hunt, an office abolished in 1807, was filled by John Courtenay in 1417. The sword-bearer is noticed in the Liber Albus (1419) and the first record of an appointment is dated 1426. Few fundamental alterations have been made in the constitution of the city, but in the reign of Charles II. the most arbitrary proceedings were taken against its liberties. The king and iff' I his brother had long entertained designs against the city, th;;3 ' ° and for the purpose of crushing them two pretexts were poration set up-(1) that a new rate of market tolls had been levied by virtue of an act of common council, and (2) that a petition to the king, in which it was alleged that by the prorogation of parliament public justice had been interrupted, had been printed by order of the Court of Common Council. Charles directed a writ qua 'warronto against the corporation of London in 1683, and the Court of King's Bench declared its charter forfeited. Soon afterwards all the obnoxious aldermen were displaced and others appointed in their room by royal commission. When James Il. found himself in danger from the landing of the Prince of Orange he sent for the lord mayor and aldermen and informed them of his determination to restore the city charter and privileges, but he had no time to do anything before his flight. The Convention which was summoned to meet on the 22nd of January 1689 was converted by a formal act into a true parliament (February 23). One of the first motions ut to the House was that a special Committee should be appointedgto consider the violations of the liberties and franchises of all the corporations of the kingdom “ and particularly of the City of London." The'motion was lost but the House resolved to bring in a bill for repealing the Corporation Act, and ten years later (March 5) the Grand Committee of Grievances reported to the House its opinion (I) that the rights of the City of London in the election of sheriffs in the year 1682 were invaded and that such invasion was illegal and a grievance, and (2) that the judgment given upon the Quo Worranto against the city was illegal and a grievance. The committee's opinion on these two points (among others) was endorsed by the House and on the 16th of March it ordered a Bill to be brought in to restore all corporations to the state and condition they were in on the 29th of May 1660, and to confirm the liberties and franchises which at that time they respectively held and enjoyed.
When the Act for the reform of Municipal Corporations was passed in 1835 London was specially exce ted from its provisions. When the Metropolitan Board of Works was formed by the Metropolis Management Act of 1855 the city was affected to a certain extent, but by the Local Government Act of 1888 which founded the London County Council the right of appointing a sheriff for Middlesex was taken away from the city of London.
When the county of Middlesex was dissociated from the city of London one portion was joined to the administrative county of London, and the other to the county of Middlesex. The lord mayor of London has certain very remarkable privileges which have been religiously guarded and must be of great antiquity. Pdvue it is only necessary to mention these here, but each ges . .
of the lord of the privileges requires an exhaustive examination mayon as to its origin. They all prove the remarkable position of Old London, and mark it off from all other cities of modern Europe. Shortly stated the privileges are four: R. R. Sharpe, London and the Kingdom (1894), i. 541. 1. The closing of Temple Bar to the sovereign. 2. The mayor's position in the city, where he is second only to the king.
3. His summons to the Privy Council on the accession of a new sovereign.
4. His position of butler at the coronation banquets. The last may be considered in abeyance as there has not been any coronation banquet since that of George IV. In the case of the coronation of Kin Edward VII. the claim was excluded from the consideration of the Court of Claims under the royal proclamation. The terms of the judgment on a further claim are as follows: “The Court considers and adjudges that the lord mayor has by usage a right, subject to His Majesty's pleasure, to attend the Abbey during the coronation and bear the crystal mace.
BIBLIOGRAPHY.'*Th€ earliest description of London is that written by the monk Fitzstephen in 1174 as an introduction to his life of Archbishop Thomas é Becket. This was first printed by Stow in his Survey. It was reprinted by Strype in his editions of Stow; by Hcarne in his edition of Leland's Itinerary (vol. 8), by Samuel Pegge in 1772, and elsewhere. The first history is contained in A Survey of London by John Stow (1598, 1603). The author died in 1605, and his work was continued by Anthony Munday and others (1618, 1633) and in the next century by John Strype (1720, 1754-1755). Stow's original work was reprinted by W. j. Thoms in 1842 and a monumental edition has been published by C. L. Kingsford (Oxford, 1908).
The following are the most important of subsequent histories arranged in order of publication; James Howell, Londinopolis (1657); W. Stow, Remarks on London and Westminster (1722); Robert Seymour (John Mottley), Survey of the Cities of London and Westminster (1734, another edition 1753); William Maitland, History of London (1739, other editions 1756, 1760, 1769, continued byjohn Entick 1775); John Entick, A New and Accurate History of London, Westminster, Southwark (1766); The City Remembrancer, Narratives of the Plague 1665, Fire 1666 and Great Storm 1703 (1769); A New and Compleat History and Survey, by a Society of Gentlemen (1770, revised by H. Chamberlain, folio revised by W. Thornton 1784); j. Noorthouek, A New History (1773); Walter Harrison, A New and Universal History (1775); j. P. Malcolm, Londinium Redivivum or an Ancient History and Modern Description of London (1803); David Hughson (E. Pugh), London (1805-1809); B. Lambert, History and Survey of London (1806); Henry Hunter, History of London (1811); j. W. Abbott, History of London (1821); Thomas Allen, History and Antiquities of London (1827-1829, continued by Thomas Wright 1839); William Smith, A New History of London (1833); Charles Mackay, A History of London (1838); The History of London, illustrated by W. G. Fearnside (1838); George Grant, A Comprehensive History of London (Dublin, 1849); John Timbs, Curiosities of London (1855, later editions 1855, 1868, 1875, 1876); Old London Papers, Archaeological Institute (1867); W. j. Loftie, A History of London (1883); W. j. Loftie, Historic Town/s (London, 1887); Claude de la Roche Francis, London, Historic and Social (Philadelphia, 1902); Sir Walter Besant, The Survey of London (1902-1908)-Early London, Prehistoric, Roman, Saxon and Norman (1908); Medieval London, vol. I, Historical and Social (1906), vol. 2, Ecclesiastical (1906); London in the Time of the Tudors (1904); London in the Time of the Stuarts (1903); London in the Eighteenth Century (1902); H. B. Wheatley, The Story of London Medieval Towns] (London, 1904).
The following are some of the Chronicles of London which have been printed, arranged in order of publication: R. Grafton; Chronicle 1189-1558 (1809); R. Arnold, London Chronicle (1811); A Chronicle of London from 108Q to 1483 written in the Fifteenth Century (1827); William Gregory's Chronicle of London, 1189-1469 (1876); Historical Collections of a Citizen of London, edited by James Gairdner (Camden Society, 1876); Chronicles of London (1200-1516], edited by C. L. Kingsford (Oxford, 1905).
Many books have been published on the government of London, of which the following is a selection: City Law (1647, 1658); Lex Londincnsis or the City Low (1680); W. Bohun, Privilegio. Londini (1723); Giles Jacob, City Liberties (1733); Laws and Customs, Rights, Liberties and Privileges of the City of London (1765); David Hughson, Epitome of the Privile es of London (1816) 1 George Norton, Commentaries on the History, Constitution and Chartered Franchises of the City of London (1829, 3rd ed. 1869); Munimenta Gildhallae Londoniensis, edited by H. T. Riley-vol. 1, Liber Albus (1419), vol. 2, Liber Custumarum (1859); Liber Albus: the White Book of the City of London, translated by H. T. Riley (1861); H. T. Riley, Memorials of London and London Life in the 13th, 14th and 15th centuries (1868); De Antiquis Legibus Liber. Curantc Tlioma Stapleton (Camden Society, 1846); Chronicles of the Mayors and Sheriffs of London 1188-1274. translated from the Liber deAntiquisLegibus by H. T. Riley. French Chronicle of London 1259-1343 (1863); Analytical Index to the Series of Records known os the Remembrancia 157Q-1664 (1888); Calendar of Letter-Books [circa 1275-1399] preserved among the Archives of the Corporation of London at the Guildhall, edited by Reginald R. Sharpe, D.C.L. (18919-1907) Z W . and R. Woodcock, Lives of Lord Mayors (1846); j. F. B. irth, Municipal
London (1876); Walter Delgray Birch, Historical Charters and