London and the Kingdom - Volume II | Page 6

mayor's own barge, for the purpose of
conveying his majesty's effects to Greenwich. As for the barge, the
mayor wrote that the lord chamberlain sometimes borrowed it for
conveying the king's guard, and it might haply be required again for the
same purpose, "but for carringe anie stuffe or lugedge whereby it maie
receave hurt it was never yet required," and he hoped their lordships
would see the matter in that light.(31)
(M11)
Another important matter which occupied the attention of the House at
this session--although no reference to it appears in the City's records of
the day--was the introduction of Free Trade, to the prejudice of the
chartered rights of various trading companies. The citizens of London
were deeply interested in the bill which was introduced for this purpose,
for although it little affected the livery companies, it touched very
closely the interests of those companies which were incorporated for
the purpose of trading with foreign countries, such as that of the
Merchant Adventurers, the Levant Company, the Russia Company, and
others. These companies had been formed at a time when few
individuals were sufficiently wealthy to bear the risk of distant
enterprises. Not every citizen was a Whitington or a Gresham. The risk
incurred by these associations in undertaking voyages to distant
countries was compensated by the advantage gained by the enjoyment
of a monopoly of the trade with those countries by charter from the
Crown. At the outset there had been no cry raised against monopolies
of this kind, but as time wore on and the merchant navy increased, as it
did in the last reign with extraordinary rapidity, a feeling of jealousy
grew up on the part of shipowners who were not members of one or
other of these chartered companies. By the beginning of the
seventeenth century dissatisfaction with the privileges of these trading

companies had become so general that appeals were made to the Privy
Council. These being without effect, the whole matter was referred to a
parliamentary committee. No pains were spared to get at the root of the
grievance. The committee were attended by "a great concourse of
clothiers and merchants of all parts of the realm and especially of
London."(32) Counsel was heard in favour of the bill which had been
drafted for the purpose of throwing open foreign trade to all merchants
alike, and the bill was supported by all the merchants attending the
committee with the exception of the merchants of London, who were
represented on the occasion by the principal aldermen of the city. The
free traders urged the natural right of every one to the free exercise of
his own industry and the example set by other nations. They declared
that the passing of the bill would lead to the more even distribution of
wealth,(33) the greater increase of shipping, and the augmentation of
the revenues of the Crown. The upholders of the companies, on the
other hand, could find no better arguments in their favour than that no
company could be a monopoly inasmuch as a monopoly was something
granted exclusively to a single individual, and that if the existence of
the companies was determined, apprenticeship would cease and
difficulties arise in collecting the king's customs! After three days'
debate on the third reading the bill passed the Commons by a large
majority.(34) It met, however, with so much opposition in the House of
Lords that it was eventually dropt.
(M12)
A quarrel afterwards arose between the king and the Commons on
financial and ecclesiastical questions, and matters being brought to a
deadlock, the House was adjourned (7 July). A few days before the
adjournment the Speaker and over a hundred members held "a friendly
and loving meeting" at Merchant Taylors' Hall, before departing to
their country homes. The king contributed a buck and a hogshead of
wine towards the entertainment, which proved so popular that thirty
more guests appeared on the scene than was originally intended. The
"Solemn Feast" was further graced by a "marchpane"--(a confection of
bitter almonds and sugar)--representing the House of Commons
sitting.(35)

(M13)
Three years later (17 July, 1607) the king himself honoured the
company with his presence at dinner in their hall. The Merchant
Taylors would gladly have welcomed him as one of their number and
admitted him to the honorary freedom of their company, but James had
already been made free of the company of Clothworkers. His son,
Prince Henry, who was present at the entertainment, declared himself
willing to accept the freedom, and made those of his suite who were not
already members of some other company follow his example.(36)
(M14)
In August (1604) the king sent to borrow £20,000 from the City, a sum
which was afterwards, at the City's earnest request, reduced to £15,000.
The money was to