pipe cokers (empty wine pipes), bought there for raising the barge, 8s. 7d.; also for spykings bought for the purpose of attaching the tilting, that it might not burst asunder, 5s.; so at last our barge was there broken!" Earlier in the same year (June 7th) we find "Thomas Wottone and William at Chapel and others coming here with letters patent, and the standard of the lord the King, touching the insurrection of the people in divers counties;" they are liberally entertained at the house of William Holyngbroke, and 13s. 4d. is charged in the corporation accounts "for a present given to the said Thomas, as a mark of respect for the letters patent, and the standard of the said lord the King, and for his trouble." As this was but five days before Tyler and his hundred thousand men sacked the house of the Archbishop of Canterbury at Lambeth, and demolished the prisons of the Marshalsea and the King's Bench; and as the greater part of Kent* was at this time openly siding with the rebels, who appeared to be getting altogether the upper hand of the authorities throughout the southern and eastern parts of England, I take this to have been a very exceptional proof of loyalty on the part of the barons of Romney; and the more as they seem, as we shall soon see, to have succeeded in raising some men at least who were afterwards employed in putting down the rebellion in the east-possibly as they may have been supposed less likely to have sympathised with rebels far from home, than with those who were nearer neighbours to them. Again on the 27th of June, and ten days after the quelling of the rebellion and the death of Wat Tyler at the hands of the Lord Mayor of London, “John Justere, Sergeant at Arms of the lord the King, came here for the reason before stated," i.e., touching the insurrection. This second message was probably the revocation of the charters of enfranchisement and pardon granted to the rebels on the field by Richard II, and revoked by him as soon as he had sufficiently broken their power to enable him to do so. That the men raised under the standard of the King by the barons of the five ports were not permitted to return to

*Including the Mayor and Corporation of Canterbury, who had been compelled by force to join them.

their homes, after the suppression of the insurrection in the neighbourhood of London, but were sent on to perform the same work in the eastern counties, under Henry Spencer, known as the "fighting bishop of Norwich," we learn from a mandate from the king, on the 26th of August, "for the arrest of men, passing over to serve under the venerable Father, Henry, Bishop of Norwich, on the 3rd of September, if returning without leave." The service, however, must have been unpopular and the barons unwilling to execute the mandate of the king; for on the 14th of September another letter arrived to "arrest all men sound of body, and horses unhurt, with harness, that had come from following the said Bishop." Whether this second mandate was obeyed or not does not appear, but the bringer of it does not seem to have been so well treated as his predecessors. Now that we have been touching on the subject of rebellion I may mention a hideous item occurring in the accounts for 1450, the year of Jack Cade's rebellion; "Given to a man carrying a quarter of a man, to supersede the said quarter, 3s. 4d." i.e., the man was bribed to carry his ghastly burden, a part of the body of one of the rebels, out of the town.

In 1382 occurs this entry: "Paid for one little bag of leather for the treasure of the community, 24d." Evidently the shape, size, and material of the "common purse" have been handed down for centuries, as it consists to the present day of a "little bag of leather." The present purse bears the date 1682.

"Small-sport" was the appropriate nickname which familiarly denoted a prison in Romney, and men were paid 6d. a day to "watch" beside the prison, when delinquents were in "small-sport," in the reign of Henry VIII. Occasionally, criminals were hanged at Romney; and notably elaborate are the entries which record the chamberlain's expenses in 1592-3, occasioned by the execution of Jeremy Whatelow. Timber for the gallows cost 8s. ; for setting it up two men received 20d.; the rope cost 4d. Edward Michell officiated as hangman, and received for that service the sum of 5s., together with some apparel, made for the occasion at a cost of 7s. 5d. One Father Gaskyn had also been

engaged to hold himself in readiness to act, if need required, and to him was paid 6d. The bellringers received 18d., for ringing at Whatelow's burial. The criminal's goods and chattels were valuable; the town paid 10s. for counsel's opinion respecting them, and 9s. for a supper given to those who appraised them. Whatelow's sheep were sold for £19; and other goods with his household stuff realized £8 8s. Od., when sold at the market cross.

The following quaint letter, though of comparatively recent date (31st January, 1664), is worthy of note.

"Mr. Bostock,

"Wee much wonder that (keeping still in yor hands this Vicarridge of New Romney) you provide not that the cure thereof be duly officiated; you cann be content to receive tithes, but you will neither reside on yr benefice yo' selfe nor provide a curate. Wee have been wholly destitute since Christmas day last and from yo' departure until Christmas wee had indeed a nimble curate who read Divine service once every Lord's Day, and was usually in his sermon and prayer before it about a quarter of an houre. These things if complayned of will neither sound to yr commendation nor proffitt, for sure wee are that if you cann obtein a dispensation for yor non residence (whereof we much doubt), yett must it be conditionally, and noe longer in force then you provide that the cure bee well and sufficiently supplyed. Wherefore in the behalfe of the p'yshioners and inhabitants here wee doe require and advise you, forthwith upon receipt hereof, to provide that the cure be officiated by yo' self or some other able divine, or otherwise for yo' apparent neglect herein we intend to take such advantage for or relief as the laws of Church or State doe affoard, wherein we shall omitt noe opportunity in case you faile in p'formeance of our request, soe expectying yo' answere wee rest,

"Yor Friends though neglected,

"THE MAIOR AND JURATS OF NEW ROMNEY." "From New Romney under the seale of office, etc., etc."

We have seen that so early as the close of the fourteenth century, disputes arose between the barons of Romney and the Archbishops of Canterbury, concerning alleged encroachments by the Archbishops on the liberties of the town. Any such attempted encroachments were at all times sturdily resisted by the jurats, but seem to have been renewed from

time to time by various primates, and in 1521 became the occasion of a regular lawsuit between the parties. The details of this suit have been published in Boys' History of Sandwich.

In 1521, William, Archbishop of Canterbury, exhibited against the jurats and inhabitants of Romney articles setting forth :

1st. That his predecessors had granted to the jurates strenne and strond of the sea; and claiming by the hands of his bailiff, passage, anchorage, and soulage of all ships resorting thither.

2nd. Ergo that the sea having now left and lost his course of flowing half a mile and more from Romney, whereby 400 acres and more were left dry and had become marsh land and good pasture, which belonged of right to the Archbishop.

3rd. That the jurats by a surreptitious charter do make leases of the said marsh or pasture for 10 marks by the year, and have received 170 marks of which the Archbishop requires restitution.

4th. The jurats will not permit his grace's bailiff to exercise his office within the town, in spite of notice and commandment from Sir Edward Poynings, Lord Warden, that they do accept, admit, and obey him.

5th. The custom hath been for the bailiff and jurats to determine all pleas real and personal, except points belonging to Court of Shepway, but the jurates frowardly keep the said courts without the bailiff, proclaim the said court, and determine the pleas.

6th. The Archbishop, by reason of his law-day should have all issues, fines, and amercements for all offences inquirable at law-day; whereas the said jurats set the fines, and take three parts to themselves and leave scantly the fourth to the bishop, whereof he requireth restitution.

7th. By maintenance of said jurats divers persons withhold the Archbishop's rents, customs, and services from his said seignory.

8thly. The jurats have encroached upon the liberty and franchise of the said lord by colour of liberty of barony, whereas the town is all bishoprick.

To these eight articles the jurats and inhabitants by no means agree, and sturdily and promptly answer is made that,

1st. The Town and Port is and hath been, time out of mind, one of the capital five ports, and has liberties ratified and approved by the great Charter of England.

2nd. They deny that the jurats and inhabitants, or their predecessors, ever had any grant of strenne and stronde of the Archbishop's predecessors, or that any person but the king can grant them any privileges but what they now use and have used, time out of mind.

3rd. That the north side only of the town is holden of the Archbishop, and that the rest is and has been holden of the king "by service to find certain ships for his voyage royal to the parts beyond the sea."

4th. That the old stream or creek in that part is holden of the king, and the part holden of the Archbishop neither is nor was any part of any creek or water, but a void place called the Strond, and used as a weekly market, where the Archbishop had picage, stylage, and stallage, which market hath been a long time disused.

5th. That the Archbishop can only send a bailiff into the town when the office is vacant, and that the present bailiff, admitted seven or eight years past, is yet living and of good name and fame, and hath not surrendered his interest " and so the place is not void." Whereas the person lately sent by the Archbishop is indicted of felony, "whereof he is not acquitted;" and he brought not any letter of attendance with him, wherefore the jurats refused him.

6th. That such bailiff was an executive officer, not a judge of their court.

7th. That his sitting among the jurats was of favour and not of duty.

8th. That the Archbishop never had any leet, or law-day, or any amercements whatever.

9th. That no fines or amercements, which the Archbishop ought to have, have been withheld from him.

10th. They admit that the officers and ministers of the Archbishop may distrain for rents where they are due.

11th. That part of Romney being held of the king and not of the Archbishop the jurats have not encroached upon the liberty of the Archbishop, but only for execution of justice as bound to do.

In these matters the jurats seem to have gained all their points except the seventh.