THE Right of Electing SHERIFFS OF LONDON and MIDDLESEX, Briefly stated and declared.  
'TIS the present unhappy Fate of this great and ancient City, to be betrayed by persons fostered within her Walls, and raised and enriched through the benefit of her Franchises and Privileges. How many, whose Hereditary Fortunes could not furnish them with Bread, are swelled to a bigness ready to burst, by having sucked at her Breasts, and like Vipers, after they have been nourished in her Womb, they state their interest in gnawing her entrails, and stabbing her in her Vital parts?  
The Antiquity of London is such, that no Records can determine her Beginning. Her subsistence as a Corporation is immemorial; and no Registers of the affairs of former times, can define or determine when her Greatness, Prerogatives, and Privileges commenced and begun. 
Annal. 14.  Tacitus saith of her above Fifteen Hundred years ago, That she was a City famous for Trade and Commerce. And Cambden assures us, That above 360 years since, she was ennobled with the Title of Augusta, which was a Name of the highest Honour and Dignity that any City was capable of: and then he further tells us, 
Britain, fol. 305.  the Bishop of this famous City was present at the Council of Arles, which was held under Constantine the Great. Yea, Heylin and Howel, whom our Tories so much Reverence and admire, have so far in this matter consulted Truth and their own Reputation, that the first of these Authors acknowledgeth, she was a City of great renown in the time of the Roman conquest; and the second confesseth, That she was anciently not only the Epitome and Abridgement of the Kingdom, but Caput Regum & Legum, the Head both of Kings and Laws.  
Nor is the Citizens Right of choosing Officers, particularly Sheriffs, founded originally upon their Charters, but it belonged unto them by the Common Law of England, as appears by the Statute of Ed. 1. cap. 8. and 13. and Cooks Commentary upon it, 
2 Instit. fol. 558. Lamb. fol. 146.  wherein all he hath said relating hereunto, is justified by Lambert in his Saxon Laws. And when in the 9th Ed. 2. it was ordained by Parliament, that the Sheriffs of the several Counties of the Kingdom should be nominated by the Chancellor, Treasurer, Barons of the Exchequer, and the Justices; London is excepted, forasmuch as it is expressly declared, that that Act extends only to such Counties and places, 
28 Ed. 3. cap. 8.  where the Sherivalty is not in Fee. And as all Sherivalties are shut out from being concluded by that Statute, which are any ways held in Fee; so by undeniable and natural consequence, such Sherivalties stand ratified and confirmed by these two Acts of Parliament to the respective Grantees. 
Stephanid. & M. ss. in Biblioth Cotton.  And whereas London had anciently pro consulibus vicecomites, for its Magistrates, Sheriffs; so William the Conqueror in acknowledgement of its ancient Rights, granted and confirmed, civibus Londini, totam dictam Civitatem & vicecomitatum, to the Citizens of London, the whole City and Sheriffwick thereof. 
lib. K. in Archivis London, fol. 120.  And as to the Sheriffwick of Middlesex, Henry 1. Son to William the Conqueror, granted it to the Citizens of London and their Heirs at the Farm of Three Hundred pounds per annum, 
Carta H. 1. Inspex 2 Hen. 5.  so that they should choose, vicecomites quales voluerint de seipsis, what Sheriffs they pleased from among themselves. And King John, Son to Henry the II. did in the first year of his Reign, Demise and grant to the Citizens of London and their Heirs, the Sheriffwick of London and Middlesex, with all the customs thereunto belonging, to be enjoyed by them and their Heirs, at the Fee-farm of Three Hundred pounds per annum. Nor it is not unworthy of our remark, that by that Charter the said Citizens have liberty and power to remove their Sheriffs when they please, 
Ex Original Carta 1 Joannis.  because as the Charter expresseth it, the City is to answer for their misdemeanours, if they should offend against the duty of their office and Place. To these we may subjoin the Charter of Hen. 3. who in the eleventh year of his Reign, devised and confirmed to the Citizens of London, the said Sheriffwicks of London and Middlesex, with all the things and customs thereunto appertaining. And all these Charters have by Inspeximus' been confirmed by Ed. 1. Ed. 2. Ed. 3. Rich. 2. Hen. 4. Hen. 5. Hen. 6. Ed. 4. Rich. 3. Hen. 7. Hen. 8. Q. Marry, Q. Eliz. K. James, K. Charles I. and his present Majesty. Nay, these Rights, Liberties and Jurisdictions of choosing Sheriffs from among themselves, and turning them out when they will, are not only ratified and confirmed to the Barons or Freemen of London, 
cap. 8.  by Magna Charta, or the great Charter, and the Statutes of the 18 Ed. 1. 9 Ed. 2. but by the Statute 1 Ed. 3. wherein it is particularly Enacted, That they shall both have all the Privileges which they have enjoyed from the time of Edward the Confessor, and William the Conqueror, and other the Progenitors of the said Ed. 3. tam per cartas quam sine cartis ex antiqua consuetudine, whether they possessed them by Charters, or without them, namely by prescription. And it is observable, that this Charter of Ed. 3. is not a mere Patent, Grant or Charter of the said King, but is itself an Act of Parliament, made in the first year of that King's Reign, and confirmed by Inspeximus in the 2 Hen. 8. And consonant to this Charter and Statute of Ed. 3. is the Charter of the 7 Rich. 2. which is also ratified into an Act of Parliament, 
Rot. Parl. 7. Rich. 2. Inspex 8. Jacob.  and wherein he confirms unto the Citizens of London all their Franchises and Privileges, sive usi non fuerint, sive abusi, whether they were either such as they had not made use of, or such as they had abused.  
Accordingly the Freemen, or Barons of London, chose their Sheriffs, without the least interposure of their Mayors, during all the time of R. 1. K. John, H. 3. E. 2. till the 20 of Ed. 3. But then they granted unto their Mayors, the nominating or proposing one Sheriff, but still with this reserve, That they should have the ratifying, confirming and choosing of them. And this reservation of a Right to themselves to choose Sheriffs, plainly appears by the Act. For the only reason of allowing that favour unto the Mayor, was upon a supposal that he had better knowledge than others, who of the Citizens were fit for so important an office, which many at that time were willing to decline, by reason of an Act of Parliament passed in the said 20th Ed. 3. Empowering the Justices of Assize to inquire into the misdemeanours of Sheriffs, and to punish them as Law and Reason did require.  
And that this Ordinance doth not infringe the Rights and Privileges of the Citizens to choose their own Sheriffs, appears uncontrollaby both by a Clause of Common Council, 49 Ed. 3. which says, That the Citizens were to be summoned to Guild-Hall, 
Vid. lib. civet. ab anno 15. Ed. 3.  as Electors des Majores & viscountes, for the Election of Mayors and Sheriffs; as also by the Elections which were made of Sheriffs in the 42d and 43d of Ed. 3. which are expressly said to have been made by the Mayor, aldermans, & quamplurimi clariorum civitatis, and many other famous persons of the City. And as if this were not enough to instruct, that the Rights of the Freemen in the choosing their Sheriffs, were not violated by the Ordinance of the 20th Ed. 3. We have another Act of Common-Council in the 4th Hen. 5. in which it was enacted, That the Citizens should be summoned at such a day for the choosing freely and indifferently, 
Ibid.  Majorem & Vicecomites, Mayor and Sheriffs.  
But whereas they allege an Act of Common-Council in the 7th Car. 1. wherein it is Ordained and Established, That the 24th of June, shall be for the confirmation and allowance of such persons as hereafter shall be chosen by the Lord Mayor of this City for the time being, to be Sheriffs of the said City and County of Midd. and for the choice of such other persons as by the Lord Mayor, aldermans and Commons shall be chousen to be Sheriffs of the said City and County of Midd. etc. I say, in the 1st place, That this Act of Common-Council by acknowledging a Right in the Common-Hall, to confirm and allow such as the Mayor shall Elect, does thereby declare that they have a power not to confirm or allow the said Person. For a Right and a Power to allow, without a power to disallow, were a thing nonsensical and ridiculous. Secondly, I affirm, That this Act of Common-Council in the sense wherein it is constructed by the Mayor and his Partisans upon he suggestions of his little Imps, is ipso facto null and void, being expressly contrary to Charter, Prescription, and Statute-laws.  
And for my Lord Mayor to insist upon it, is not only to perjure himself, but to become liable to Indictments for subverting the Laws of the Land, as well as the privileges and jurisdictions of the City. I thirdly affirm, That the Lord Mayor have upon the Commons contesting this Prerogative with them, often disserted and abandoned it. And for particular instances, I refer them to what fell out in the 29th of Eliz. when my Lord Mayor having drunk to Richard Platt, the Common-Hall chose Hugh Offler and Richard Saltonstall; and to what occured in the 32 of Car. 2. When notwithstanding George Hocknal's being drunk to, the Commons elected, Slingsby Bethel, and Henry Cornish. And besides, there are many instances when the Commons chose the very persons that my Lord had named, but not till they had first set aside his Right and claimed Prerogative of prescribing unto them. For example, my Lord Mayor having in the 19 Car. 1. Nominated and presented John Fowke, the Commons refused to confirm the Election, till the said Mayor had declined his Prerogative and pretence, and referred for that time the Nomination of both the Sheriffs to the Common-Hall; upon which having vindicated their Rights, they elected the said John Fowke and James Bunce. Nay, when in cases wherein my Lord Mayor hath pleaded his Prerogative in this matter, the House of Lords being appealed unto, have upon finding the Commons to withstand the confirmation of the person he had Nominated and Presented, in effect decided it against him, and allowed the Commons to proceed to the Nomination of both Sheriffs for that time, as appears by an Order of the House of Lords, 1628.  
And whereas it is said, That my Lord Mayor and Aldermen intent on Midsummer-day to continue on the Hustings as a Court; I do affirm that such a practice would be contrary both to the Charters of the City, and to ancient custom. For albeit they have a Right of voting in the Election of Sheriffs, yet it is only in the quality of Barons and Freemen of London, and not in the rank and under the Character of Mayor and Aldermen. And therefore if they should pretend to stay, they are to descend and come down from the Hustings among the Commoners, and during that affair and transaction lay aside their Grandeur, and list themselves among the Livery of the City. Nay, so far back as the 22. Hen. 6. We read that the Mayor having presented one Nicholas Wyford for Sheriff, 
Lib. K. fol. 214. in Arch. 2. Lond.  did thereupon, cum Aldermanis ascendere in cameras superiores, remove from the Court, and go into an upper Chamber. And consonant hereunto, hath the custom and practice been for many ages. The Sheriffs for the time being are the only judges of the Election that is then to be made. And as this hath been the Common usage, so it is agreeable to Law and Reason.  
But whereas it is discoursed abroad, That unless my Lord Mayor can obtain his will of imposing a Sheriff upon the City, he intends to dissolve the Court; I shall only say, let him do it at his peril. For hereupon not only every Freeman may have an Action against him, as wronging them in the violation of their Rights and Privileges; but they may Indict him for Perjury both in violating his Oath not only as Mayor, but as a Freeman, and also as a subverter of the Laws of the Kingdom, and the Rights and Privileges of this famous Corporation. Nay, upon the dissolving the Court without the Election of Officers, he would at once offend against an Act of the Common-Council, which appoints the 24th of June for the Election of Sheriffs; and withal leave the City without a Chamberlain and Bridg-masters. And as upon the nonelection of a Chamberlain, no Moneys can be issued out of the Chamber, seeing there is none that hath Authority to do it; so his Lordship must expect to be liable to all the Actions that persons having money arising from thence, shall think fit to commence. Nay, his Lordship's standing upon the Prerogative of choosing one Sheriff, is industriously to betray the Charter of the City, forasmuch as the plea put in against the Quo Warranto proceeds directly upon this principle and foundation, viz. That the Freemen have Right  to Prescription and Charter of choosing annually two Sheriffs.  
Upon the whole, Gentlemen and Citizens, you now understand what your Privileges and Rights are, and pray remember, That by your Oaths you are bound to maintain the customs and Franchises of the City.  
Nor can you be ignorant that the design of wresting from you the Privilege of choosing the Sheriffs, is merely in order to hang as many of you as a few men whom I forbear to mention shall think meet. Did ever any of our former State-Ministers concern themselves in these matters? Alas! there were not heretofore such machinations carried on against our Lives, Laws and Fortunes.  
And therefore accordingly as you shall acquit yourselves in this affair, you may expect either to live safely, or to become sacrifices to a few men, who having forfeited their own heads to the Law, would preserve them by an exchange for yours.  
I need not mention the form of my Lord Mayors late Precepts, you are all acquainted with it, and cannot but be sensible that it differs from all you have heretofore seen, and that it directly overthrows your Charter, and all the Privileges of it. Farewell.   

LONDON: Printed for R. Dew. 1682.