That the Right both of Choosing Sheriffs, and of Admitting them to, or Precluding them from, the relieving themselves by FINE, is solely in the Common-Hall, briefly Opened and Defended.  
'tIS as surprising, as 'tis unaccountable, that while we are vindicating our Laws, Rights, and Liberties from the invasions made upon them by our late Kings, there should be found so great an inclination in inferior Magistrates, Courts, and Officers, to maintain their own usurpations over the Franchises and Privileges of their fellow Subjects and Citizens. Nor does it only fill men peaceably disposed with amazement, but it greatly alarms them to find, that those who a few Months ago, would have been thankful to have stood indemnified from their illegal and arbitrary Actings, are become of late so emboldened, as to justify their former Lawless Courses, by adhering unto, and pursuing the same methods. But surely the Freemen and Citizens of London, must be degenerated into a strange fondness of slavery, if when through the Grace and Generosity of Their present Majesties, they are not only redeemed from the Tyranny exercised over them and the Nation by Kings, but secure against it in future Reigns as well as their own; they should sacrifice their Rights to the Court of Aldermen and the Common-Council, who, as they are indebted for the station they are in to the choice of the Freemen, so they are not only sworn to preserve and defend the Liberties, Privileges, and Franchises granted to the City by so many Charters; but are accountable to the Community represented in the Common-hall, in case through violating their Oaths they either invade or betray them. And as the behaviour, at this juncture, of some Men, shows how little they are influenced by the example of His Majesty, both in making the known Laws the alone Rule of his Government, and in expressing the utmost temperance of mind, condescension, patience and goodness, towards unthankful, murmuring, and undutiful, as well as towards grateful and loyal Subjects; so the present carriage of some of the Court of Aldermen, in the matter under debate between them and the Common-Hall, seems to be calculated in order to frustrate and defeat one of the great ends of His Majesty's glorious undertaking in his coming into England, which was to vindicate, recover, and restore to Cities and Corporations, all the Privileges and Rights whereunto they had a legal claim by Laws, Prescriptions, Grants or Charters, and which had been either lost and departed from by length and corruption of time, or wrested from them by the fraud and violence of any Rank or Set of Men.  
Whatsoever Right some of our late Mayors, Aldermen, and Common-Council men challenged in and over the Privileges and Franchises of the City, as if the Charters containing the Customs, Liberties, Powers and Authorities, vouchsafed, and conveyed to the said City, had been originally made and granted solely to them; yet it is a matter too evident to be controlled, That they are not so much as named or mentioned in any of the said Charters, every thing therein specified and comprehended, being made over, granted, and confirmed to the Citizens and Commonalty of London: So that all the Interest they can with Justice or Reason pretend unto, by virtue of any Charter, in reference to the Rights and Franchises of the City, is merely as they are Citizens, a● in conjunction with the Commonalty. See ● Charters granted to the City of London by Hen. K. John. Hen. 3. Edw. 1. Edw. 2. Edw. 3. Ric. 2. etc.  
And as the Power of choosing Sheriffs, is one of the principal Rights and Privileges conveyed and confirmed in the said Charters; so both the Sheriffwick itself, with all the Customs thereunto belonging, and the Privilege and Authority, as well of making as amoving Sheriffs, is made over and granted to the Citizens and Commonalty of the said City. This will fully appear to all such as will allow themselves to consult the forementioned Charters. Nor is is it consistent either with the Honour or Peace of the City, That the Right of Electing Sheriffs should be lodged in one Body of Men, and the Power of Approving and Disallowing should be vested in another. Neither is it agreeable with the measures either of Wisdom or Justice, That any should lose' but they who have power to bind. Accordingly when Mr. John Richmond, who in 33 Hen. 8. had been chosen by the Common-Hall for one Sheriff, refused to serve upon a certain pretence mentioned in the Records of the City, Lib. Q. fol. 35. a. The Commons in the Common-Hall Assembled took cognizance of it, and judging the Excuse and Plea upon which he grounded his refusal, to be insufficient, they committed him to Prison for disobedience and obstinacy: And then he submitted to a Fine, and the Common-Hall met again the 12th of August, to consent to his discharge.  
But whereas the Court of Aldermen insist upon, and allege the Authority of an Act of Common-Council, made An. 7. Car. 1. whereby they pretend to be authorised and empowered to admit such to Fine whom they shall think meet, without the concurrence of the Commons; and that notwithstanding the Commons having both chosen such Person or Persons to the Office of Sheriff, and their continuing to adhere to the Election which they have made: we shall take liberty to unravel that Act, and show, not only the illegality of it, but what fatal mischiefs it is shapen and adapted to produce. Nor is it a derogation from the Wisdom of a Common-Council, when I say that One of the Acts of that Body may be illegal; seeing I am justified in the use of the expression by the Commons of England in Parliament assembled, An. 1628. who being applied unto by way of Petition and Complaint by one Legatt, did judge and declare a certain Act of the Common-Council to be null in itself, and that all the Proceed upon it had been unjust and arbitrary.  
Nor is it much for the Reputation of the Court 〈◊〉 aldermen, that the Act which they seek to ju●●●fie themselves by, is the same that Sir John More bore himself upon, when he overthrew all the Rights of the City relating to the Choice of Officers, and thereby laid us open to a Deluge of Misery and Blood. But I see some Men do as little understand their Interest as their Duty; for by reviving the Authority of that Act of Common Council, they prevent the forgiving as well as the forgetting their Crimes. There must be in the Court of Aldermen Gentlemen either ●f very weak Memories, so as to forget the Reflections made upon this Act in the Committee ●t the House of Commons but a few weeks ago; ● else they have neither that Reverence for the authority, nor that Apprehension of the Justice ● that Part of the Legislative Body, as well as Grand Inquest of the Kingdom, which not only their Duty, but their Circumstances should oblige them unto.  
To which I do farther add, That whatsoever the Power of a Common-Council is, yet it remains still subordinate and subject unto, and may have its Acts both questioned and superseded by a Common-Hall: For the former being a Creature of the latter, and only instituted and erected by it, for the ease and conveniency of the Great Body of the Commonalty; it is not to be supposed but that the Freemen reserved a Jurisdiction unto themselves in their General Meetings, both of controlling and annulling such Acts as should be found to the prejudice of the Corporation and Society. Accordingly, we not only find the Commons of London, in the 20 Ed. 3. and the 43 Ed. 3. giving Rise and Being unto a Common-Council, and both prescribing the Ends for which it was Instituted and Ordained, and adjusting the number of the Members th●t were to constitute it, together with the manner how they should be chosen and elected: But we further find, That the said Commons 
☞  in Common-Hall assembled, An. 7. Ric. 2. do both redress those Inconveniences that had crept into the Management of Common-Councils, and prescribe such new Regulations as might render their Debates calm and sedate, and themselves more useful in time to come.  
But then, if we will observe, That the Act insisted upon by the Court of Aldermen for their admitting Persons, after their being elected to Offices by the Commons, to discharge and free themselves from the said Offices by Fine, without the leave and consent of the Commons, is inconsistent with the Charter, we may not only affirm it to be in itself null, but that they who strive to assert and uphold the Authority of it, are not so regardful of their Credit, as men of Wisdom and Honesty ought to be. All the Power and Authority that either the Court of Aldermen, or the Common Council can pretend unto, is vested in them for the preservation of the Franchises granted to the Citizens, and not for the subversion of them. To this they are sworn upon their admission into their respective Offices; and by every known and wilful invasion upon the Privileges settled by the Charter on the Freemen, they are guilty of the violation of their Oaths, and become perjured. Nor is their passing and enacting of such Laws as are inconsistent with the Charter, merely an invasion upon the Rights of the Commonalty; but it is a Crime against the King, both in robbing his people of the Grace which the Crown hath vouchsafed unto them, and in annulling all the Statute Laws by which the Charter is ratified and confirmed. And therefore, as it hath been lately acknowledged by the Town-Clerk before the Committee of the House of Commons, that this Act of Common Council is disagreeable unto, and inconsistent with the Charter; so I do not know, but that they who have the boldness to support and justify it, are liable to be impeached of cancelling the Laws of the Kingdom, and of claiming a power unto themselves, both of subverting his Majesty's Royal Authority and Prerogative, and of committing a breach upon his Bounty, Favour, and Grace.  
And as it is not to be thought that the present Lord Mayor, who besides his approved Integrity in the most difficult times, is a person of that Wisdom as not to act inconsistently with himself, will after he has so lately departed from one Branch of this Act of Common-Council as unjust, illegal, and oppressive, insist upon any other Clause or part of it, as valid and binding; so 'tis to be hoped, that the very Court of Aldermen will as readily in favour of the Commonalty of London, abandon the unjust and arbitrary pretence and claim, which they fan●y ●●●●oresaid Act does empower them to challenge, about admitting persons to Fine, whom the Common-Hall hath chosen for Sheriffs, without the concurrence and approbation of the Majority of the Electors, as they calmly deserted and forsaken their invasion upon the Rights of the City, about the Lord Mayor's constituting a Sheriff by the Honourable Method of Drinking to One, and who by the late Act of Common-Council in the Mayoralty of Sir Will. Pritchard, was to be so held and esteemed, if but Two Persons of the whole Commonalty, should hold up their hands in Confirmation of the Person designed and chosen by the Glass and Rummer.  
Nor will it be unworthy of the consideration of the Court of Aldermen, That the Act of Common-Council upon which they insist in justification of their present procedure, hath been judged to be of no Force, Validity, or Obligation, by the highest Court of Judicatory of the Kingdom, namely by the Lords in Parliament assembled, 17 Car. 1. For the Commons having refused to confirm one for Sheriff, whom Sir Edward Wright, the then Lord Mayor, had by the Cup or Glass chalked out for that Office, and a disappointment being thereby occasioned of the Election of Sheriffs on Midsummer day, the Case was thereupon brought judicially before that High and Honourable Court, which after a full he●●ing of both Parties, ordered the Commonalty to proceed to the Nomination and Election of both Sheriffs for the Year ensuing.  
To which may be added, That the forementioned Act in the 7 Car. 1. and all other Acts of Common Council preceding the 15 Car. 2. that are either derogatory from, inconsistent with, or invasions upon the Rights of the Charter, are all cancelled, repealed, or made void by the Inspeximus of the said 15 Car. 2. For whereas that revives and confirms all the Original Grants made to the City, reinvesting the Freemen in all the Rights and Privileges conveyed to them in Former Charters, it necessarily follows, That all such By-Laws as detract from, diminish, or subvert their Franchises, are thereby superseded, abrogated and annulled. And for any now to plead the validity of the often  Act of Common-Council, is not only to dispute the Authority, and renounce the grace and benefit of the said Inspeximus, but to provoke the Commonalty to seek redress in Parliament, against this unjust and abrogated Law.  
Yea, should this Act of the Common-Council be acknowledged of force and binding, and be made the Rule according to which the Court of Aldermen are to govern themselves in reference to the choice of Sheriffs, they would not only be clothed with a power of oppressing and harrassing the Citizens by often and unnecessary attendance in Common Halls, but they would so far deprive the City of all Authority over its Members, That it would neither be in the power of the Commonalty, nor in the Court of Aldermen, to oblige any man to take upon him, and to hold the Office of Sheriff. For whereas by that Law, any man that will, may, notwithstanding his being chosen by the majority of the Freemen for Sheriff, challenge a right of discharging himself from serving, upon the paying of a certain and specified Fine; it plainly follows, that it must be from Choice, and not from Obligation, if any Person submit to hold.   

LONDON: Printed in the Year 1689.