THE CASE Of the City of LONDON against the Bill for Confirming a Patent for a Market for Live cattle in BROOKFIELD.  
KING Edward III. primo Regni sui by Charter in Parliament granted to the City, that there should be no Market within seven Miles thereof. The Words of the Charter are— Edwardus, &c. Sciatis nos, &c. de assensu Prelatorum, Comituum, Baronum, ac totius Communitatis Regni nostri in instanti Parliamento nostro apud Westminster convocato existentium concessisse Civibus Civitatis London & Successoribus suis imperpetuum( inter alia) Quod nullum Mercatum de caetero infra septem Leucas in circuitu Civitatis praedictae per nos vel Haeredes nostros alicui concedatur. underwritten per ipsum Regem& commune Concilium Parliamenti.  
Which Charter was confirmed by a particular Act of Parliament septimo R. 2. and by several Charters and Acts of Parliament since.  
Not any Market for Live cattle has been set up within that Distance, nor any one attempted till 1637. But on several Hearings before the King in Council, it was adjudged inconvenient and prejudicial to the City; and therefore a Stop was put thereunto.  
Anno Decimo quinto Caroli Secundi, The Earl of St. Albans obtained a Grant to John Harvey and John Coell in Trust for his Lordship, of a Market for Live cattle, on Mondays and Wednesdays in Hay-Market-Street, but the same never took effect.  
In 1683. a Grant was passing to erect a Market for Live cattle at Conduit-Mead, but upon hearing the City in Council, a Stop was put thereunto.  
After judgement was given against the City in the late Quo Warranto, the Lord Dover 25th of September, in the second year of the late King James, obtained a Patent in the Name of Sir John Coell, That the said Markets might be held at Great Brookfield on Mondays and Wednesdays: And by a subsequent Patent in 1688. the said Market-days were changed to Tuesday and Thursday.  
The City's Charter and Liberties being restored under the present Government, they petitioned His Majesty for Relief against the said Grants, who was pleased to refer the Examination to the Attorney-General; and upon his Report His Majesty in Council was pleased to order a Scire Facias to be brought in his Name, in order to try the Validity of the said Grants.  
In 1695. the City brought a Scire Facias; but Dr. Barbon being interested in the said Grants, and then a Member of Parliament, insisted on his privilege, and so obstructed the City's Proceedings therein during his Life.  
Since his Death the City have brought another Scire Facias against the Heir of Sir John Coell, and the Cause now depends in Chancery undetermined.  
The Granting a New Market for Live cattle within that Distance, is plainly against the above-mentioned Charters granted to the City in Parliament; which privilege as to any Market for Live cattle they have hitherto enjoyed.  
It will prejudice and bring to Decay the City's Ancient Market at Smithfield, which is made very commodious for Sale of cattle, and under good Regulation by Stat. 22,& 23 Car. 2. c. 19. made to prevent Frauds in Buying and Selling of cattle in Smithfield, which rectifies several Abuses which will not extend to prevent them in this new intended one.  
It will bring to Decay the Revenues of St. Bartholomew's Hospital( which is of public Use, especially in time of War, for curing of maimed Seamen, there having been above 3000 taken in and cured the last War) which arise from Rents at Smithfield, which will be much lessened, if this Market be permitted.  
Smithfield is capable of containing more cattle than are brought there to Market, which is the Reason that Wednesday is not kept as a Market-day, altho' the same is within the Grant.  
Goods are cheaper at one General Market than in several, and prevents Regrating, and other Abuses committed when Markets are near, and Persons buy at one Market to sell at another, to enhance the Price.  
Great Numbers of cattle are sold at the Ends of the Town, which might be, if brought to Market, sufficient to supply both Markets.  
Smithfield is capable of receiving all such cattle, and a great many more; and the buying at the Ends of the Town is a great Loss to the City, and against the Statute made against Forestalling, and an Offence for which the City have ordered Prosecutions from time to time.  
Supposing this Market were convenient for a few Butchers at Westminster( the only Persons concerned in a Market for Live cattle) yet it is hoped such Conveniency will not be esteemed a Reason to dispossess the City of a more ancient Right. The same Argument would be much stronger to erect the like Markets at Southwark, Wapping, and all other Parts of the Town: And nothing but an Absolute Necessity( which is not pretended in this Case) will be sufficient to support such a Law.  
It has not been usual to pass any Bill( tho' for a public Good) that is prejudicial to the Right of any Person, without making Satisfaction to the Party aggrieved; as in making Rivers navagable, enlarging High-ways, &c.  
It is objected, That notwithstanding the City's Grants, there are many Markets in the Suburbs.  
They are such as are for things perishable, and of immediate Use, as Flesh and other like things; which Markets the City do not think reasonable to oppose, altho' they might insist, that the same are within their Grant.  
The Honourable House of Commons in 1698. upon hearing the City at the Bar, and long Debate, were pleased to reject the Bill for erecting a Corn-Market at Westminster, in Prejudice to the City's Corn-Market at Queenhithe, which is a parallel Case with this.  
'tis humbly hoped this Honourable House will not confirm a Grant so prejudicial to the City of London, and contrary to their more Ancient Grants; but that the Patentees or Persons interested in the said Grants, way be left to try the Validity of the same in a due Course of Law.   

THE CASE OF The City of London AGAINST The Bill for Confirming the Grants of a Market for Live cattle at Brookfield.