Page:VCH London 1.djvu/504

 A HISTORY OF LONDON for his new palace ;'" in 1553 all the plate and coin and the vestments and copes of the cathedral were commanded to be given for the king's grace.'" In like manner the prebend of Kentish Town was appropriated, in 1551, to the furnish- ing of the royal stables.'*^ In August, 1553, the dean and chapter were cited to appear before Queen Mary's com- missioners.'" All the great dignitaries of the cathedral, with the exception of the archdeacon of Essex, and the chancellor, resigned, or were deprived ; and Bonner collated others to their places. The office of Dean William May, a leading Puritan, was given to John Fecken- ham.''* In September Bonner sang mass in the church,'^' and in the next year a ' young flourishing rood ' was set up to welcome King Philip.'"' The accession of Elizabeth wrought another complete change in the holders of offices and in the services.'" May was restored to the deanery,'*^ and, on his death in 1 53°) he was succeeded by Francis Nowell, who had been an exile in the time of Mary.'^' On 4 June, 1 56 1, St. Paul's steeple was struck by lightning ; and a fire ensued which burnt all the tower, the roof, and the timber work.'" The queen deputed a commission to order the restoration, and directed that it should confer with the lord mayor.'^' On her recommendation a collection for the repairs was made among all the clergy of the province of Canterbur}'^* In or about the year 1590 the ancient dispute between the cathedral and the City was revived. The mayor and commonalty claimed a right of making arrests within the precincts. In reply the dean and chapter stated that the inhabitants of the churchyard were freemen of the City ; but that, although they dwelt within a ward, they were not of it, but belonged to a place of exempt jurisdiction. The action of Incent, who had prevented the City's alleged right of way through the churchyard, was defended. Eventually the parties submitted to the arbitration of the lords chief justices. The point of exempt jurisdiction was apparently conceded, and the ancient limits of the churchyard were defined.'" "* Chron. ofGreyfriars (Camden Soc), 58. ■" Ibid. 77. '*" Letters printed in Strype, Eccl. Memoriab, pt. ii, 264. '" Foxe, Act! and Monuments (ed. 1 846), vi, 533. "» Le Neve, Fasti (ed. 1 7 16), 185. '" Chron. of Greyfriars (Camden Soc), 84. '°'' Foxe, Jets and Monuments (ed. 1846), vi, 553. '" Le Neve, Fasti (ed. I 7 16), 185. '^- Collection of Records in Burnet's Hist, of Ref pt. ii, bk. iii, Nos. I, 481. '" Description of Monuments in St. Paul's in Stow, Surv. ofLond. (ed. Strype), iii, 160. '" Doc. lllus. Hist, of Old St. PauPs (ed. W. Simpson), 113— 119. '" Cal. S.P. Dom. 1547-80, pp. 177, 178. '"Ibid. 179. '" S.P. Dom. EHe. vol. ccxxx, Nos. 37, 40. E. The early Stuart kings were careful of the cathedral. In 1620 its ruinous state was urged by the bishop of London, in a sermon preached before the king at St. Paul's Cross.'^* As a result a royal commission was formed for the restoration and maintenance of the church, and the remedy of encroachments on the precincts.'" For these objects the king laid aside the yearly sum of j^2,ooo, and Prince Charles that of ^<) 00 ; "" and there were many other subscriptions. When Laud became bishop of London he took a very active interest in the work. He obtained a new commission from Charles I,"' and himself contributed ;^ioo every year.'^^ Inigo Jones was made surveyor-general, and was able to exempt those he employed from liability to im- pressment.'" The commissioners instituted collections in the City and in every county. In 1636 the king assigned to the repair of St. Paul's all profits of ecclesiastical causes and all moneys compounded for in the exchequer during the next ten years ; and forbade that any crimes of ecclesiastical cognizance should be pardoned without the assent of the archbishop of Canterbury.''* Buildings which were considered to straiten the churchyard or to impair the beauty of the cathedral were demolished, and their owners compensated."* Thus St. Gregory's Church was pulled down."^ Such actions did not tend to make popular a work to which the sympathies of the Puritan party were already opposed '" be- cause it was earnestly forwarded by Laud and the king, and because its aim seemed to be rather outward show than the care of men's souls. ''^ Moreover, Puritan censure was more than once directed against the services and ritual authorized by the chapter.'" At his trial Laud was charged with having controlled the orders of the king and council board, in the matter of pulling down houses about St. Paul's, against right and equity,'*" and with appropriating to the restoration money intended for other objects.'^' It was declared that the devotion of the profits of ecclesiastical courts to the repair of the cathedral had been instrumental in increasing abuses and augment- ing the archbishop's jurisdiction. As the Civil War drew nearer Royalists also were hindered from contributing to the restoration, because they must use all their resources to hinder ' more near approaching mischief.''*^ 23, p. 131. '"Ibid. 163 1-3, z8i. '" Ca!. S.P. Dom. 1619- '^s Ibid. 409. '" Ibid. 1631-3, p. 6. '" Ibid. 1636-7, p. 400. '" Ibid. 1634-5, p. 150, "* Ibid. 1635-6, p. 339. "' Ibid. 1619-23, pp. 171, 206, 165, 169; 1631-3, . 281. '" Ibid. 1636-7, p. 400. ■" Ibid. 1640, p. 463. '" Ibid. 16 1 7-1 8, p. 472 ; '"Ibid. 1644, p. 4 1619-23, p. 449 l633-4> P- 252- "° Ibid. 1641-3, p. 524. '"Ibid. 1637, p. 512. "'Ibid. 526,551. 416