Page:VCH London 1.djvu/655

 RELIGIOUS HOUSES that church against the priest who then held it, and because the advowson belonged to St. Martin's, though the church was not appropri- ated, it was held that the Court of Canterbury had no jurisdiction.^^" Again in 1 38 1 the king claimed that the dean of St. Martin's had from time immemorial exercised all ordinary jurisdic- tion within the Tower of London, a right not based on any existing charter, and that the bishop of London had exceeded his powers in placing the Tower chapel under an inter- dict."» In the fifteenth century St. Martin's had, however, to meet a formidable attack from another quarter on different grounds. The City beyond trying once or twice to make the college pay part of a tallage,^'^ had hitherto scarcely questioned its special privileges."' While, how- ever, it was becoming even more conscious of itself as a corporate body and more jealous and resentful of exemptions from its dominion within its bounds, the evils caused by the privileges of St. Martin's did not grow less. As the elements of disorder increased during the reign of Richard II, the precinct of the church owing to its right of sanctuary became a nest of corrup- tion. In 1402 the Commons complained to the king in Parliament '^^ that apprentices and servants carried off their master's goods to St. Martin's and lived there on the proceeds of the sale, that forgers took up their abode and carried on their nefarious work there, that the inhabi- tants of the place bought in the City things for which no payment could be obtained, and that robbers and murderers used the place as a con- venient refuge from which they issued to commit fresh crimes. The king ordered that the privileges should be shown before the council, and that there should be reasonable remedy, but evidently nothing was done. In 1430 the mayor and sheriffs took the law in their own hands and forcibly removed from the sanctuary a certain canon of Waltham,"' but they had to put him back. Undaunted by this check the sheriffs in 1440 took away from St. Martin's a soldier and the men who had "° Doc. of D. and C. of Westm. Cartulary dorso. "' Ibid. '" There is a writ of King Edward to the mayor and sheriffs of London, and another to the treasurer and barons of the exchequer about the exemption of St. Martin's from tallage. Reg. fol. 9 and b ; Lansd. MS. 170, fol. 59 and 59^. Kempe says the attempt was made in 1 3 14, op. cit. I 03. "' King Edward, but which one is not clear, in a letter to the mayor and sheriffs speaics of their having taken away transgressors found within the close, and says that such an act is 'in contempt of us an J our crown.' Reg. fol. 9 ; Lansd. MS. 170, fol. 59^. '" Pad. R. (Rec. Com.), iii, 504^. '" Reg. of St. Martin le Grind, fol. 27^, 28^ ; Kempe, op. cit. 113. I 56 rescued him as he was being taken from the prison of Newgate to the Guildhall. The dean and chapter appealed to the king, and in spite of the resistance of the City they won the day."« One of the sheriffs and some of the goldsmiths of London in 1448 visited the shops of their craft in the precinct. The dean did not oppose their examination but prevented its being used as a precedent against the immunities of the place by himself ordering anything condemned by them to be destroyed and the offenders to be committed to prison."' Although the privileges of St. Martin's were found to hold good even against the king himself as the cases of William Caym ^'* and Sir William Oldhall"^ in 145 1 sufficiently proved, the abuses of the right of sanctuary were too notorious to be ignored any longer, and the council in 1457 ordained ^'^ that persons taking refuge there should be registered by the dean ; that they should not retain their weapons ; that control should be kept over notorious criminals ; that stolen goods should be restored to their owners if they claimed them ; that makers of counterfeit plate and jewels should not be allowed in the sanctuary ; that men exercising their trades there should observe the rules of the city in this respect; and that vice should not be countenanced. The exemptions of St. Martin's outlived the church itself, though the right of sanctuary was curtailed under Henry VIII. Considering the relations that had always existed between the dean and the sovereign, it would not have been easy for him to remain neutral amid the dynastic changes which now took place. Dean Stillington did not make the attempt, but threw in his lot with the Yorkists, and was employed by Richard III in the negotia- tions with the duke of Brittany for the surrender of the duke of Richmond. ^^^ As a natural consequence he was removed when Richmond became king, James Stanley being put in his place.'^^ In 1503 St. Martin's le Grand entered on a new phase, for it was appropriated with all its possessions except the prebend of Newland to the use of Westminster Abbey as part of the endowment of the chapel founded there by "° Ibid. fol. 33-48 ; Kempe, op. cit. 1 17-32. "' Reg. fol. 58 ; Kempe, op. cit. 133. "* Caym, one of the followers of Jack Cade, took refuge there, and the dean kept him in his prison, but would not give him up. Reg. fol. 58 ; Kempe, op. cit. 136—7. '" The king, suspecting him of treason, set persons to watch him while in sanctuary. The dean how- ever insisted that they should be withdrawn. Reg. fol. 6oi> ; Kempe, op. cit. 140-4 ; Devon, Issues of the Exch. 476. "" Stow, Surv, of Land. (ed. Strype), iii, 103 and 104. '" Diet. Nat. Blog. liv, 378. ™ Pari. R. (Rec. Com.), vi, 292a. I 71