ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY that year was one concerning tithes in London/" and a quarrel between the rector and parishioners of Allhallows Lombard Street was discussed by the aldermen, who refused to help either side, declaring that the matter was not determinable in their court, but should be remitted to the laws." The parishioners sent a petition to Cromwell, stating that before the episcopal constitution confirmed by the bull of 1453 only zd. in every loj. of rent had been paid/' The inhabitants of the City were compelled to submit to the imposition of d. in every 6j-. 8^., but those of the suburbs had always successfully resisted it. Rents were double what they had been in 1453, ^"^ there had been much building of new houses, especially in their parish. The City rectors kept no hospitality and were non-resident, and they enforced their claims under the bull with great rigour. But the bull was obtained without royal licence, and the petitioners dare not obey it for fear of incurring the danger of praemunire. Some of the parsons who had sued their parishioners for tithes had lately, fearing the consequences of putting the bull into execution, ceased their suits and agreed to receive id. in lOJ."^ About 1533 a partisan of Cromwell wrote a treatise on the question of offerings, arguing that rectors could only claim tithes of the fruits of the earth, and that their maintenance in towns must be left to the consciences of their parishioners. Therefore the ' rich living ' which they had in London was only ' by the consents of the people ; ' they had also procured more money in many ways, by fees for burials, &c., and ' privy tithes of whatso- ever they can get,' even of ill-gotten goods. He thought that all the City curates should be paid a fixed salary of 20 marks (;ri3 6j. %d.) a year by the Corporation, the money to be raised by a uniform assessment of 2j. in the pound rent, while they might receive more of ' private devotion.' ^ In 1534 the whole question was submitted to the arbitration of the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Lord Chancellor, the Bishop of Winchester, Cromwell, and the two Chief Justices, who fixed the rate at 2J-. 9^'. in the pound. This decision was enforced by royal proclamation in 1534 and 1535, and in 1536 by an Act of Parliament which sanctioned it till other arrangements should be made by the king's authority." Its effect may be illustrated by the case of St. Magnus, the richest rectory in the City, the value of which was over jTioo in 1494, and ^67 zs. id. in 1535." The holders of the very poor livings must have suffered greatly. There were, however, not many of these" ; in 1535 most were worth between ^^lo and ;(^2o, and eleven over >C30.^^ The rectors complained that because the Act of 1536 mentioned only house rent the citizens refused to pay on their shops, &c., that rents were
- ^ L. and P. Hen. nil, vi, 120. " Rec. Corp. Repert. viii, fol. 260.
'* No evidence has been found in support of this assertion. L. and P. Hen. Fill, v, 1788. '" P.R.O. Tract. Theol. and Pol. vol. ii, fol. 43 et seq.; cf. L. and P. Hen. Fill, x, 248. " Stat. 27 Hen. VIII, cap. 31 ; Rec. Corp. Letter Bk. P, fol. 31, 34, 341^, 37, 41;^, 42, 60, 86, 1 18, 173^; Repert. ix, fol. 50^, 5 I ; Z. and P. Hen. Fill, vii, 425 ; viii, 453 (2). The Common Council agreed that the ' suitors ' who by their agitation had obtained this victory for the City should be rewarded with monej procured by a payment of d. in every 10/. rent to be made by all householders. " Arnold, Customs of Lond. 228 ; Falor Eccl. (Rec. Com.), i, 373. "In 1 5 1 3 seven and in 1 5 1 7 twelve had been exempted from payment of a subsidy on account of their poverty (Lond. Epis. Reg. Fitz James, fol. 47, 120), and in 1535 there were fifteen whose value was less than j{^lo, and four less than £(> 13/. d., the ordinary salary of a chantry priest. " Falor Eccl. i, 370 et seq. This return is, however, very inaccurate as regards the City of London. 251
