that he should be formally tried, and was on the eve of St. Bartholomew condemned by the nobles of the kingdom of England to a most cruel but amply deserved death. First of all, he was led through the streets of London, dragged at the tail of a horse, and dragged to a very high gallows, made on purpose for him, where he was hanged with a halter, then taken down half dead, after which [certain gruesome details are omitted] his body was divided into four quarters, and his head fixed on a stake and set on London Bridge. But his four quarters thus divided, were sent to the four quarters of Scotland. Behold the end of a merciless man whom his mercilessness brought to this end.

(B) After all these events had taken place, fresh disturbances and wars broke out in Scotland. For Robert Bruce, earl of Carrick, conferred at first secretly, and afterwards openly with some of the great nobles of Scotland, saying to them, "Ye know that by the right of hereditary relationship this kingdom belongs to me, and how this nation intended to have crowned my father king, but the cunning of the king of England disappointed him of his desire. If, therefore, you will crown me king, I will fight your battles, and deliver this kingdom and this people from its slavery to the English." This he said, and presently he received the consent of many perjured men. And when he asked if John Comyn, a very noble and powerful knight, whether he also agreed to this, he steadily replied that he did not. And he said, "All the nations know that the king of England has four times subdued our nation and country, and that we all, both knights and clergy, have sworn fealty and homage to him for the present and all future generations. Far be it from me to do this; I will never consent to this measure, that I may be free from perjury." Bruce persuades, Comyn dissuades; the one threatens, the other is perplexed; at last Bruce, drawing his sword, strikes the unarmed Comyn on the head. And when he had thrown him down, as he was striving to wrest the sword from the hands of his assassin (for he was a man of great personal strength), the servants of the traitor ran up and stabbed him with their swords, and released their master. But the Lord John escaped as well as he could to the altar; and Robert pursued him, and, as he would not agree to his proposal, the wicked and inhuman man there sacrificed the pious victim. These things were done in the church of the Minor Brothers,2 at Dumfries, on the 29th of January,3 3 1306.

123rd August, 1305.

2 Franciscans.

in the year subsequent to this one. Behold the beginning of the homicide, aspiring to the kingdom by the shedding of the blood of Abel.

36. THE PRICE OF FOOD UNDER EDWARD II. (1315).

England was afflicted by a grievous famine just after the battle of Bannockburn, and various shifts to relieve popular distress were tried. The rich cut down the expenses of their households, parliament debated, and the king issued an edict which attempted to fix the price of food. Experiments in setting a maximum value on the ordinary commodities of life have been made in different countries (notably in France during the Revolution), but never with lasting success. The interference of Edward II. with regular market rates was a failure, and is recalled here simply because it gives us some means of judging what cattle, poultry and eggs brought in 1315. The prices named would be higher than usual by reason of the prevailing scarcity.1

SOURCE.-De Pretio Victualium. Edward II. Trans. in Somer's Tracts, vol. i., p. 6.

Edward, by the grace of God, King of England, Lord of Ireland, and Duke of Aquitaine, to the mayor and sheriffs of London, greeting. We have received a complaint of the archbishops, bishops, earls, barons, and others of the commonalty of our kingdom, presented before us and our council, that there is now a great and intolerable dearth of oxen, cows, sheep, hogs, geese, hens, capons, chickens, pigeons and eggs, to the no small damage and grievance of them and all others living within the said kingdom. Wherefore, they have pressingly besought us, that we should take care to provide a fit remedy thereof. We therefore, for the common benefit of the people of the said kingdom, assenting to the aforesaid supplication, as seemed meet, have ordained, by the advice and assent of the prelates, earls, barons, and others, being of our council, in our

1 Thorold Rogers, Six Centuries of Work and Wages, vol. i., p. 215, makes the average price of wheat between 1261 and 1540 come within a small fraction of 6s. the quarter. The average in 1315 was 14s. 10d.; in 1316 it reached 16s. The unusual distress was caused by heavy rains and a murrain,

last parliament held at Westminster, that a good saleable fat live ox, not fed with grain, be henceforth sold for 16s. and no more; and if he have been fed with corn, and be fat, then he may be sold for 24s. at the most; and a good fat live cow for 12s. A fat hog of two years of age for 40d. A fat sheep with the wool for 20d. A fat sheep shorn for 14d. A fat goose in our city aforesaid for 3d. A good and fat capon for 21d., and three pigeons for 1d., and twenty eggs for 1d. And that if it happen that any person or persons be found that will not sell the said saleable goods at the settled price aforesaid, then let the foresaid saleable goods be forfeited to us. And forasmuch as we will that the foresaid ordinance be henceforth firmly and inviolably kept in our said city and the suburbs thereof, we strictly order and command you, that you cause the foresaid ordinance to be proclaimed publicly and distinctly in our foresaid city and the suburbs thereof, where you shall think meet, and to be henceforth inviolably kept, in all and singular its articles, throughout your whole liberty, under the foresaid forfeiture; and by no means fail herein, as you are minded to avoid our indignation, and to save yourselves harmless. Witness ourself at Westminster, the 14th day of March, in the eighth year of our reign.

37. TROUBLES AT BRISTOL (1316).

The Life of Edward II., which Hearne on insufficient evidence attributed to a monk of Malmesbury, closes with 1325, and was probably written towards the end of the reign. It is a reputable authority, especially where western England is concerned. The Bristol riot of 1316 which it describes is significant for two reasons. Bristol was then the third town of the kingdom, and soon after rose above York to second place—a rank which it held till the eighteenth century. And, moreover, one can detect beneath the surface of the troubles an important tendency. For several centuries before the Municipal Corporations Act of 1835 most of the English towns were governed by a "select body" of twelve or twenty-four men. These filled vacancies in their number by a vote of the remainder without appeal to the community. They also levied the taxes in such wise as to make public burdens fall lightly on their own

shoulders. At Bristol we see a small party or clique asserting right of control over market and seaport to the exclusion of the majority and in the end its members won their point. Bristol affords, then, an early instance of change from a relatively democratic to a narrower type of town government. SOURCE.-Vita Edwardi II. Rolls Series. Chronicles of the Reigns of Edward I. and Edward II., vol. ii., p. 219. Trans. C. W. Colby.

Some time ago trouble arose in the town of Bristol over customs in seaport and market, privileges and other things, in which fourteen of the greater persons of this town seemed to have a special right. The community resisted, stating that the burgesses were all of one condition and therefore equal as to liberties and privileges. Over matters of this sort frequent domestic quarrels arose, until in the king's court they asked for and received judges to examine the case and bring it to just conclusion. Forthwith the said fourteen procured that outsiders should be associated in the inquiry. These, moreover, were believed to have been bribed and wholly brought over to the side of the fourteen. The community alleged that it would be contrary to the liberties of the town to try a local matter by the judgment of outsiders, but the judges held that such allegations were idle; so that in this respect they did not regard the liberties and privileges of the citizens. The leaders of the community seeing that their exceptions were not admitted and their right was being taken from them by favour rather than by reason, left the hall, where according to custom the trial was going on, in a great state of agitation, and thus spoke to the commonalty: "Judges have come who favour our adversaries and admit outsiders to our prejudice, whereby we shall for ever lose our rights". On these words the foolish crowd started a riot and the whole people was smitten with fear of a tumult. Forthwith returning with a large company they entered the hall where they proceeded to turn their right into outrage. With fists and sticks they began to assail the opposing party, and that day about twenty lives were suddenly and stupidly lost. Since a natural fear so attacked both gentle and simple that many jumped out of the windows from the top of the balcony, and in falling to the ground broke their legs or shins very badly. As for the judges, they feared for their lives and humbly sought leave to depart in peace. The mayor of the town after he had with the greatest difficulty calmed the fury of the mob, sent them away unharmed.

On account of this disturbance about eighty men were indicted, and after a careful inquiry held before the royal judges at Gloucester, were condemned. They were then demanded from the county, and not coming or obeying were declared to be exiles. But well fortified they remained within their town nor would obey the royal mandate unless it were carried out by force.

The said fourteen who were striving against the community gave up their homes and revenues and left the town; because they deemed it useless to remain among their opponents at such a time. During two years and more this rebellion of the community of Bristol lasted, and yet on the king's part they were often bid to make peace. For he preferred to qualify the sentence of the rioters if they were willing, rather than to destroy a good town by taking full vengeance. But they still persisted in rebellion, always despising the royal order and precept. They did not come when called; they did not obey when threatened, but said that all suit against them was unjust, because wholly contrary to their privileges and liberties.

The king, therefore, unwilling any further to satisfy their malice, summoned the knights and chief persons of Gloucestershire to London, and enjoined upon them in virtue of the oath there taken to make clearly known the case of Bristol, and whose was the injury. They all said that the community of Bristol had the wrong side, and that the eighty were responsible for the violence. Therefore he sent Adolmar, Earl of Pembroke, to Bristol, who having convened the chief persons of the community spoke to them thus on the king's behalf: "Our lord the King," he said, "having taken action in your case has found you guilty, and enjoins you to obey the law. Give up these murderers and culprits, and you and your town remain in peace. I promise that if you do so you will find the King placable and merciful enough." The community replied: "We were not responsible for the outrage; we have not transgressed against our lord the King. Certain persons strove to take away our rights, and we on the other hand strove as was fit, to defend them. Therefore if the King will remit those things with which we have been burdened, if he will give us life and limb, revenues and estates, we will obey him as lord and do whatever he wishes; otherwise we will keep on as we have begun, and will defend our liberties and privileges even to death." 1

1 The "fourteen were eventually reinstated.