HOAR was Elected Alderman, [...] 8th. 1671. and ordered to be sworn the then next Court-day.

He took the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance, [...] 22, 1671. and that of an Alderman, and Justice of Peace, as also the Oaths appoint­ed by Act of Parliament for regulating of Corporations; and subscribed the Declaration therein directed, and took the Sacrament, as by Law required, within a year before he was so sworn.

He served the Office of Mayor of the said Town, 1674. and took the Sacrament and all the Oathes, and subscribed all the Declarations by Law required.

He took the said Oaths, 1675. subscribed the said Declaration, and served the said Town in the Office of Coroner, and hath every year since taken the Sacrament in his Parish-Church, as by Law required, when the same hath been Administred there.

A Letter from His Majesty and His Most Honourable Privy-Council came to Hull, [...]il 1680. wherein was set down the Purport of the Act for regulating Cor­porations, made in the Thirteenth year of His Majesties Reign; The Let­ter required the Mayor and Aldermen, to examine whether all the Magi­strates of that Town had taken the Sacrament, the Oaths, and subscribed the Declaration, as by the said Act was required, and to remove such as had failed therein, and certifie their names to that most Honourable Board.

A Certificate was drawn up, [...] 4, 1680. wherein it was humbly certified, That all persons in Office did duly take the Sacrament within one year before their being elected into their respective Offices, according to the Rites of the Church of England, except Alderman Hoare chosen 8. Feb. 1671, who though he had not taken the Sacrament within a year before his Election, yet he took it before he was sworn Alderman, and every year since.

The Certificate above mention'd was agreed upon by the Mayor, [...] 7, 1680. and the majority of the Aldermen, [...] There was pre­ [...] Mayor, Re­ [...], and Ten Al­ [...] to be sent to His Majesty and Council, viz. Six against Five, and it was accordingly signed by George Crawle Mayor, Christopher Richardson, Richard Frank, Thomas Johnson, John Rogers, and William Shiers. And the same day a Letter was writ and sign'd by the same persons, directed to the Right Honourable the Earl of Sunderland; in which the Certificate aforesaid, was order'd to be inclosed and sent away.

The Mayor and Eight Aldermen met (when Alderman Hoare and most of his Friends were absent); [...] 13, 1680, where by Five against Three it was carried, That the Certificate aforesaid should not be sent forward to the King, but that a new one should be drawn, and made to bear date the Seventh of May as the former did, which accordingly was done, and thereby they certified, That Daniel Hoare had not made it appear to them, that he had taken the Sacrament within a year before his being Elected Alderman; and that [Page 2]thereupon they had Voted his place void, which Vote they made that very day (and not before): And yet a Certificate thereof was sign'd by George Crawle Mayor, William Foxley, Richard Frank, Anthony Lambert, Hum­phry Duncalfe, and Henry Masters, dated the Seventh of May; and the last Five sign'd also the aforesaid Letter dated the Seventh of May directed to the Earl of Sunderland; and therein they inclosed this new Certificate, and sent the same immediately to the said Earl, before it was confirmed by a succeeding Court, which was contrary to the constant methods of the proceedings of the said Mayor and Aldermen, in all Cases of the like na­ture; and was a trick playd to affront the said Hoare.

Hoare finding himself thus surprised, [...] 17, 1680. made application to the Mayor, and those Aldermen who had subscribed the first Certificate, for relief; who, though not able to retreive the Certificate obtained by a trick as aforesaid, yet they did give a new Certificate under their hands, purporting that the said Hoar had taken the Sacrament as required by Act of Parlia­ment, with all the Oaths, before his being sworn Alderman; and made the several Subscriptions and Declarations required by the Act for Regu­lating Corporations, that he had duly taken the Sacrament every year, since his entring upon that Office, and took the said Oaths, and Sacra­ment, and subscribed the said Declarations, and abjur'd the Covenant in the year 1674, when he served the Office of Mayor, (at his very great charge) to the abundant satisfaction and honour of the whole Corpo­ration.

[...] 21, 1680. [...]e Minister hath [...]ere Four years. [...]urch-Wardens [...]ertifie for their [...]ears. The Pa­ [...]k for the whole [...]rs.The Minister, and the several Church-Wardens, and Parish Clerk of St. Marys, in Kingstone upon Hull, did humbly certifie, That the said Daniel Hoar had duly taken the Sacrament according to the Rites of the Church of England, when Administred within the said Parish-Church, every year since his living therein; which he had done ever since the year 1672.

a The Mayor and Aldermen then Assembled, and ordered Mr. Charles Vaux, their Town Clerk, to give Mr. Hoar notice of their Vote of the Thir­teenth of May, [...]ne 9, 1680 shews Hoar was [...]ed out till May That Hoar was [...]ent when voted [...]s is falsely al­ [...] 3. That the [...]e bears date [...]efore the thing [...]e whereby they had declared his Office of Alderman Void.

b Hereupon the said Hoare humbly Petitioned His Majesty in Council for relief, praying to be continued in his Office, and annexed the Certificates of the 17th, and 21st of May, aforesaid, to the said Petition; on which day, the Right Honourable Earl of Sunderland, by His Majesties Command Writ to the Mayor and Aldermen, signifying His Majesties pleasure to be, That they should not proceed any further, nor chuse any Alderman in Mr. Hoar's room, till His Majesty should have examined the matter by His Privy Council; [...]e 28, 1680. and thereupon signified His further directions to them therein.

His Majesty in Council was pleased, [...] 29. 1680. upon Reading the said Hoar's Peti­tion, and Certificates annexed, to swear him, and Alderman Thomas John­son, to the truth thereof; and thereupon ordered that the said Hoar should be continued the said Office of Alderman, and enjoy all the Rites and Priviledges thereunto belonging, as fully, as if the said Office had ne­ver been declared void; Requiring the Mayor and Aldermen of the said Town to take notice thereof, and govern themselves accordingly.

Hoar moved the Court of Kings Bench for a Mandamus to restore him to the said Office, [...]y term, 1680. and obtain'd the same, but never made any use thereof.

The Mayor and Aldermen, when they were just proceeding to a new Election of an Alderman, [...]y 15. 1680. were attended with the Letter of the Earl of [Page 3] Sunderland's, and Order of Council aforesaid, whereupon they desisted from such Election, and readmitted Hoare into his place, in which he hath ever since continued. At which time the Court was moved to join in a Pe­tition to his Majesty, to revoke the said Order, which was refused: Ne­vertheless,

A Petition in the name of William Foxly, August 4th. 1680. William Ramsden, William Skin­ner, Anthony Lambert, Humphry Duncalfe, and Henry Masters, Aldermen of Hull, was presented to his Majesty and Council on behalf (as is alledged) of themselves and the chief Burgesses of that Town, wherein they set forth, That Alderman Hoare had not made appear to them that he took the Sacra­ment within twelve Months before his Election, and therefore they had vo­ted his place void, and were advised it would be of dangerous consequen­ces to the Petitioners and other the Justices and Officers of that Town, to join in any Act of administration of Justice with one whose place was void: Prayed therefore the Discharge of the Order of Council for Hoare's continuing Alderman, that the matter might be heard in Council, and Mr. Hoare left to his remedy at Law for being restored to the said Office.

His Majesty upon reading the said Petition was pleased to order a Hear­ing of this Matter at Council-Board within ten days after notice to Mr. Al­derman Hoare; which Hearing falls out to be the 15. Sept. 1680.

Mr. Hoare obtained an Order for summoning Witnesses, August 31. 1680. which being to be sent to Hull, and they summon'd and to come up by the 15th. of Sept. was almost impossible, especially it falling out that most of them were then to be at Holden-Fair. Wherefore he by two humble Petitions two several Council-days, pray'd a further time; but the more important Affairs of State prevented the making any Order upon those Petitions, so that he will want much of the Evidence upon his Hearing, which otherwise he might have had.

He humbly prays favour therefore, that Cognizance be taken of a Cer­tificate returned to his Majesty in Council, Signed by the Mayor and five Aldermen, the Sheriff and Chamberlain of Hull, and about 120 of the Chief Burgesses of that Town. The Contents whereof is as followeth.

UPon the whole matter the said Hoare most humbly offers to Conside­ration, That there is no Objection made against him in the Petition, or otherwise, save only that he had not made it appear that he took the Sacrament according to the Rites of the Church of England within one year before his Election; but the Petition doth not say that Hoare had not taken it within that time.

In Answer to which Objection he prays that it may be observed:

I. The Act of 13th of the King for Regulating Corporations, does not require any man after he hath been in an Office 9 or 10 years, to prove he took the Sacrament within twelve Months before his being Elected into the same; if it did, and if all men in Office were to be turn'd out that could not make such proof, it's more than probable that half the Officers in England would be removed.

II. It is positively proved he took the Sacrament and Oaths, abjured the Covenant, signed the Declaration by Law required, before he was Sworn Alderman, and did the like in 1674, when he was chosen and serv­ed Mayor, and hath duly taken the Sacrament every year since, and is now a Justice of Peace, and therefore after having served Mayor, and spent near 800 l. in Fines, and defraying the charge of that Office, it would seem very hard to put him out of his Office of Alderman, only because he can­not prove he took the Sacrament within twelve Months before he was cho­sen to that Office, especially since that choice did not make him Alderman till he was Sworn, and before he was Sworn he had done all that the Law required, to capacitate him for Alderman.

III. He being chosen 8. Feb. 1671, and Sworn the 22th. of that Month, if he had not taken the Sacrament before his Election, and by reason there­of his Office of Alderman had been void according to the strict letter of the Law; yet by his Majesties Gracious Act of free Pardon past in 1672 that omission is forgiven, and it is not in the least pretended that he hath done any Act since whereby to forfeit his said Office, which he hath many times freely offered to have laid down, and doth not now contest the same for any benefit or profit that arises thereby, but meerly to defend his Loyalty and Integrity, and prevent the affront designed to be given him, by some few of the present Aldermen.

IV. The Intent of the Act of 13th of the King was to prevent disloyal persons, or persons dissenting from the Church of England, from being cho­sen into Offices; but was never designed to turn Loyal Subjects and true Sons of the Church out of Offices, because they had not the spirit of Divinati­on, to know before-hand when they should be chosen into Offices, and so take the Sacrament purposely to qualifie them for such Elections.