TO prepare the Lords to hear what Council should offer upon the Cities Petition, it was first prayed, That the Judgment against the City and its Liberties might be well weighed; the Substance thereof was,

That the Liberties claimed for the Citizens of London, to be of Themselves a Body-Corporate and Politick, by the Name of Mayor, Commonalty, and Citizens of the City of Lon­don, should be Taken and Seized into the Hands of the King; And that the Citizens should be taken Prisoners, to satisfie the King for his Fine, for Vsurping the said Liberty and Priviledge.

The purport of the Bill is to Reverse this Judgment, as Illegal and Arbitrary, and to make it Null and Void, to be hereafter of no Effect: But shews not wherein it was Illegal or Arbitrary, either in Matter or Form, whereby the City might be secured against the like Illegal Judgments.

The Bill also declares, in effect, That Illegal Judgment to have been of such legal force and efficacy, that by vertue thereof, the Bo­dy Politick of the City was utterly dissolved and destroyed, and all their Liberties, Lands, Goods, Debts and Interests, as a Corporation (even those belonging to their Wives and Children) forfeited to the King.

'Tis herein imply'd, That the City to this hour is no Corpora­tion. And all that exercise the Powers of Mayors, Sheriffs, or Com­mon-Councils, [Page 2]or any other City Office, are in effect declared to be Usurpers and Wrong-doers, having no Lawful Authority. And 'tis also in effect affirmed, That the City hath no right nor claim to Liberties, Lands, Goods, Debts, or any other Interest, unless the Late King's Trustees and Confidents, to whom he granted them for that year, please to shew the Effects of His Grace to the Citizens; or the Chancery shall compel them to it.

But the City takes these Declarations and Concessions of the Bill, to be destructive to their Fundamental Rights and Liberties, they claiming to have been a City, and Body Politick, with divers Li­berties and Customs, above 2000 years, and to have perpetual Suc­cession which could not be forfeited, nor destroyed, or come under the Judgment of the Judges of the King's-Bench for their being a Bo­dy Politick (if any Citizens had been Offenders, as they were not, in this case) nothing less than an Act of Parliament being able to destroy their Corporation, subsisting by Customs, Prescription, and many Acts of Parliament. Therefore they justly dread a Declaration to be made by Parliament (as in this Bill) that an Illegal Arbitrary Sentence of the King's Bench Judges have dissolved the Body of the City, and may at any time at the Will of an Arbitrary Prince de­stroy it again, and all its Customs, Authority and Privileges, to the ruine of their Wives and Childrens Interests.

The City therefore (as We humbly conceive) justly insists, That this Judgment was void in it self, and of no force to destroy their Incorporation, and are ready to maintain themselves to have always been, and to be at this time a Body Politick in due form of Law. And they aver, That the King neither did, nor could by Law take any thing into his hands by force of that Judgment. And they affirm, That the present Mayor, and Sheriffs, and Common-Council, are legally possessed of their respective Places; being duly chosen accord­ing to their Customs and Charters.

They say, That the Information in the nature of the Quo War­ranto, upon which the Judgment was founded, was void of it self, in the Construction of Law, and ought to be esteemed and taken for none, being brought against the Body-Politick of the City, for usurping to be a Body-Politick; which is utterly Repugnant and Contradictory in its self. It cannor be admitted to Complain, and Aver in a Legal Court, That a Body Politick usurps to be a Body-Politick, there being in that case no Defendant to answer the Com­plaint, so the very Information is void and null in its self, it is in rea­lity no Information against any Body, and no Judgment could be gi­ven upon it.

The very Judgment also is contradictory in its self, being to take into, and continue in the hands of the King, the Franchizes of the Corporation and Body-Politick of the City, mentioned in the Pleadings; when 'tis averr'd in the whole Proceedings towards Judg­ment, That there was no Corporation, or Body-Politick of the City, but that there was an Usurpation only of the name of a Body-Po­litick.

The City insists, That many Points of Law do arise naturally [Page 3]upon the Bill fit for the greatest Consideration, and the Advice of all the Learned Judges, the whole Constitution of the Govern­ment of the Kingdom being concerned in them, as well as the City.

These following Questions in Law ought to be clearly Resolved, be­fore it's reasonable that the Bill should be made a Law.

1 Q. Whether by force of the Judgment, the Corporation or Body-Politick of the City, was by our Laws actually in King Charles the Second, and descended to the late King James, and remained in him notwithstanding his Instrument and Grant under the great Seal, to restore to the City all that was pretended forfeited to him, and that he took from them? If the Corporation was never in King James, or was restored to the City by him, then this Bill will do great wrong to the City, by depriving their Officers of their Authorities and In­terest, without Cause, and changing the Customary Times of Chu­sing Officers, and of their holding their Offices; the Bill appointing them to continue for Sixteen Months, which is a burden intolerable to some of the City-Officers.

2. Q. Whether the Officers of the City, and Members of Parlia­ment serving for the City, being chosen according to the Cities Cu­stoms and Liberties, be Usurpers of their Offices and Places, as the Bill clearly imports?

3. Q. Whether by that form of the said Judgment, the Cities Franchise of being a Body-Politick, be taken and seized into the King's hands, all the Lands and Inheritances of the City, were by Law so vested in the King, that the late King might grant them to whom he pleased? This Bill plainly implying, the late King James's Lease of all the City Lands to his Confidents in trust, to have béen good in Law.

4. Q. Whether the Judges of the King's Bench have a Legal Ju­risdiction to Judg, and if they please, to Destroy the being of all the Corporations by Prescription throughout the Kingdom, of whose Bur­gesses the Parliament in great part consists? This Bill supposes and allows the Judges to have had a Jurisdiction, which shakes the An­cient Foundation of the Government, wherein all the Corporations by Prescription, are taken to have perpetual Succession.

5 Q. Whether any small pretended, or real Misdemeanor of some Members of Corporations by Prescription, can be a Forfeiture of all the Liberties, Lands, and Goods of the whole Body-Corporate.

6. Q. Whether it be agreeable to the Proceedings of Parliament, or consistent with the English Liberty, to determine by this Bill the In­terests claimed by the present Magistrates and Common-Council of the City in their Offices and Places, without any Offence alledged a­gainst them, whilst they insist to have the common Liberty of all the Subjects of England, to maintain their Interests and Authorities in due Course of Law, against any that shall legally bring the same in­to question?

7. Q. Whether in case this Bill should pass into a Law, it doth not amount to a Declaration of the Law in all the Cases wherein this Bill [Page 4]affirms the said Judgment to have had any Force or Effect against the Corporation of the City, whereby the Law in Westminster-Hall will be changed exceedingly. This Case and Judgment being altogether new never heard of, or imagined before the treasonable Designs in the late Reigns, to subvert the Ancient Laws and Government of the Kingdom.

8. Q. Whether the Information in the Nature of a Quo Warranto, &c. all the Proceedings on the Kings part against the City, and the several pernicious Opinions of the Judges about the Case, and the Plead­ings therein remaining on Record, and in no sort condemned; in this Bill the Judgment only being declared illegal without any Cause ren­dred? Whether all those Records will not be taken for such Prece­dents in future Ages, as may be of dreadful Consequence to the Ci­ty, and the whole Kingdom?

9. Q. Whether upon the whole matter, the said Information and Judgment be not absolute Nulities in Law, and ought for the Security of the City and Kingdom, to be taken out of all Rolls, Files and Records, that no Memory may be had of such illegal and pernicious Proceed­ings? That hath been usually practiced by Parliaments, in Cases of the like Nature, and of such dangerous Consequence.

The Citizens that moved these Questions, humbly offered also to their Lordships, That this Bill makes void the Elections of all the Common-Council-men chosen legally under their Present Majesty's Government by the Inhabitants of the Wards, and yet confirms all the Officers put into Places illegally by the late King James his Com­missioners; And also all the Livery-men put in arbitrarily by that King's Will, and Directions of the Lord Jefferies, Mr. Graham and Burton.

They also put their Lordships in mind, That this Bill, that in the be­ginning allows the said Judgment to have dissolved the Corporation, yet in a Proviso allows it to be a Corporation, whereof there is a pre­sent Mayor and Sheriffs, which shall continue untill a new Election be made of such Officers: And if they have not Legal Authority by their Election to act as Mayor and Sheriffs, there is none given them in the Proviso, by saying only they shall continue. Whereby all the present Authorities are in such uncertainty, that it will not be known, if the Bill should pass, who hath any Authority to cause any Elections to be made, and to preside in them.

They offered many other things needful for the City's Settlement, which are wholly omitted in the Bill in respect of the Orphans, and the Administration of Justice.

But above all other matters, they earnestly intreated divers Lords, That the Opinion of all the Judges upon the Substance of these Que­stions foregoing, might be taken in Writing for the satisfaction of their Lordships, and the Kingdom. The Case being altogether new, and numberless Consequences not foreseen to be drawn from it in the proeeeding of Judgments in Law.

Whatsoever shall be the issue of their Endeavours, they have ac­quitted themselves of their Duty, and shall humbly acquiesce therein, if the Bill shall pass into a Law.