Notes and Queries, Number 37, July 13, 1850 | Page 5

so kepte yt thereof folowe non annoyaunce."--p. 87.
Of course "Houndsditch" is here meant; but for what purpose were the
hounds kept? And, indeed, what kind of hounds were they, that thus
formed a part of the City establishment? Were they bloodhounds for
tracking criminals, or hounds kept for the special behoof and pleasure
of the "Lord Mair, Aldermen, and Comen Coûsel?" The Houndsditch
of that time bore a strong resemblance to the Fleet ditch of times
scarcely exceeding the memory of many living men.
I come now to the passages relating to the clergy.
"Also, where as the curatis of the cyte have used often tyme herebefore
to selle their offring (at mariag), whereby the pisshês where such sales
be made comenly be lettid fro messe or matyns, and otherwhiles from
both, by so moch as the frendis of the pties maryed vsen to goo abowte
vij. or viij. dayes before, and desiryg men to offryg at such tymes as
more conuenyent it were to be at diunyne seruice. Plese it my Lord
Mair, Aldirmê, and Comê Coûseile, to puide remedy, so that the sayd
custume be fordone and leid aparte."--p. 86.
"Also, to thentent that the ordre of priesthood be had in dew reuerence
according to the dignite therof, and that none occasions of incontinence
growe bee the famylyarite of seculer people. Plese it my Lord Mayre,
Aldirmen, and Comon Counsyll, to enacte that no maner persone beyng
free of this citee take, receyue, and kepe from hensforth ony priest in
comons, or to borde by the weke, moneth, or yere, or ony other terme
more or lesse, vpon peine thervpon to be lymytyd, prouided that this
acte extêde not to ony prieste retayned wyth a citezen in famyliar
housolde."--p. 89.
"Also, plese it my Lord Mayre, Aldyrmen, and Comon Counseylle, that
a communication may be had wyth the curatis of this citee for
oblacions whiche they clayme to haue of citezens agaynst the tenour of
the bulle purchased att their owne instance, and that it may be
determined and an ende taken, whervpon the citezens shall rest."--p. 89.
"Also, yf ther be ony priest in seruice within the warde, which afore
tyme hath been sette in the toune in Cornhyll for his dishoneste, and
hath forsworne the cyte, alle suche shulde bee presentyd."--p. 92.
Upon these I shall make no remark. They will make different

impressions on different readers; according to the extent of prejudice or
liberality existing in different minds. They show that even during the
most absolute period of ecclesiastical domination, there was one spot in
England where attempts to legislate for the priesthood (though perhaps
feeble enough) were made. The legislative {101} powers of the
corporation were at that time very ample; and the only condition by
which they appear to have been limited was, that they should not
override an act of parliament or a royal proclamation.
Is there any specific account of the "tonne in Cornhyll" existing? Its
purpose, in connection with the conduit, admits of no doubt; the
forsworn and dishonest priest had been punished with a "good
ducking," and this, no doubt, accompanied with a suitable ceremonial
for the special amusement of the "'prentices."[3]
I have also marked a few passages relative to the police and the fiscal
laws of those days, and when time permits, will transcribe them for you,
if you deem them worthy of being laid before your readers.
T.S.D.
[Footnote 2: Mr. Cunningham, speaking of Houndsditch, merely quotes
the words of Stow. It would appear that Stow's reason for the name is
entirely conjectural; and indeed the same reason would justify the same
name being applied to all the "ditches" in London in the year 1500, and
indeed much later. This passage of Arnold throws a new light upon the
_name_, at least, of that rivulet; for stagnant its waters could not be,
from its inclination to the horizon. It, however, raises another question
respecting the mode of keeping and feeding hounds in those days; and
likewise, as suggested in the text, the further question, as to the purpose
for which these hounds were thus kept as a part of the civic
establishment.]
[Footnote 3: This view will no doubt be contested on the authority of
Stow, who describes the tonne as a "prison for night-walkers," so called
from the form in which it was built. (Cunningham, p. 141., 2nd ed.) Yet,
as Mr. Cunningham elsewhere states (p. xxxix.), "the Tun upon
Corn-hill [was] converted into a conduit" in 1401, it would hardly be
called a "prison" a century later. The probability is, that the especial
building called the tonne never was a prison at all; but that the prison,
from standing near or adjoining the tonne, took its name, the tonne
prison, in conformity with universal