while money and books were the twin bases on which the fabric of the university reposed, it is plain that a great institution of the sort would involve the employment of numerous agencies not strictly concerned with the work of instruction, but engaged upon the not less necessary functions of maintaining order and ministering to the needs of the body. all persons so occupied were accounted as "of the privilege of the university," and were subject to the jurisdiction of the chancellor. from an indenture between the university of oxford and the town, dated 1459, we find that the privilege embraced:

"the chaunceller, alle doctours, maistres, other graduats, alle studients, alle scholers, and alle clerkes, dwellyng within the precint of the universite, of what condicion, ordre or degree soever they be, every dailly continuell servant to eny of theym bifore rehersed belonging, the styward of the universite wyth their menyall men, also alle bedells with their dailly servants and their householdes, all catours, manciples, spencers, cokes, lavenders, povere children of scolers or clerkes, within the precinct of the said universite, also alle other servants taking clothing or hyre by the yere, half yere, or quarter of the yere takyng atte leste for the yere vi. shillings and viij. pence, for the half iii. shillings and iv. pence, and the quarter xx. pence of any doctour, maister, graduat, scoler or clerc without fraud or malengyne; also, alle common caryers, bryngers of scolers to the universite, or their money, letters, or eny especiall message to eny scoler or clerk, or fetcher of eny scoler or clerk fro the universite for the tyme of such fetchyng or bryngyng or abidyng in the universite to that entent."

parchment-makers, illuminators, scribes, barbers, and tailors were also, by convention, members of the privilege.

before going farther, it will be well to inquire what is intended by the "precinct of the university." there appears to have been some amount of uncertainty as to the radius included. in 1444 henry vi. granted authority to the chancellor to banish any contumacious person from the precinct of the university, which was taken to mean a circuit of twelve miles. on the other hand, on march 17, 1458, david ap-thomas swore on the holy gospels that he would keep the peace towards the members of the university, would inform the authorities of any plot against them which might come to his knowledge, would not assist in rescuing richard lude from prison, and would leave oxford on the following day, nor presume to come within ten miles of the university for twelve weeks.

the bedels

of all the persons named as of the privilege the bedels, as the executive officers, most distinctly represent its character and extent. the office of bedel was, of course, not confined to the universities. in london, for example, the wards had their bedels, who were sworn, inter alia, to suffer no persons of ill repute to dwell in the ward of which they were bedels, and to return good men upon inquests. they were also to have a good horn and loud sounding. at oxford the bedels were bound to make summonses for scholars at their request, and to arrest wrong-doers. the latter duty was naturally attended with some peril; and in 1457, one richard of the castle, flying from the hands of came, bedel, with drawn dagger, because he refused to go to prison, was banished from the university. fines also were levied by the bedels, and they played a conspicuous part in the ceremonies of congregation and similar assemblies. as the position was liable to abuse, they were bound by certain restrictions. thus, they were forbidden to ask or receive [extraordinary?] fees from inceptors[3] and to carry anything away with them from the feasts at inceptions. they were required to attend funerals, but might not ask for a share of the offerings, nor for any present from the executors of the dead. and they had to give up their maces at the first congregation after michaelmas, but were eligible for reappointment.

the bedels were of two grades—higher and lower; and the superior bedels were bound by immemorial usage to provide the inferior bedels with board and lodging and ten shillings a year for shoes. in 1337 the latter, on resigning their office in congregation, according to custom, complained that the superior bedels had neglected to furnish them with board. thereupon the university decreed that the inferior bedels should be granted the option of standing at meals with the superior or receiving a weekly allowance of sevenpence as compensation. this allowance was to be suspended during the absence from oxford of any inferior bedel, whether occasioned by his own affairs or those of the university. the annual payment of ten shillings for shoes was confirmed. failure to observe these regulations subjected superior bedels to the loss of their office when the time came for the maces to be resumed.

the question will naturally arise—from what source, or sources, did the superior bedels obtain the means not only to provide for their necessities, but also to feed, house, and, to some extent, clothe their hungry and dissatisfied dependents? light is thrown upon this subject in a way which shows that the superior bedels themselves may not have been without a grievance. at any rate, about seventy years later—in 1411—an ordinance draws attention to omissions on the part of the students, evidently inconvenient at the time, in the following words:

"the charity of students has in these latter days grown cold, so that they no longer make collections for the doctors and masters of their several faculties, nor make due presents to the bedels; therefore it is decreed that henceforth all scholars, on receiving notices from a doctor, master, or bedel of their respective faculties shall pay regular contributions according to the ancient statutes on pain of losing the current year of their academical course, and of forfeiting their privilege; and all principals of halls, at the notice of the doctors, masters, or bedels, shall within a month from the commencement of such collection, take care that the members of their societies contribute, and send in the names of those who fail to do so to the chancellor under a penalty of twenty shillings: and every doctor or master shall pay the bedel honestly within a month from the commencement of the collection."

from a notice of the year 1432 it transpires that the bedels received one-twelfth of all fines inflicted for misdemeanours; and, in 1434, prior to the admission of inceptors, the chancellor announced that each inceptor would be required to pay the ordinary fee of thirty shillings and a pair of buckskin gloves for each bedel, or, in lieu of gloves, five shillings to be divided among the bedels. two licentiates protested against such payment, stating that it was contrary to the statutes, whereupon an inquiry was held, by which it was established that these fees had been paid to the bedels from time immemorial and were therefore due.

the appointment of the bedels rested with the regent masters, and was one of their most jealously guarded prerogatives. mention has been made of john came, who for many years held the office of bedel. when he was elected, in 1433, by four regent masters and the two proctors in congregation, an attempt was made by the chancellor and the doctors of the four faculties to substitute a nominee of their own, one benedict stokes, on the ground that they were the senior members of the university, and represented a majority of their faculties. realizing that the supremacy of the faculty of arts was menaced, the proctors resisted this claim and demanded the admission of came, with the result that the chancellor reluctantly gave way. an appeal was entered by richard cauntone, a doctor of laws, and the candidate, benedict stokes, but three days later was renounced by both of them as frivolous, and their cautions were forfeited. even then the matter did not end. two days afterwards, information came to the proctors that one of the doctors had given his scholars to understand that the election would have been invalid but for a vote recorded by a doctor. thereupon the proctors, in order to settle the question once for all, summoned a congregation, by which it was determined that the phrase "major part" imported a numerical majority.

the election of bedels was conducted in the same way as that of the chancellor. every such election was preceded by three proclamations made within eight "legible" days after the office had become vacant.

the relations between the university and the town will be dealt with presently. here it may be noticed that the bedels exercised some control over the proceedings of the townsmen which concerned the interests of students. as an illustration, when the goods and chattels of harry keys, a scholar, which had been left in the house of thomas manciple, were "presyd" betwixt thomas smyth and davy dyker, the valuers were sworn before john wykam, bedel.

if the bedels, as public officials, were necessarily and conspicuously of the privilege, the remark is not less true of those humbler functionaries, the personal attendants of the scholars. as we have seen, the payment of the bedels depended in part on collections, and the gains of the scholars' servants were derived from the same source. every master was compelled by statute to exact contributions from his scholars at the end of term at what was called "collection." at the present time the expression is applied to terminal examinations, and this use of it originated from the circumstance that fees were paid by the scholars varying in accordance with the subject of study. for grammar the statutable amount was eightpence, for natural philosophy fourpence, and for logic threepence per term, and it was usual to reckon four terms to the year. to each scholar were allotted two servants—a superior and an inferior; the former receiving threepence, and the latter one penny per term. there was no evading these charges; even the poorest student had to pay "scot and lot" towards the support of both classes of menials, some of whom were doubtless better off than himself. the division of these servants into orders, resembling those of the bedels, has descended to modern days, most oxford colleges having their upper and under "scouts." this, it has been well observed, "is a curious instance of the vitality of insignificant customs, which exist while the greater give place to new."

at the commencement of the chapter, a list was furnished of various occupations—more or less connected with the work of the university—the professors of which were regarded as of the privilege. the term "privilege," in this and similar contexts, denotes administrative autonomy and special jurisdiction; and members of these trades were amenable to the chancellor, while the chancellor had to answer for their good behaviour to the king and parliament. in the middle ages the chancellor was not, as he is to-day, a permanent and ornamental figure-head, the duties properly pertaining to the office being discharged by the vice-chancellor. he was the active and dominant centre of university life, and, as such, took cognizance of numerous details which would now be deemed too petty, and even ridiculous, for a personage of his dignity and importance. so great, however, was the pressure of judicial and other business that it was necessary that he should be relieved of part of the burden, and thus we often find commissaries sitting in his room and stead.

the ministry of trade

the powers of the chancellor were very considerable. they did not extend to questions of life or death, but he could fine, he could imprison, he could banish, and, being an ecclesiastic, he could excommunicate; and these methods of reproof and coercion were constantly employed by him as ex-officio justice of the peace and censor of public morals. the privilege of the university was of a dual nature. it protected the scholars in any court of first instance but a university court; on the other hand, the university obtained full control over its scholars, who were forbidden to enter a secular court. litigants were allowed to appeal, and very frequently did appeal, from the chancellor's decision to congregation, and, if they were still not satisfied and the matter was sufficiently grave, to the pope—that is, in spiritual causes. in temporal causes an appeal lay to the higher tribunals of the realm and the king. the chancellor, also, might appeal to the king, invoking the secular arm in cases where the voice of the church proved ineffectual in dealing with rebellious subjects, and the letter addressed to the sovereign for this purpose was called, in technical language, a significavit.

sometimes the king, moved perhaps by a petition from his lieges in one or other of the university towns, admonished the chancellor to be more alert in the performance of his duty. in june, 1444, the head of the university of oxford was in receipt of the following missive from henry vi.:

"trusty and welbeloved, we grete you wel, and late you wyte that we have understanden by credible report of the greet riotts and misgovernance that have at diverse tymys ensued and contynelly ensue by two circuits used in oure universite of oxon in the vigile of st. john baptist and the holy apposteles peter and paule to the gret hurt and disturbance of the sad and wol vituled personnes of the same universite, wherefore we, wolling such vices and misgovernaunce to be suppressyd and refused in the said universite and desiring the ease and tranquillite of the said peuple in the same, wol and charge you straitly that ye see and ordeyne by youre discretione that al such vices and misgovernaunce be left and all such as may be founde defective in that behalve be sharply punished in example of all other; and more over we charge you oure chancellor, to whom the governance and keeping of our paix within oure said universite by virtu of our privilege roial is committed that in eschewing of all inconvenience, ye see and ordeyne that oure paix be surely kepe within oure universite above said, as wel in the saide vigiles as at all other tymes; and for asmuch as we be enformed that the sermons in latin which ever before this tyme, save now of late, be now gretly discontynued, to the gret hurt and disworship of the same, we therefore, desiring right affecturusely the increse of vertu and cunning in oure said universite, wol and commande you straitly that ye with ripe and suffisant maturite, advise a sure remede in that party, by the which such sermons may thereafter be continued and inviolably observed, wherein ye shal do unto us right singulier pleisir.—geven under oure signet at farneham the 20 day of juyn."

the reader will no doubt be interested to learn the occasion of this reprimand. the concluding portion invests it with a somewhat general character, and may be interpreted as pointing to a lamentable decline from a previous high standard of piety and learning, which only incessant preaching was calculated to rectify. neglecting this postscript, it is pretty evident that the scandal arising from the observance of vigils was produced by the inconsiderate carousals of craftsmen included in the privilege, and was therefore obnoxious to the magisterial notice of the chancellor. it will be sufficient to refer to the riots on the eve of st. john baptist.

as was the custom in medi?val towns, different trades had different stations assigned to them, and the tailors, who must have driven a flourishing business in caps and gowns, had their shops in the north-west ward of st. michael's parish. in ancient days these satellites indulged at certain seasons—more particularly on the eve of st. john baptist—in unseemly demonstrations. they waxed very jovial, and, after eating, drinking, and carousing, "took a circuit" through the streets of the city, accompanied by sundry musicians, and "using certain sonnets" in praise of their profession and patron. as long as they kept within these limits there seems to have been no complaint, but the thing increased more and more. people were disturbed and alarmed, the watch beaten, and from blows the outrageous tailors passed to murder. and so it came about that their revelling, with the "circuit" of another profession on the eve of st. peter and st. paul, was prohibited first by edward iii. and then by henry vi. in the letter above cited.

another trade closely associated with the university was that of the barbers. in the twenty-second year of edward iii. (1348) the whole company and fellowship of the barbers within the precincts of oxford appeared before the chancellor and announced their intention of "joining and binding themselves together in amity and love." they brought with them certain ordinances and statutes drawn up in writing for the weal of the craft of barbers, and requested the chancellor to peruse and correct them, and, afterwards, if he approved, attach to them the seal of the university. the regulations having been seriously considered by the chancellor, the two proctors and certain doctors, it was resolved to comply with the petition on the day following and constitute the barbers a society or corporation.

the first article stipulated that the said craft should, under certain penalties, keep and maintain a light before the image of our lady in our lady's chapel, within the precincts of st. frideswyde's church; the second, that no person of the said craft should work on a sunday, save on market sundays and in harvest-time, or shave any but such as were to preach or do a religious act on sunday all through the year; while a third provided that all such as were of the craft were to receive at least sixpence a quarter from each customer who desired to be shaved weekly in his chamber or house. one shave per week does not coincide with our modern notions of what is attractive and presentable in the outer man, but the same rule prevailed at cambridge. the statutes of st. john's college in the latter university affirmed: "a barber is very necessary to the college, who shall shave and cut once a week the head and beard of the master, fellows, and scholars, as they shall severally have need."

in the statutes of new college, oxford, there is an injunction against the mock ceremony of shaving on the night preceding magistration. it is called a ludus (or play), and is believed to have been affined to the ecclesiastical mummeries so popular in the middle ages, in one of which the characters were a bishop, an abbot, a preceptor, and a fool shaved the precentor on a public stage erected at the west end of the church. there was also a species of masquerade celebrated by the religious in france, which consisted in the display of the most formidable beards; and it is recorded by gregory of tours that the abbess of poitou was accused of allowing one of these shows, called a barbitoria, to be held in her monastery.

the only men of religion permitted to wear long beards were the templars; and, speaking generally,[4] the presence or absence of hair was one of the marks of cleavage between the clergy (tonsi) and the laity (criniti). even those privileged to wear long hair—we refer, of course, to the male portion of the community—were required to be shorn so far that part of their ears might appear, and that their eyes might not be covered. at first it may seem strange that the question of trimming the hair should come under the cognizance of the church—the person himself or his barber might have been deemed at liberty to consult his own taste. the canon, however, which regulated the usage was based on the apostolic challenge: "doth not nature itself teach you that, if a man hath long hair, it is a shame unto him?"

this ordinance applied a fortiori to priests, who had to be content with very little hair. at a visitation of oriel college by longland, bishop of london, in 1531, he ordered one of the fellows, who was a priest, to abstain, under pain of expulsion, from wearing a beard and pinked shoes, like a laic. it would seem that this spiritual person had been accustomed to ridicule the governor and fellows of the college, since he was commanded to abjure that bad habit also.

the correct explanation of the custom condemned by the new college statutes is doubtless that already furnished. hearne, however, had an idea that it was a reflexion on the lollards. wiclif is always represented with a beard, and, as most of his followers were lay-folk, it was possibly a symbol of the sect, which may have recollected the text: "neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard."

the interest of the university in expert tonsure is now well understood, but the craving for the subjugation of falsifying hair must have been quite secondary to that for the sustenance of the bodily powers, and accordingly the cooks stood very near to the purveyors of intellectual aliment. nor did the chancellor concern himself merely with the ratification of their ordinances; as the natural sequence, he, or his deputy, saw to it that they were properly respected, and formed a court of appeal for the settlement of internecine differences. thus, on august 19, 1463, two persons, proctors of the craft of cooks of the university of oxford, petitioned the commissary against one of the members who had declined to contribute to the finding of candles, vulgarly called "coke-lyght," in the church of st. mary-the-virgin, and to a certain accustomed feast on the day of the cooks' riding in the month of may. a day was appointed for investigating the matter, when the defendant did not appear, but several witnesses were produced to confirm the plaintiffs' assertions. robert, the cook of hampton hall, deposed that all the cooks of colleges and halls had been used to contribute to the annual feast; that he had been a cook for six years, and that the cooks had always nominated two of their number to gather contributions. his testimony was corroborated by stephen, the cook of vine hall, as also by walter, another cook, and john, the cook of "brasenos." it is worthy of note that in the record of these proceedings the names are entered as "stephanus coke," "walterus coke," and "johannes coke," thus throwing light on the formation of one of our commonest surnames.

not only were questions of public policy and "constitutional usage" determined by the chancellor's court, but delinquents of all descriptions were brought up for judgment. here we shall do well to remember that this was an ecclesiastical court, and therefore offences against good morals as well as the law of the land were dealt with. a person unjustly defamed as guilty of incontinence could clear himself by a voluntary process of compurgation—that is, by the sworn testimony of reputable friends. if, unhappily, he was guilty, he might rehabilitate himself by formally abjuring his indiscretions. both scholars and others of the privilege frequently appeared before the chancellor in the character of penitents. in 1443 a certain christina, laundress of st. martin's parish, swore that she would no longer exercise her trade for any scholar or scholars of the university, because under colour of it many evils had been perpetrated, wherefore she was imprisoned and freely abjured the aforesaid evils in the presence of master thomas gascoigne, s.t.p., the chancellor. in 1444 dominus hugo sadler, priest, swore on the holy gospels that he would not disturb the peace of the university, and would abstain from pandering and fornication, on pain of paying five marks on conviction. in this case four acted as sureties, singly and jointly. in 1452 robert smyth, alias harpmaker, suspected of adultery with joan fitz-john, tapestry-maker, dwelling in the corner house on the east side of cat-strete, abjured the society of the same joan, and swore that he would not come into any place where she was, whether in the public street, market, church, or chapel, on pain of paying forty shillings to the university. on august 22, 1450, thomas blake, peliparius, william whyte, barber, john karyn, chirothecarius, "husbundemen" (householders), presented themselves before the chancellor, and, touching the holy gospels, abjured the game of tennis within oxford and its precinct.

at this point it will be convenient to refer to a custom not by any means confined to the universities, about which there appears to be some degree of misconception. "love-days," as they are called, have been strangely confused with law-days, whereas the very essence of the institution was the avoidance of litigation with all its expense and ill-feeling. the practice of submitting disputes to friendly arbitration was seemingly founded on the text: "dare any of you having a matter against another go to law before the unbelievers and not before the saints?" in these circumstances it is not surprising that the clergy bore a great part in such proceedings; and thus we find chaucer avouching of his frere:

in love-dayes ther coude he mochel helpe,

for ther he was nat lyk a cloisterer,

with a thredbare cope, as is a poore scoler,

but he was lyk a maister or a pope.

the university, being a microcosm of the entire kingdom, an imperium in imperio, by virtue of the "privilege roiall," cases occur in which deplorable misunderstandings were referred to the decision of one or more graduates of position—either in the first instance, or, it might be, ultimately, to the chancellor or commissary—by persons subject to academic tutelage. when the affair had been adjudicated, forms of reconciliation were prescribed, the parties being required to shake hands, go on their knees to one another, give each other the "kiss of peace," and provide a feast at their mutual expense, the menu of which was sometimes determined by the arbiter.

this interesting and admirable feature of old english life receives such copious illustration from the annals of oxford that it seems worth while to specify examples. thus, on november 8, 1445, a dispute between john godsond, stationer, and john coneley, "lymner," having been referred to two masters of arts and they having failed to compose it within the time stipulated, the chancellor intervened and decided that john coneley should work for john godsond for one year only; that his wages should be four marks, ten shillings; that he should himself fetch his work and return it to his employer's abode; that he should be thrifty in the use of his colours; and that his employer should have free ingress to the place where he sat at work. on july 7, 1446, four arbitrators, having in hand a quarrel between broadgates and pauline halls, imposed the following conditions: that the principals should implore reconciliation from each other for themselves and their parties; that they should give, either to other, the kiss of peace, and swear upon the holy gospels to have brotherly love toward each other for the future, and bind themselves to its observance under a bond to pay one hundred shillings for the violation thereof. the bond was to be in the keeping of the chancellor, and he was to deliver it, should hostilities be renewed, into the hands of the aggrieved party. david philip, alleged to have struck john coneley, was commanded to kneel to him, and ask and receive his pardon. it is worthy of remark that the invariable phrase applied to past quarrels is "ab origine mundi," which left no loophole for the revival of ancestral feuds, however remote in point of time.

on july 21, 1452, master robert mason, having delivered judgment in the case of thomas condale, a servant of new college, and john morys, tailor, required both parties, as a pledge of goodwill, to invite their neighbours to an entertainment, and provide at their joint charges two gallons of good ale.

on january 10, 1465, thomas chaundler, s.t.p., commissary-general of the university of oxford, having been chosen as arbitrator between the worshipful sir thomas lancester, canon-regular and prior of the same order of students, and simon marshall, on the one part, and john merton, pedagogue, and his wife, on the other, decreed that none of them should abuse, threaten, or make faces at each other, and that they should forgive all past offences. none of them was to institute further proceedings, judicial or extra-judicial, and within fifteen days of the date thereof they were to furnish an entertainment at their joint charges—one party to furnish a goose with a measure of wine, and the other bread and beer.

finally, on february 6, 1465, dr. john caldbeke, arbiter between certain members of "white hall" and "deep hall," ordered the parties to pardon each other and commence no ulterior proceedings. he imposed perpetual silence on them, and as to a certain desk, the causa teterrima belli, reserved the decision to the chancellor. the disputants, accompanied by four members of each hall, were to meet at a time and place to be named, wine was to be provided for their mutual entertainment, and, before parting, they were to shake hands.

the question has been deferred too long—against whom did the university maintain its privilege? in part, no doubt, against the king's officers, but, mainly, against the mayor and burgesses of oxford, between whom and the scholars there was a simmering hostility bursting into periodical mêlées answering to, but infinitely more sanguinary than, the "town and gown rows" of more recent days. the general result of these disturbances, assumed to be acts of aggression on the part of the citizens, but more probably provoked by the insolence of the undergraduate portion of the university, of which there is abundant evidence, was to fortify the authority of the chancellor and extend his powers. we have seen that the townsmen, at an early period, were mulcted in an annual tribute, of which they were afterwards relieved, for hanging certain clerks. this might have served as a sufficient warning of the inviolability of the erudite persons in their midst, but it failed of effect. altogether there were three capital riots in the later middle ages, which we shall proceed to notice, together with the consequences.

of these three great conflicts between townsmen and scholars the first occurred in 1214. this was ended by a compromise brought about by the bishop of tusculum, the papal legate, the king granting jurisdiction to the university in all cases where one of the parties was a scholar or a scholar's servant. the second tumult, which took place in 1290, induced the king to confer upon the university the custody of the peace, the custody of the assize of victuals, and the supervision of weights and measures jointly with the mayor, who had hitherto borne full sway in matters of police. the third battle was in 1357. this was the famous riot of st. scholastica's day—satis periculosa—which resulted in the excommunication of the mayor, while he and the commonalty of the town of oxford were laid under an interdict by john, bishop of lincoln. the mayor, who was a vintner and drawn into the quarrel through it having arisen in his tavern, is stated in one account to have been originally in the service of the university—protected by the privilege—and this, of course, was regarded as an aggravation of his offence. the end of it was that the rights before mentioned were confirmed with certain extensions—namely, the supervision of the pavement, and the custody of the peace as well between laics as scholars, while the mayor was excluded from the custody of the peace between scholars.

as a species of penance the mayor and his fellows were enjoined by the bishop of lincoln to attend an anniversary mass at st. mary's on st. scholastica's day; and the scholars were forbidden, on pain of a long term of imprisonment, to inflict on any layman of the town, whilst on his way to the church, during the celebration of the mass, or in the course of his return, any injury or violence, lest he should be deterred from the observance of the duty. this caution was proclaimed through the schools year by year on the "legible day" immediately preceding the festival. good relations were hard to restore, and as long after as 1432 the authorities were reduced to publishing the following edict in the hope of abating the scandal:

"whereas there are no more suitable means of allaying the lamentable dissensions between the university and the town, which are a sign of the wrath of the almighty, than the devout supplications of priests walking in procession, therefore this ordinance is made for the regulation of such processions. first shall walk the chancellor, after him the doctors by two and two, in the rank of their several faculties, then masters of arts, then bachelors in theology, then non-regents, then beneficed bachelors, then all other bachelors, then secular priests non-graduates, then scholars, all by two and two, and all silently praying for the king and other benefactors living and dead, and for the peace and prosperity of the university. priests non-graduates shall be bound to attend on pain of a fine of sixpence, but no licentiates of any faculty soever may in any wise be present at the act."

it would not be fair to conclude this account without giving the townsmen's version of the way in which the privilege was exercised. this can be conveniently presented in the terms of two petitions, one of which certainly, and the other probably, dates from the second year of edward iii. (1328). if there be any truth in the allegations, it must be owned that the chancellor abused his judicial position to a degree quite intolerable to the victims.

i

"to the king and council; the burgesses of oxford complain, whereas the chancellor and university of oxford have cognizance of contracts, covenants, and trespass between clerk and clerk, or clerk and lay, they encroach on the franchise of the town, and draw to them these contracts, etc., between laymen, especially in certain gifts and actions brought before the chancellor, wherein a clerk has some concern, who, by covine, are made to incur large sums which were not due, and thus the defendants are condemned and afterwards excommunicated in all the churches of the town, unless they agree thereto; and if they are not absolved of the sentence before the chancellor, they are despoiled even to their breeches, and must give all their goods to the clerk. in the same way a plea of trespass in which there has been a cession to a clerk is made to terminate in a plea of debt, and thus charges of rent upon free tenements are proved, against law and in great burden to the tenements of the town. thus the chancellor encroaches on the franchises of the town, to the damage of the king's profits on writs and issues on pleas of debts, &c., pleadable before the justices, or before the mayor and bailiffs of the town. and with such proceedings taken before the chancellor concerning merchants and other strangers passing through, as well as residents, the merchants will not repair thither on account of such evil doings, and the town is thereby greatly impoverished."

ii

"to the king and council: walter de harewell, burgess and inheritor in oxford, showing that whereas the chancellor of the university has cognizance of offences and contracts between clerk and clerk, and clerk and lay, in the town, but nowhere else, one william de wyneye, clerk, impleaded him before the chancellor for offences done out of his jurisdiction in a foreign county; the said walter justified himself before the chancellor, but the said chancellor, notwithstanding, condemned him to prison and kept him in prison in oxford till he contented the said william with a large sum of money, and made an obligation of ￡20 to be at the will of the said university, and still he had to find mainprise before he could be set free. and because when he was taken and led to prison by the bedels of the university, he entered his house and shut his coffers and chests and the door of his room for the safety of his goods and chattels, the said chancellor banished him out of the town, and had it proclaimed everywhere, as though he were an outlaw, and sequestered all his goods and chattels, threatening if he entered the town to imprison him again for six days. no one ever had such franchise or power thus to outlaw, destroy, and banish the king's burgesses in the said town. prays a remedy for charity."[5]

owing perhaps to their peculiar position as the king's chattels, neither the chartered rights of the citizens nor the privilege of the university could be directly asserted against the jews, of whom a considerable body appears to have been settled at oxford, but the unbelievers were not allowed to do as they pleased. a critical instance occurred at ascensiontide, 1268, in connexion with a solemn procession to st. frideswyde's, when certain horrible jews, demoniaco spiritu arrepti, seized a cross from the bearer, broke it, and trampled it under foot. complaint was made to the king, who happened to be at woodstock, and he issued an order for the making of two crosses at the expense of the jews, one of which was to be of silver gilt and portable, and the other of marble and stationary. these were to be preserved for the perpetual remembrance of the outrage; and the silver cross was presented to the chancellor, masters, and scholars, to be borne before them in their solemn procession. an ordinance states that "since the relics of the blessed frideswyde repose in the borough of oxford, and more especially ought to be deservedly honoured as well by the university as by others, particularly by all who dwell in the aforesaid town, that the said university may obtain, through the intervenient merits and prayers of the same, more abundant tranquillity and peace for the future, a solemn procession be made in the middle, to wit, lent term, to the church of the same virgin, for the peace and tranquillity of the university, and that solemn mass be held there in respect of the above-said virgin."