Lord Mayor of London, and to live in the City's history as one of its greatest benefactors. But that tale is too full of anachronisms and improbabilities for any part of it, not confirmed by authentic records, to be believed in; and the authentic records are so few that we can get but a slight knowledge of Whittington's real history.

That a cat had something to do with the making of his fortune is not easily to be denied. The legend is traced back to within a generation of his lifetime, and to authorities that could hardly have been either ignorant or untruthful. It is probable, moreover, that he owed something to the influence and assistance of Fitzwarren, whose daughter he did really marry. But that he began life as a beggar-boy and scullion is certainly a fable. He was the youngest son of Sir William Whittington, a descendant of an ancient Warwickshire family, and proprietor of the manors of Pauntley, in Gloucestershire, and Solers Hope, in Hereford, who died in 1360. The family possessions passed to William, the firstborn, and, on his early death, to Robert, the second son, High Sheriff of Gloucester in 1402, and again in 1407, and ancestor of the Whittingtons of Hamswell, existing to this day. This Robert must have been a wealthy man. On one occasion he was riding with his son Guy in the neighbourhood of Hereford, when about thirty followers of one Richard Oldcastle, who had doubtless been aggrieved at some of the High Sheriff's proceeedings, waylaid and took them prisoners, only to be released on their entering into a bond to pay 6ool. by way of ransom, and to take no procedings against Oldcastle for his lawless conduct. In 1416, however, Robert Whittington obtained authority from Parliament to consider this forced engagement as null and void; and it is likely that he got back,his money and procured the punishment of his enemy.

Richard Whittington seems to have been only a few years old at the time of his father's death; and he was not yet a man in 1373, when he lost his mother. Being a

younger son, he followed the common practice of younger sons in times when there were few other professions to choose from, and became a merchant. Of his early life nothing is recorded. We first hear of him in the year 1393, when he must have been nearly forty; but as he was then a member of the Mercers' Company, and alderman and sheriff of the City of London, we have good ground for assuming that he had been a prosperous merchant during many previous years. Perhaps, as the story-books assert, he ran away to London, and then became rich through the accidental value of his cat; but in that case the wealth thus derived can only have been a trifling sum, to be used well and greatly augmented by his own industry. It is more probable, however-and we do him the greater honour in making this assumption that he rose solely through his own talent and application. He must have had some slight patrimony of his own, and much more must have come to him by his marriage with Alice, the daughter of Sir Hugh Fitzwarren of Torrington, owner of much property in Devonshire, Gloucestershire, and other counties. We have no solid ground for supposing that Fitzwarren himself ever meddled with trade, but his influence would be of use to young Whittington at his beginning of commercial life. That the beginning was comparatively humble may be inferred from the fact that the lad took to mercery instead of engaging in the wholesale wool or wine trades that were followed in the different ports by such men as the De la Poles of Hull. 'The mercers, as a metropolitan guild,' we are told, may be traced back to A.D. 1172; but it was not until the fifteenth century that they took their station among the merchants, and from being mere retailers became the first City company. Towards the close of the fourteenth century the mercers monopolized the silk trade, woollen stuffs having, prior to that period, constituted their staple business, and up to which time they had only partially been incorporated.' Whit

London in 1391, and again in 1404, and his name is several times met

with in conjunction with Whitting ton's. The king's debts were paid in 1410, and in 1411 we find that Whittington was employed to pay 100 marks for expenses incurred on account of the coming of French ambassadors to Dover, and their conveyance thence to the king's presence at Gloucester. In 1413 he lent another sum of 1,000l. to Henry IV., the money being returned in a fortnight; and it is certain that he often rendered similar service both to this monarch and to his son. For maintaining the siege of Harfleur in 1415 he lent 700l. to Henry V., to be repaid out of the customs on wool collected in London, Boston, and Hull; and another loan of 2,000 marks made in 1416 was discharged two years later. There is a tradition, hardly to be credited, that Whittington incurred much greater obligations on Henry's account, and volunteered an acquittance in the most chivalrous way possible. During his last mayoralty, in 1419, we are told, he invited the king and queen to a sumptuous entertainment at Guildhall, on the occasion of his receiving knighthood; and among the rarities prepared to give splendour to the festival was a marvellous fire of precious and sweet-smelling woods, mixed with cinnamon and other costly spices. While the king was praising the novelty, Whittington I went to a closet and drew thence bonds to the extent of 60,000l., which during the French wars had been issued by the sovereign, and which he had diligently bought up from the various merchants and money-lenders to whom they had been given; and this whole bundle he threw into the flames as the most expensive fuel of all. 'Never had prince such a subject!' Henry exclaimed, as soon as he understood the generosity of the act. never had subject such a prince!' answered Whittington.

And

That story may or may not be true. But of other, wiser and more honourable acts of liberality done by Whittington we have ample proof. "The fervent desire and busy intention of

a prudent, wise, and devout man,' he is reported to have said not long before his death, shall be to cast

before and make sure the state and the end of this short life with deeds of mercy and pity, and specially to provide for those miserable persons whom the penury of poverty insulteth, and to whom the power of seeking the necessaries of life by art or bodily labour is interdicted.' And this was certainly the rule of his own life. In the year 1400 he obtained leave to rebuild the Church of St. Michael Paternoster, and found there a college, 'consisting of four fellows, clerks, conducts, and choristers, who were governed by a master, on whom he bestowed the rights and profits of the church, in addition to his salary of ten marks. To the chaplains he gave eleven marks each, to the first clerk eight, to the second clerk seven and a half, and to the choristers five marks a year each.' Besides this he built the chapel annexed to Guildhall, made contributions to the adornment of Gloucester Cathedral, and endowed many other churches. Four hundred years before John Howard appeared as the prisoner's friend Whittington began to rebuild Newgate Prison, hitherto a most ugly and loathsome prison, so contagious of air that it caused the death of many men;' and, dying before the work was done, he left money that it might be duly completed. St. Bartholomew's Hospital, in Smithfield, was also repaired by his instructions; and Whittington's Almshouses, near Highgate, are to this day standing monuments of the generosity of this worthy and notable merchant, the which,' according to the testimony of his executors, while he lived, had right liberal and large hands to the needy and poor people.' In other ways he cared for the neediest among his fellow-men. 'One of the last acts of his life,' says a manuscript authority, indicating his honesty and public spirit, was his active prosecution of the London brewers for forestalling meat and selling dear ale; for which interference with their proceedings the brewers were very wroth.' And as a small

but significant illustration of his large-hearted charity, Stow tells us that 'there was a water conduit east of the Church of St. Giles, Cripplegate, which came from Highbury, and that Whittington, the mayor, caused a bosse [or tap] of water to be made in the church-wall,'-the forerunner, by nearly half a millenium, of the drinking-fountains now so common among us.

Notable evidence of Whittington's ability in a province not much heeded by the majority of merchants, appears in the fact that Henry V., in 1413, a few months after his accession, appointed him chief supervisor of the rebuilding of the nave in Westminster Abbey. Two years later, moreover, in ordering certain alterations in the City of London, the king thought it well to direct that the mayor should do nothing either in building up or in pulling down without the advice of Whittington. But the merchant did more for the City than even King Henry could have expected. In his will he provided for the paving and glazing of Guildhall, luxuries at that time almost confined to palaces; and during the last years of his life he was busy about the foundation of the library of the Grey-friars monastery in Newgate Street. This noble building,' according to Stow, was 129 feet long, 31 feet in breadth, entirely ceiled with wainscot, with 28 wainscot desks, and 8 double settees. The cost of furnishing it with books was 556. 10s., of which 400l. was subscribed by Whittington.' Still more important than this was the Guildhall Library, built by Whittington's directions, for the preservation of the civic records.

The

most important of these, the Liber Albus,' printed for the first time a few years ago under the editorship of Mr. Riley, is thought to have been compiled, at Whittington's own suggestion, by his chief executor, John Carpenter.

Whittington died in 1423. His body was three times buried in his own church of St. Michael Paternoster-first by his executors under a fair monument; then in the reign of Edward VI., the parson of the

church thinking some great riches, as he said, to be buried with him, caused his monument to be broken, his body to be spoilt of its leaden sheet, and again the second time to be buried; and in the reign of Queen Mary the parishioners were forced to take him up and lap him in lead as before, to bury him the third time, and to place his monument, or the like, over him again.' But both church and tombstone were destroyed by the Great Fire of 1666; and now his only monument is to be found in the records of the city which he so greatly helped by his noble charities, and, as far as we can judge, by his perfect showing of the way in which a merchant prince should live.

CHAPTER IV.

THE CANNINGS OF BRISTOL.

From very early times Bristol was one of the foremost marts of English commerce. In the twelfth century, according to William of Malmesbury, its haven was a receptacle for ships coming from Ireland, Norway, and other foreign lands, lest a region so blest with native riches should be deprived of the benefits of foreign merchandize;' and in later generations there was no diminution of the old seafaring zeal. Considering the many and notable services,' runs a charter granted by Henry IV. soon after the year 1400, which very many merchants, burgesses of our town of Bristol, have done for us and our famous progenitors in many ways with their ships and voyages, at their own great charges and expense, and also since many of the said burgesses and merchants have been grievously vexed and disturbed by the lieutenants and ministers of our Admiralty of England, to their great loss and burthen, we there fore of our own special grace have granted for us and our heirs to the mayor and commonalty and their heirs, that the said town shall be for ever free from the jurisdiction of the said Admiralty.'

But for a long time Bristol commerce ran in the old groove, with

out receiving much influence from the cloth trade introduced in the twelfth century from Flanders. Hull, Boston, and other towns on the eastern coast of England, with Winchester,. Totnes, and others in the south, had been growing rich through some generations by means of commerce in wool and cloth before Thomas Blanket, a merchant of Bristol, and some of his friends were in 1340 fined by the civic authorities for having caused various machines for weaving and making woollen cloths to be set up in their own houses, and having hired weavers and other workmen for this purpose.' The fine was remitted, however, by Edward III., and the Bristol people, seeing the value of the innovation, soon learnt to honour its introducers. In 1342 Blanket was made bailiff of Bristol, and in 1356 he, with some of his fellowmerchants, was summoned to Westminster to advise with the king on matters of importance in the interests of trade. From this time cloth played an important part in the commerce of Bristol. It provided a principal occupation both for the home manufacturers and for the traders with foreign countries until the discovery of America opened up new and yet more abundant sources of wealth.

The greatest name in Bristol history prior to the beginning of that American traffic is first met with in the lifetime of Blanket, the clothweaver and cloth-dealer. William Canning, or Canynges, the elder, was a man of mark and a famous merchant during the second half of the fourteenth century; but nearly all we know of him is summed up in a string of dates. In 1361, and again in 1369, he was elected to the office of bailiff of Bristol; he was six times mayor-in 1372, 1373, 1375, 1381, 1385, and 1389; and thrice-in 1364, in 1383, and in 1384-he represented the city in Parliament. He died in 1396, leaving a large amount of money to be divided between his children, and much more to be distributed in charity. His son John was also a merchant of repute. A ship belonging to him, trading to Calais and

Flanders, was seized by some jealous seamen of the North in 1379, and detained at Hartlepool until the culprits had been brought to justice and restitution obtained. He also went the round of civic honours, being bailiff in 1380, sheriff in 1382, member of Parliament in 1384, and mayor in 1392 and 1398. He died in 1405, leaving a third of his goods to his wife, a third to his children, and a third to the poor. His eldest son Thomas settled in London as a grocer, and prospered well enough to become in due time master of his company and Lord Mayor of London; but in fame and wealth he was far outdone by his more famous brother.

This brother, known as William Canning the younger, to distinguish him from his grandfather, was born in 1399 or 1400. Of him, as of the other members of his family, very little indeed is recorded. That he was the greatest of Bristol's old merchant princes, however, is abundantly shown. He was about twenty-five when, as we are told in the contemporary Libel of English Policy,' the men of Bristol first, ' by rudder and stone,' went to Iceland,

'As men were wont of old

Of Scarborough, unto the coastës cold;" and it is pretty certain that he himself was one of the earliest and most energetic of the men who transferred the fish trade to Bristol.

Bristol was not long allowed without hindrance to enjoy this source of wealth. The shortsighted policy of the Danish Government, submitted to by the weak and mischievous counsellors of Henry VI., led to a treaty by which the merchants of London, Norfolk, Suffolk, Lincoln, York, Hull, Newcastle, and Bristol, were forbidden to trade to Iceland, Finmark, and other districts subject to the King of Denmark; and in 1450 the treaty was confirmed. To the rule, however, there was made in the latter year one notable exception. The Danish monarch allowed William Canning, 'in consideration of the great debt due to the said merchant from his subjects of Iceland and Finmark, to lade