delinquents were prosecuted and fined, the building speculation continued, till it became necessary, in consequence of the rapid decay of wooden structures, and the vast consumption of timber, to order, that in future the outer walls, fore-fronts, and windows of all edifices should be either of brick or stone.'*

Among the buildings which arose in this reign was the New Exchange, which the crafty Robert Cecil, Earl of Salisbury, and Lord High Treasurer of England, erected on the site of a long range of stables belonging to Durham House in the Strand, 'some shape of the modelling, though not in all respects alike, being after the fashion of the Royal Exchange in London,' to which, indeed, it appears to have been intended as a kind of rival; yet, though patronized by the Sovereign himself, who (accompanied by his Queen and children, and many Lords and Ladies) attended its opening, in April 1609, and named it Britain's Bourse, it had not the expected success; though it continued to exist till long after the Revolution. +.

About this period, the buildings in Lincoln's Inn Fields began so to increase, that the Privy Council, at the desire of the Benchers and Students of that Inn, directed a Mandate to certain Magistrates of the County of Middlesex, stating, that it was his Majesty's express pleasure and commandment, that the erection of new buildings' there should be restrained;' and ordering the said Justices to apprehend and commit to Gaol any who should be found so offending, or to take sureties of him or them to appear before the said Privy Council to answer the charges.' This curious mandate was not in force many years: the cause of its having been issued may be partly seen from the Special Commission, bearing date in 1618, and in which, after the most

grossly

* See preceding Volume, pages 304 and 314. It seems probable, that the augmentation of London in James's reign, was partly occasioned by the numbers of his countrymen who settled here after his accession, and particularly after the Union of the two Kingdoms in 1605.

+ More particulars of this building will be given in the account of the Strand.

1

grossly false assumption, that more public works, near and about the City of London, had been undertaken in the sixteen years of that reign, than in ages heretofore,' it was alledged, that

the grounds called Lincoln's-Iun Fields were much planted round with dwellings and lodgings of Noblemen and Gentlemen of qualitie; but at the same time, were deformed by cottages and mean buildings, incroachments on the Fields, and nuisances to the neighbourhood.' The Commissioners, therefore, who were the Lord Chancellor Bacon, the Earls of Worcester, Pembroke, and Arundel, and other Noblemen and Gentry, were directed to reform those grievances; and according to their discretion to frame and reduce those Fields, both for sweetness, uniformitie, and comeliness, into such walkes, partitions, and other plottes, and in such sorte, manner, and form, both for public health and pleasure,' as should be drawn up, by way of map, by Inigo Jones,' who was then Surveyor-General of his Majesty's Works. Under the superintendance of this able architect the present Square of Lincoln's-Inn Fields was laid out, and the buildings were begun; but many deviations were subsequently made in the original plan.'*

Whatever may be objected to the taste of Inigo Jones, who seems to have formed his style from the contemplation of the simplicity and solid grandeur of the Tuscan, rather than of the more elegant and higher Orders of Architecture, the Metropolis is certainly indebted to him for the introduction of a mode of building, which, if it has not all the characteristics of Grecian purity, is, generally speaking, far removed from the heavy and incongruous intermixture

* In Rymer's Fœdera, Vol. XVIII. p. 97, is the copy of another Commission directed to the Earl of Arundel, Inigo Jones, and others, for the prevention of any building on new foundations, within two miles of the City of London and Palace at Westminster;' and in some Letters from Mr. Gerrard, published in the Strafford Papers, which contain an account of proceedings under the Commission, it appears that twenty newly erected houses in St. Martin's Lane, were pulled down by order of the Commissioners acting on that authority.

intermixture that succeeded the decay of the Pointed style. The Banquetting House at Whitehall, was one of the structures erected by him towards the latter part of this reign; this fine edifice was the first essay towards the building of an extensive and beautiful Palace for the English Sovereigns; a design which the subsequent contest between Charles the First and the Parliament effectually put a stop to.

One of the Public Works' alluded to in the Commission before-mentioned, was doubtless the bringing of the New River to London, which was effected in the year 1613, chiefly through the individual munificence of Sir Hugh Middleton. Another, most probably, was the erection of a County Sessions House, in St. John's Street, afterwards called Hickes's Hall, at the sole expence of Sir Baptist Hickes, who was subsequently created Lord Viscount Campden. About this time also, anno 1615, the footpaths of the principal streets of the City, which had hitherto been laid with pebbles, were first begun to be paved with broad flags of free-stone, at the charge of the inhabitants. About this period also, several new Play-houses appear to have been either built or fitted up in London; the augmented numbers of the population demanding fresh sources of amusement: these edifices, however, were all of inconsiderable extent.

During the first ten or twelve years of the reign of Charles the First, the Suburbs of London kept continually on the increase, particularly in the neighbourhoods of Spitalfields and Westminster. The domestic traffic of the City in provisions, was also so much augmented, that various local regulations were devised to regulate it, and prevent its becoming a general nuisance. To this end it was enacted by the Common Council, in 1631, that 'no inhabitant should presume to sell any thing in the streets or lanes of the City, under pain of forfeiting for the first offence twenty shillings, for the second forty shillings, and for every subsequent offence, the penalty to be doubled. Two years afterwards, the Court of Star Chamber issued a Decree against Engrossers of provisions, and for the regulation of Bakers, Victuallers, and

Vintners,

Vintners within the Cities of London and Westminster. Among other things enjoined by this Decree, it was ordered, that no Vintner should sell any thing but bread and wine, nor permit any flesh or any sort of provisions to be brought into his house, to be there eaten by any of his guests;' that the keepers of Victualling-houses should take no more than two shillings for a meal, including wine and beer, and of each servant eightpence:' All Victuallers and Vintners were likewise enjoined "not to suffer in any of their houses, the use of Cards, Dice, Tables, or other unlawful games, nor to depend upon any License granted them. upon that account by the Groom-Porter;'* all such by this decree 'being declared null and void.' Further, that no Innholder within the above Citic, or ten miles of the same, shall take above six-pence in twenty-four hours for hay for one horse, nor

This will be better understood by referring to a Grant, (sce preceding Volume, p. 323,) made in 1620, by James the First to Clement Cottrell, Esq. Groom-Porter of the Household; by which the latter was empowered to License within the Cities of London and Westminster, and their respective Suburbs, twenty-four Bowling-Alleys: in Southwark, four; in St. Catherine's, one; in the Towns of Lambeth and South Lambeth, two; "in Shoreditch, one ; and in every other Burg, Town, Village, or Hamlet, within two miles of the Cities of London and Westminster, one Bowling-Alley. He was further authorized to License fourteen Tennis Courts; and to keep at play at Dice and Cards forty Taverns or Ordinaries: all within the same limits. This Grant may be considered as a direct example of the arbitrary power which James had then assumed; as it was made în express violation of an Act of Parliament passed in 33 Hen. VIII. c. 9. which enacts, that No person shall for his gain, luere, or living, keep any Commonhouse, Alley, or Place of Bowling, Coiting, Cloysh, Eagles, Half-bowl, Tennis, Dicing, Tables, or Carding, or any other Game, prohibited by Statute heretofore made, or any unlawful new Game, npon pain to forfeit every day 40 s.' The Grant to Cottrell, on the contrary, besides a general permission for good and civil people,' of sufficient ' qualitie and abilitie, to play at all the Games then used, gave also a similar License in respect to ⚫ any other Game hereafter to be invented. See Rym. Fad. Vol. V. xvii. p. 238. The increase of Bowling-Alleys, and of Carding and Dicing Houses, after the decline of the manly practice of Archery, is somewhat patheti cally lamented by Stow, in different parts of his Survey.

more than six-pence for a peck of oats; and it being appro hended, that great inconveniences would arise from the great numbers of Livery Stables lately set up in London, Westminster, and Southwark,' it was ordained, that after the said Stablekeepers had consumed their stocks of hay and oats, they should not presume to make any further provision, but lay the business entirely aside.' The only justification that can be offered for these arbitrary enactments, must be sought for in the great dearth which then prevailed.

About the year 1634, the foundation of the present square of Covent Garden was commenced by Francis, Earl of Bedford, and the Piazza, and Church of St, Paul there, were subsequently built by Inigo Jones. At this time also, the great repair of St. Paul's Cathedral

The following whimsical account of the State of the Metropolis about this period, is extracted from the Works of Sir William D'Avenant. Making due allowance for the satire, and for the cast of humour that pervades it, this description may be regarded as presenting a pretty accurate picture of London at that period.

"I will first take a Survey of the long continued deformity in the shaps of your City, which is of your buildings,

"Sure your ancestors contrived your narrow streets in the days of wheel-barrows, before those greater engines, carts, were invented. Is your elimate so hot, that as you walk, you need umbrellas af tiles to intercept the sun? or are your shambles 30 empty, that you are afraid to take in fresh air, lest it should sharpen your stomachs? Oh, the goodly landskip of Old Fish Street! which, had it not had the ill luck to be crooked, was narrow enough to have been your Founder's perspective; and where the garrets, perhaps not for want of architecture, but through abundance of amity, are so narrow, that opposite neighbours may shake hands with out stirring from home. Is unanimity of inhabitants in wise cities better exprest than by their coherence and uniformity of building; where streets begin, continue, and end, in a like stature and shape? But yours, as if they were raised in a general insurrection, where every man hath a several design, differ in all things that can make distinction. Here stands one that aims to be a palace, and next it another that professes to be a hovel : bere a giant, there a dwarf; here slender, there broad; and all most admirably different in faces, as well as in their height and bulk. I was about.