CHAPTER IX

THE SERJEANTS AND SERJEANTS’ INNS

Like so much of the history of the Lawyers and their Inns, the origin of the Serjeants and the steps by which they obtained a monopoly of pleading are buried in obscurity. It is, at any rate, certain that the Serjeants-at-Law, or _Servientes ad legem_, early acquired the exclusive right of audience in the Court of Common Pleas, wherein were determined all matters between subject and subject, where the King was not a party.

The Serjeants-at-Law had secured a monopoly of pleading; but, as business increased in the Courts, they found themselves unable to deal with it. In 1292, therefore, they were empowered, by an ordinance of Edward I., to select from the students and apprentices of the Common Law some of those best qualified to transact affairs in the King’s Courts (_cf._ p. 6). It is not clear who these students and apprentices were, but they were destined in the course of time to supersede the body of Counsel whom they were called in to aid.

‘Apprentice’ is a term that smacks of the Guild, and though in the fifteenth century it came to be applied to the Serjeants themselves, it must originally have denoted the students who sat at the feet of some recognized teacher of the Law. But, in truth, we have not enough evidence to enable us to trace the developments of the relationship between the Serjeants, the Students, and the Inns. The fact that the Serjeants, or Doctors of Law, upon attaining that degree, entirely severed their connection with their Inns, and that it was the Masters, and not they, who formed the governing bodies of the Inns, may be significant of some early difference or antagonism between the original Serjeants-and Apprentices-at-Law.

The custom of tolling a newly-elected Serjeant out of Lincoln’s Inn by ringing the chapel bell--‘a half-humorous, half-serious reminder that hence-forward he was dead to the Society’--may be considered to support this view.[79]

The obscurity of this question is enhanced, not only by the lack of documentary evidence, but also by the fact that the technical terms of the profession had no stationary significance. _Apprenticii ad legem_ was a fluid phrase; it came to be applied to the genuine junior apprentices of the law in the Inns of Chancery, to the senior students who instructed them, as well as to those who had completed the eight years’ curriculum of the University, and, having passed their examinations, were admitted to practise as advocates in Court, to the very Serjeants and Judges themselves.

We have seen how the topography of the Inns of Court--and of London itself--is bound up with the history of the Crusades and the Order of Templars who sprang from them. It is supposed that the Order of Serjeants, these Professors of the Common Law, who acquired the exclusive privilege of practising in the Court of Common Pleas, imitated the second degree of the Old Templars, and derived their name from the ‘free serving brethren’ of the Order of the Temple. The word Serjeant is said to translate the Latin _Servientes_, and the King’s Servants-at-Law, _Servientes domini Regis ad legem_, were, it is suggested, the lineal descendants of the _fratres servientes_, the servant brethren, of the Knights Templars. The peculiar dress of the ‘Order of the Coif’ is advanced as an argument in support of this fascinating pedigree. The Serjeants-at-Law marked their rank, it is suggested, by wearing red caps, under which, as in the East, a linen cap, or coif, was worn. Did the Templars bring this habit from the East, and were their first ‘servants’ Mohammedan prisoners? At any rate, the coif proper was a kind of white hood made of lawn (later of silk), which completely covered the head like a wig, and whilst the later black patch represented the cornered cap worn over it, the true vestigial representative of the coif is to be found in the white border of the lawyer’s wig.[80] A connection may be traced between the white linen thrown over the head of a Serjeant on his creation and the white mantle in which the novice was clothed when, in the Chapel of St. Anne, he was initiated into the Order of the Knights Templars, and declared a free, equal, elected and admitted brother.

In this connection it is at least noteworthy that the Serjeants had a cult for St. Thomas of Acre (Thomas à Becket), and that in the Chapel of their patron Saint, adjoining the Old Hall of the Temple, they used to pray before going to St. Paul’s to select their pillars. The Knights of St. Thomas in Palestine were placed at Acre under the Templars in the Holy Land, and a Chapel dedicated to St. Thomas of Acre was built for them. Can it be that the Serjeants trace from the subservient Order of the Knights of St. Thomas?

There is some trace of an ecclesiastical origin, not only in their ‘long, priest-like robes,’ which Fortescue describes, ‘with a cape, furred with white lamb about their shoulders, and thereupon a hood with two labels,’ but also in their performance of a rite, which none but priests might offer, in a solemn ceremony that lasted down to the Reformation. When feasts were held in the Temple Hall, the Serjeants, in the middle of the feast, went to the Chapel of St. Thomas of Acre in Cheapside, built by Thomas à Becket’s sister after his canonization, and there offered; and then to St. Paul’s, where they offered at St. Erkenwald’s shrine; then into the body of the Church. Here they were appointed to their pillars by the Steward of the feast, to which they then returned.

The theory has, indeed, been advanced that the coif was a device for covering the tonsure of ecclesiastical pleaders after clerics had been forbidden to practise in the secular Courts. But this explanation seems too ingenious.

The ceremony of choosing a pillar at St. Paul’s, referred to above, points to the ancient practice of the Lawyers taking each his station at one of the pillars in the Cathedral, and there waiting for clients. ‘The legal sage stood, it is said, with pen in hand, and dexterously noted down the particulars of every man’s case on his knee.’[81]

It long remained the custom of the Law-Courts to adjourn at noon. Then the Serjeants would repair to the ‘Parvis,’ or porch, of St. Paul’s to meet their clients in consultation. And this practice is alluded to by Chaucer:

‘A serjeant of the law ware and wise, That often had y been at the “Parvise,” There was also, full rich of excellence. Discreet he was, and of great reverence; He seemed such, his words were so wise. Justice he was full often in assize, By patent and by pleine commissioun.’ _‘Prologue,’ Canterbury Tales._

Whatever the exact history of their lineage, the trained lawyers who were summoned to attend and advise the King in Council did, undoubtedly, become a recognized Order, styled _Servientes Regis ad Legem_--King’s Serjeants-at-Law. From their ranks the Judges were always supposed to be chosen. The old formula at Westminster, when a new Serjeant approached the Judges, was, ‘I think I see a brother.’ Down to the time of the abolition of the Order, a lawyer, when nominated a Judge, first had to get himself admitted a Serjeant, and to enter the Order of the Coif. This was always an expensive step.

Fortescue enlarges upon the cost which attended the ceremonies, when one of the persons ‘pitched upon by the Lord Chief Justice with the advice and consent of all the Judges’ was summoned in virtue of the King’s Writ to take upon him the state and degree of a Serjeant-at-Law.

His own bill for the gold rings he was obliged to present--_fidei symbolo_--on such an occasion to the Princes, Dukes, Archbishops and Judges who were present at the ‘sumptuous feast, like that at a Coronation, lasting seven days, which the new-created Serjeants were called upon to give,’ amounted to £50. There is record of a Serjeants’ Feast held in the Inner Temple, 1555, which cost over £660. These feasts were held at first at Ely Place, Lambeth Palace, or St. John’s Priory at Clerkenwell. Afterwards they took place in the Hall of the Inn of which the new Serjeant had been a Student. The whole House contributed to the expense of this degree. The elaborate ceremonies which attended the creation of a new Serjeant-at-Law are given at length by Dugdale (chapter xli. _et seq._). It would be out of place to recount them here.

It has been humorously, though not quite accurately, observed that the Bar ‘went into mourning for Queen Anne, and has remained in mourning ever since.’ The sombre robes now worn by the English Bar may well be thought to symbolize the dignity of the law and the gravity of the profession, as the ‘spotless ermine’ typifies the integrity and independence of the Judges. But, as was the case with the hoods and gowns of other degrees in other Universities, or the black _felze_ of a gondola at Venice, brilliancy and splendour of colour was the original note, and dulness was the result of restriction. The robes which the Serjeants wore varied from time to time, and with different occasions.

In the seventeenth century Dugdale observes that their robes still in some degree resembled ‘those of the Justices of either Bench, and were of murrey, black furred with white, and scarlet. But the robe which they usually wear at their Creation only is of murrey and mouse-colour,’ with a suitable hood and the coif.

Arrangements were made about 1635 between the Judges and Serjeants, in accordance with which gowns of black cloth were to be worn for term-time; violet cloth for Court or holidays; scarlet in procession to St. Paul’s, or when dining in state at the Guildhall or attending the Sovereign’s presence at the House of Lords, and black silk for trials at _Nisi Prius_. But the fashions and colours were always changing. The violet gown, which superseded the mustard and murrey worn in Court during term-time, gave occasion for Jekyll’s witty rhyme, when a dull Serjeant was wearying the Court with a prosy argument:

‘The Serjeants are a grateful race; Their dress and language show it; Their purple robes from Tyre we trace; Their arguments go to it.’

It was the militant Chief Justice Willes who, ten years after the ’45, first endeavoured to secure the abolition of the exclusive right of the Serjeants to practise in the Court of Common Pleas. But their hour had not yet come. In 1834 a mandate was obtained from William IV. abolishing the privilege of the Serjeants, but this was set aside by the Privy Council as being defective in form. At length doom fell upon the old Order of the Coif, in the shape of an Act of Parliament, 1846, which threw open the Common Pleas to all counsel indiscriminately. The last Queen’s Serjeants to be appointed were Serjeants Byles, Channel, Shee, and Wrangham, in 1857. By the Judicature Act of 1873, which consolidated the three Courts of Law at Westminster (_See_ Chapter I.) into the High Court of Justice, the Judges were no longer required to receive the coif on their nomination to the bench. The knell of the Serjeants’ doom had now rung. Five years later their Inn in Chancery Lane and the Brotherhood were dissolved.

When the mere pillars of St. Paul’s had ceased to be regarded as satisfactory ‘chambers,’ the Serjeants, like the law-apprentices, took possession of Inns for the purposes of practice and residence. These Inns remained independent bodies, and never became, like the Inns of Chancery, subject to the Inns of Court.

Scrope’s Inn, adjoining the Palace of the Bishops of Ely, and opposite the Church of St. Andrew in Holborn, was the first abode of the Serjeants. Its site was long marked by Scrope’s Court in Holborn. It took its name from the Le Scropes, who rose to eminence under Edward I. Two brothers, Sir Henry and Sir Geoffrey, both became Chief Justice of King’s Bench, in 1317 and 1324 respectively. Richard Le Scrope, son of the former, was created Baron Scrope of Bolton, and was twice Chancellor of England. He died in 1403, whilst in residence at his Inn. Scrope’s Inn would thus naturally be a centre round which the trained professors of the law would congregate, as round Lincoln’s Inn and Grey’s Inn, to help in the transaction of the business of the Justice of King’s Bench. It then became an Inn for Judges and Serjeants-at-Law, and so continued until, in 1498, it was abandoned. For the lawyers were concentrating upon the southern end of Chancellor’s Lane and Fleet Street. The Serjeants took up their residence in Serjeants’ Inn (Fleet Street) at least as early as the reign of Henry VI., and probably much earlier (Dugdale). This Inn is connected with the Inner Temple by a passage past the little garden once in the possession of Sir Edward Coke, and afterwards known as the ‘Benchers’ Garden.’ But the principal entrance is from Fleet Street, through a pair of handsome iron gates, in which are wrought the arms of the Inn, a dove and a serpent.

The Gate House forms the offices of the Norwich Union Fire and Life Assurance Society. The whole Inn was burnt down in the Great Fire, and was afterwards rebuilt (1670) by means of voluntary subscriptions on the part of the Serjeants. But upon the expiration of the lease then granted to them, the Serjeants abandoned their Inn, with its fine chapel, hall, and houses that surrounded the Court, and united with their brethren in Chancery Lane. The Inn was afterwards pulled down and rebuilt from the designs of Adam, the architect of the Adelphi, for private houses and Assurance offices. The ‘elegant building,’ as Herbert calls it, in the classical style, which was erected on the site of the old Hall, formed at first the offices of the Amicable Assurance Company, and is now occupied by the Church of England Sunday School Institute. The quiet quadrangle is surrounded by pleasing eighteenth-century houses, with decorated porches and fine iron-work. Some of them have extinguishers for the links in front of their porches. Loftie noted the initials “S. I.” and the date 1669 upon one survivor of the Serjeants’ rebuilding.

The Inn, which the Serjeants joined when they left Fleet Street, had been occupied by their brethren since the end of the fourteenth century. But, though leased to their representatives by the Bishops of Ely, who held the freehold, or their lessees, it was not called Serjeants’ Inn until 1484. Prior to that date it was known as Faryngdon’s Inn in Chancellor’s Lane. Here all the Judges, as having been Serjeants-at-Law before their elevation to the Bench, had chambers assigned to them.

A plain, unpleasing, stuccoed, Early Victorian building now faces Chancery Lane, and drops as a screen of ugliness across the old brick buildings within. This we owe to Sir Robert Smirke, who rebuilt the Inn (1837-1838), with the exception of the old Hall, which was ‘approached by a handsome flight of stone steps and balustrade.’ So Herbert, who says that in his day (1804) all the buildings were modern. He describes the Inn as then consisting of two small Courts, the principal entrance from Chancery Lane fronting the Hall, and the second Court communicating with Clifford’s Inn by a small passage. As there is an exit from Clifford’s Inn to Fetter Lane, it is thus possible to pass from Chancery Lane to Fetter[82] Lane without going into Fleet Street. When, in 1877, the Brotherhood of Serjeants dissolved, they sold the Inn for some £60,000 to Serjeant Cox, and divided the proceeds, but gave the twenty-six valuable portraits of their predecessors, that had adorned the walls of the Hall, to the National Portrait Gallery. The tiny Hall, the single, narrow Court of plain stuccoed houses, and some trees and turf behind some railings, remain to remind us of the Serjeants’ Inn and the Serjeants’ Garden, where Lord Keeper Guildford would take his ease, and where the great roll of English Judges have had chambers. But the beautiful old stained glass windows of the Hall and Chapel, which bore the arms of the various members, together with the heraldic device of the Order--an ibis _proper_ on a shield _or_--were removed by the purchaser to his residence of Millhill, where he built a chamber, the facsimile of the Hall, for their reception.

Such is the story of the Inns of Court, which have gone on from strength to strength, and of the Inns of Chancery and the Serjeants’ Inns, which have almost vanished, together with the Societies which made them famous, from off the changing face of London. It is a story which, though briefly told, and told by a layman who makes no claim to originality of material, can hardly fail to be of interest to those who are alive to the charm of the old things of the Capital.

It brings before us, not only the vision of the great Justiciars who transacted the business of the King’s Courts, of the great Lawyers who built up the mighty fabric of English Law, and the great Judges who defended the rights and liberties and progress of the people, but also many of the greatest names in literature and architecture. The precincts of the Temple remind us of the Order of the Red-Cross Knights, and near at hand are the vacated Inns of that other Order which has been likewise dissolved. For we see no more, save in the light of imagination, either the mail-clad figures of the Templars in their white cloaks stamped with the red cross, or the Serjeants in their white lawn coifs and parti-coloured gowns, wending their way from the Temple Hall to the shrine of St. Thomas.

The silver tongue of Harcourt is mute as the impassioned eloquence of Burke and Sheridan, yet these buildings seem to echo with their voices, with the sonorous declamation of Dr. Johnson, or the witty stammer of Charles Lamb. There, in Gray’s Inn, we still seem to see the figure of Francis Bacon, pacing the walks with Raleigh, talking of trees and politics and high adventure; from the Gateway of Lincoln’s Inn, and past the red bricks laid by Ben Jonson, when Wolsey was Cardinal, the form of Sir Thomas More emerges; and across the way the thin, alert figure of Sir Edward Coke steps briskly from his tiny garden into Old Serjeants’ Inn.

Here Dickens talks with Thackeray, and Blackstone scowls at Goldsmith; there, in the Middle Temple Hall, Queen Elizabeth leads the dance with Sir Christopher Hatton, and the rafters ring with the music of Shakespeare’s voice and Shakespeare’s poetry. And the buildings themselves are the works of a noble army of English Architects, admirable creations and memorials of the genius of Sir Christopher Wren, Inigo Jones, Adam, Hardwick, Street, and of the unknown builders of Norman, Gothic, and Elizabethan things. These facts once known, not all the dirt and fog of London air, not all the noise and distraction of City business and legal affairs, can ever again wholly obscure the charm, the romance, the historical and literary associations, which haunt these homes of so many great English Lawyers, Writers, and Administrators.

APPENDIX

The following is a list of the chief authorities referred to in the foregoing pages:

ADDISON, C. G.: The Knights Templars. BAYLISS, T.: The Temple Church. BEDWELL, C. E. A.: Quarterly Review, 1908. BELLOT, H.: The Inner and Middle Temple. DOUTHWAITE: Gray’s Inn, 1886. DUGDALE, WILLIAM: Origines Juridicales, 1671. FLETCHER, J.: The Pension Book of Gray’s Inn, 1901. FORTESCUE, SIR JOHN: De Laudibus Legum. GOUGH: Sepulchral Monuments. HERBERT, WILLIAM: Antiquities of the Inns of Court and Chancery, 1804. INDERWICK, F. C., K.C.: Calendar of the Inner Temple Records. KELLY, J.: Short History of the English Bar. LEIGH, GERARD: Accedence of Armorie, 1653. Lincoln’s Inn, The Black Books of, 1897. LOFTIE, W. J.: Inns of Court and Chancery, 1895. MANNINGHAM, JOHN, Diary of, 1868. Minutes of Parliament of the Middle Temple. PITT-LEWIS, G.: History of the Temple, 1898. POLLOCK and MAITLAND: History of English Law. PULLING, ALEXANDER: The Order of the Coif, 1884. SPEDDING, JAMES: Life and Letters of Francis Bacon. SPILSBURY, W. H.: Lincoln’s Inn, 1850. STOW, JOHN: Survey of London, Ed. Kingsford, 1908. WHEATLEY, H. B.: Literary Landmarks of London. WILLIAMS, E.: Staple Inn.

INDEX

Abinger, Lord, 103

Abram, Messrs., shop, 67

Adam, architect, 197, 201

Addison, Joseph, 62, 66

Ainger, Canon, 59

Albert, Prince, 120

Alderson, Edward Hall, 94

Allington, Sir Richard, 183

Ancients. See Benchers

Anson, Sir William, 72

Apprentices at the Law, 5, 6, 9, 12, 17 _ff._, 36, 38, 39, 166, 186-188

Ashburton, Lord, 81

Ashmole, Elias, 81

Asquith, Right Hon. H. H., 93

Atterbury, Bishop, 183

Bacon, 136 Sir Francis, 89, 144-146, 148-152, 155-162 Sir Nicholas, 146, 153, 156

Barebone, Dr., 143

Barnard’s Inn, 102, 173-175

Barristers, Inner, 11 _ff._ Outer, or Utter, 11 _ff._ Roll, 80

Bathurst, Lord, 121

Beaumont, Francis, 89, 152

Benchers, 11 _ff._, 61, 95, 100, 153

Bernasconi, 117

Bettenham, Jeremy, 161

Blackfriars, 108, 109

Blackstone, Sir W., 70, 165

Boswell, James, 87-89

Bolting, 59

Bowen, Lord, 72

Brewer, Dr., 184

Brougham, Lord, 117, 121

Burghley, Lord, 142

Burke, Edmund, 45, 69

Burleigh, Lord, 149

Burnet, Bishop, 183, 184

Butler, Bishop, 183

Butler, Samuel, 57, 163

Byllyng, Sir W., 139

Camden, William, 163

Campbell, Lord, 81, 93, 121 Thomas, 126

Canning, George, 93, 121

Carew, Sir Randolph, 98

Carey Street, 177, 178

Chancery Lane (= Chancellor’s Lane = New Street), 1, 8, 106, 107, 122, 128, 196-199 Old Temple in, 29

Chapman, George, 163

Chaucer, Geoffrey, 37, 64, 104, 105, 191

Chelmsford, Lord, 103

Cheshire Cheese, the, 69

Chester Inn, 180

Chichester, Bishop of, 106, 107

Child’s Bank, 66

Churches, Round, 28, 29, 47

Cibber, Colley, 103

City, the, boundaries of, 6, 7

Clarendon, Lord Chancellor, 80

Clement’s Inn, 95, 177

Clergy excluded from the Courts, 4, 8

Cleveland, John, 163

Clifford’s Inn, 5, 167, 176, 178-180, 198 Kentish Mess, 180

Cobbett, William, 163

Cockburn, Sir Alexander, 81

Coif, the, 192, 195 Order of the, 188, 189

Coke, Sir Edward, 87, 92, 98, 179, 196, 201 Lord, 146

Coleridge, Lord, 72

Colman, George, 121

Colonies, the, and the Inns of Court, 78-80

‘Comedy of Errors,’ the, 150

Coney Garth, 107, 111

Congreve, William, 80

Connaught, H.R.H. the Duke of, 163

Converts, House of the, 181 _ff._

Courts, the Civil, 3, 4

Coverley, Sir Roger de, 162

Cowper, Lord Chancellor, 81 William, 73, 104

Cox, Serjeant, 199

Cromwell, Oliver, 113, 114, 130 Thomas, 163

Crusades, 188 influence of, 2

Cursitor Street, 156

Davey, Lord, 121

Day, Thomas, 60

Denys, Hugh, 140

Despencer, Hugh le, 36

Devereux Court, 35, 82

Devil Tavern, the, 66

Devil’s Own, the, 129 _ff._

Dickens, Charles, 126-128, 169-171, 176 quoted, 46, 82, 83

Disraeli, Benjamin, 121

Donne, Dr., 114 _ff._

Drake, Sir Francis, 78

Eldon, Lord Chancellor, 81, 131, 134

Ellenborough, Lord, 93, 94, 134

Ellesmere, Earl of, 129

Ely, Bishops of, 197

Ely Place, 171

Embankment, the, 67, 74, 94

Erskine, Lord, 121, 133

Essex House, 35 Water Gate, 84 Inn, 35 Street, 29, 35

Evelyn, John, 81

Eyre, Sir James, 146

Faryngdon’s Inn, 198

Feasts and Bevels. See Inns of Court

Fetter Lane, 178, 198

Fielding, Henry, 62, 73

Finch, Sir Heneage, 99, 100

Fire of London, the, 45, 47, 57, 74, 96, 103, 179 of 1678, 59, 73, 81, 96

Fitchett’s Field, 30

Fitzgerald, Edward, quoted, 96 Percy, 176

Fleet Street, 1, 2, 5, 9, 29-31, 44, 65, 102, 178, 196 No. 16, 45 No. 17, 45

Ford, John, 80

Fresco by Watts, 120

Furnival’s Inn, 122, 175, 176

Gainsborough, 113

Gardiner, Bishop, 146

Gascoigne, George, 163 Sir William, 163

Gauden, Dr. John, 58

Gibbons, Grinling, 102

Gifford, Robert, M.R., 81

Gladstone, W. E., 121

Goldsmith, Oliver, 62, 65, 69-72, 104, 163

Goldsmith’s grave, 71

Goldsmith, Sir Francis, 185

‘_Gorboduc_,’ 99

Gordon Riots, 131, 132

Grant, Sir William, 133

Gray, Earl de, 108

Gray’s Inn, 6, 70, 87, 89, 108, 135 _ff._, 195 Ancients of, 153 and Barnard’s Inn, 173-175 and Francis Bacon, 148 _ff._ and Queen Elizabeth, 146-152 and Shakespeare, 148, 150 and Staple Inn, 172 arms of, 160 buildings of, 142 _ff._ Chapel, 144, 154, 155 Field Court, 159 Fields, 136 Fullwood’s Rents, 162 Gardens, 159 _ff._ Gateways, 143, 144 Hall, 144 _ff._ Lane, 136, 143 Library, 144, 145 masques and plays at, 148 _ff._ moots received at, 21 origin of, 137-142 pensions and pensioners of, 153 Raymond Buildings, 159 Road, 145, 158 rookery in, 161 South Square, 143 _ff._, 157, 159 Square, 143, 155, 156 surroundings of, 135, 136 Verulam Buildings, 158, 159 Walks, 162

Grenville, George, 93

Grey Friars, the, 137

Greys, the, of Wilton, 137 _ff._

Griffith, Henry, 147

Grimthorpe, Lord, 112, 118

Hale, Sir Matthew, 98, 118, 167, 179

Hallam, Henry, 80

Halls of the Inns, 11 _ff._

Hampden, John, 162

Harcourt, Sir Simon, 98

Hardwick, Philip, 118, 119, 128

Hatton, Sir C., 25

Havelock, Sir Henry, 81

Hawthorne, Nathaniel, 135

Heath, C. J., 130

Heber, Bishop, 116

Herring, Archbishop, 116

Hogarth, William, 76, 104, 118, 126

Holborn, 8, 131, 135, 144, 195 Bars, 6, 7, 29, 31 Bridge, 108

Hooker, bust of, 55 Dr. John, 58

Hullock, Sir John, 146

Inner Temple. See Temple Lane, 87, 89, 92

Inns of Chancery, 9, 18 dissolution of, 167 monopolized by attorneys, 167 origin of, 165 _ff._ relation of Inns of Court to, 166-168. See Barnard’s Inn, Clement’s Inn, Clifford’s Inn, Furnival’s Inn, Lyon’s Inn, New Inn, Staple Inn, Strand Inn, Thavie’s Inn

Inns of Court, 61-64, 75, 106, 142 and the Colonies, 79, 80 a University of Law, 8-11, 16 an aristocratic University, 16, 17 buildings of, 73 degrees, discipline, and customs of, 11-26 Feastings, Revels, and Post-Revels, 13, 22-26, 77, 98, 117, 192, 193 Guilds of Study, 9, 10, 17 Halls, 23-26 homes of literature, 19 _ff._ Irish Law-students at the Inns of Court, 20 masques and plays performed at, 24-26, 65, 77, 89, 148 _ff._, 192 origin of, 2 _ff._ Parliaments of, 153, 154 position of, 163, 164 relation of, to Inns of Chancery, 165-168 Volunteers, 129 _ff._

Ireton, Commissary, 130

Jeffreys, Lord Chancellor, 55, 80, 101

Jessel, Sir George, 185

Jews, House of the Converted, 181 _ff._

Johnson, Dr., 62, 65-67, 69, 87-89, 173

Jones, Inigo, 45, 114, 115, 122, 127, 175 Lieutenant-General, 130 Sir William, 60

Jonson, Ben, 66, 112, 113, 142

Kenealy, Dr., 163

Kentish Mess (Clifford’s Inn), 180

King Charles I., 25, 76, 99, 129, 130, 146, 152 Charles II., 127, 141, 146 Edward I., 33 Ordinance of, 4, 186 Edward II., 34-36 Edward VII., 85 George II., 98 George III., 133 Henry II., 30 Henry III., 33, 181 Ordinance of, 8 Henry VII., 111 Henry VIII., 112 James I., 40, 89, 100, 136 patent of, 41 James II., 146 John, 33 William III., 98

King’s Bench Walk, 94

Kingsley, Charles, 121

Kinlosse, Lord, 183

Knights Hospitallers (Order of St. John), 34-36, 39, 40, 47, 58, 98

Knights Templars. See Templars, Knights

Lamb, Charles, 29, 59, 65, 82, 87, 89-95, 159

Lambeth Palace, 112

Lancaster, Thomas, Earl of, 35, 39, 40, 110

Law Courts, the, 1, 3, 8, 30, 118, 177, 178

Leicester, Earl of, 91

Leigh, Gerard, 99

Lincoln, Earl of, 107 _ff._

Lincoln’s Inn, 6, 20, 29, 107 _ff._, 167 Buildings, 111 _ff._ Chapel, 113-117 Chaplain of, 114-116 custom at, 187 Fields, 122-128, 131 No. 13 (Soane Museum), 124-126 fresco, by Watts, 120, 121 Gateway, 111-113, 130 Library, 113, 118 New Hall, 118-122 Square, 122 Old Buildings, 113 Hall, 117, 118 origin of, 107-111 Revels at, 117 Stone Buildings, 118, 128, 129

Linge, Bernard van, 116

Lockwood, Sir Frank, 94, 121

London County Council, 45, 67

London, growth of, 1, 136

Louvres, 23, 24, 76, 117

Lovell, Sir Thomas, 111, 112

Lushington, Stephen, 94

Lyon’s Inn, 176

Lyte, Sir Henry Maxwell, 183

Lyttleton, Edward, Lord, 92, 130 Sir Thomas, 92, 98

Macaulay, Lord, 157

Mackworth, Dr. John, 173

Macnaghten, Lord, 121

Mandeville, Geoffrey, effigy of, 54

Manningham, John, diary of, 77

Mansfield, Lord, C.J., 81, 103, 121, 131

Masque of Flowers, the, 152

Masques and Plays, 24-26, 65, 89, 148 _ff._

Matthews, Sir Philip, 141

Maule, Sir John, 93

Mercers’ Company, the, 175

Micklethwaite, Dr., 58

Middle Temple. See Temple, Middle Lane, 67, 74

Midsummer Night’s Dream, 148

Milford Lane, 84

Molyneux Globes, 79

Moots, 11 _ff._

More, Sir Thomas, 122, 175, 181

Museum, Sir John Soane, 124-126 Record Office, 183, 184

Nethersale, John, 118

Neville, Sir Thomas, 142

New Inn, 40, 181

Norths, the, 81

Norton, Thomas, 65, 99

O’Connell, Daniel, 20, 121

‘Old Curiosity Shop,’ the, 126-128

Ossulston, Manor of, 137

Overbury, Sir Thomas, 80

Parvis, the, of St. Paul’s, 191

Paston Letters, the, 139

Paulet, Sir Amias, 66

Pembroke, Earl of, 35, 36 Earls of, effigies of, 53

Penn, William, 121

Perceval, 121

Petyt, Sylvester, 102 William, 102

Pitt, William, 113, 121

Plays. See Inns of Court, Masques

Plowden, Edmund, 80 Monument, 56

Poland, Sir Harry, 101

Pollocks, the, 81, 100

Portpool, Manor of, 137, 140, 141 Market, 171

Portsmouth, Duchess of, 127 Street, 127

Post-Revels. See Inns of Court, Feasts, etc.

Praed, W. M., 69

Prudential Assurance Company, 169, 170, 172, 175, 176

Prynne, John, 25 William, 117, 121

Pym, John, 77, 163

Queen Anne, 98 Caroline, 98 Elizabeth, 25, 78, 146-152 Mary, 98 Victoria, 6, 119, 184

Quincey, Thomas de, 80

Raleigh, Sir Walter, 78, 160

Raymond, Lord, 146

Rayner, C. J., 121

Readers, 12 _ff._

Readerships, revived, 20

Readings, 11 _ff._

Record Office, the Public, 80, 179, 182-185 Museum of the, 183, 184

Red Cross Knights. _See_ Templars Lion Fields, 143

Revels. See Inns of Court

Reynolds, Sir Joshua, 69

Robes of the Bar, 193, 194

Rogers, Samuel, 93

Rolls Chapel, 182-185 Monuments, 183 Master of the, 182 _ff._

Romilly, Sir Samuel, 132, 136

Roo, John, 150

Rupert, Prince, 100

Russell, Lord, 72, 121

Sackville, Thomas, 65, 99

Savoy, the, 36

Scott, Sir G., 118

Scrope’s Inn, 108, 195

Scropes, Le, the, 108, 195, 196

Selden, John, 87, 93, 167, 179 grave of, 55

Serjeants, the, 12, 13, 186 _ff._ Abolition of the Order of, 194, 195 the, at St. Paul’s, 190, 191 Feasts, 192, 193 Inn (Chancery Lane), 178, 179, 197-199 Inn (Fleet Street), 92, 196, 197 Inns, 12, 195 _ff._ Robes of the, 193, 194

Shadwell, William, 80

Shakespeare, William, 42, 43, 75, 148, 150 at the Temple, 24 ‘Twelfth Night,’ 77, 78

Shene, Convent of, 141

Sheridan, Richard Brinsley, 20

Shirley, James, 153

Shoe Lane, 108

Sidney, Sir Philip, 162

Skipworth, W., 139

Smirke, Sir Robert, 198 Sydney, 96

Soane, Sir John, Museum, 124-126

Solicitors excluded from the Inns of Court, 166

Somers, Lord Chancellor, 81

Somerset, Earl of, 152 House, 181

Southey, Robert, 163

Spedding, James, 96, 149, 151, 160

Spenser, Edmund, 68, 69

St. Anne, Chapel of. See Temple

St. Dunstan’s Church, 178

St. George’s Inn. See New Inn

St. James’s Palace, 112

St. John, Oliver, 130 Order of. See Knights Hospitallers

St. Paul’s Cathedral, 56, 67, 137 the Serjeants and, 189-191, 195

St. Thomas, Chapel of. See Temple Knights of, 190

Staple Inn, 87, 137, 169-173

Stapleton Inn, 35

Steele, Richard, 66

Stowell, Lord, 81

Strand Inn, 180 the, 35, 177

Strange, Sir John, 183

Street, 30, 178 Architect, 1

Sundials (Temple), 72, 73, 81 _n._, 95, 96

Swift, Dean, 66

Taylor, Sir Robert, 128 Tom, 90, 91

Templars, the Knights, 1, 2, 27 _ff._, 48, 98, 106, 171 and the Serjeants, 188, 189 badge of the, 31, 32 customs of, 97 decadence and dissolution of the Order of the, 33 _ff._ effigies of, 46, 51-55 origin of the Order, 27, 28 settlement in England, 28 _ff._

Temple, the, 29, 110 a place of sanctuary, 60, 61 attacked by Wat Tyler’s men, 36

Temple Bar, 6-8 Chapel of St. Thomas, 59, 189, 200 Church, the, 44-59, 71, 74, 97 Chapel of St. Anne, 48, 189 dedication of the, 30, 31 description of, 46-56 Master of the, 57-59 Master’s House, 47, 57, 58 Cloisters, 59, 60 Flower Show, 94 Gardens, 6, 42, 43 buildings, 74

Temple, Inner, 6, 37, 86 _ff._ See Clifford’s Inn and Temple, Templars Benchers’ Garden, 196 characteristics of the, 86, 87 charter of the, 40, 41 Clock Tower, 97 Cloister Court, 60 crest of the, 31, 32 Crown Office Row, 89-91 Farrar’s Buildings, 89 Feasts, 192 Fig-tree Court, 73, 93, 94 Garden, 94, 95 gateway, 1, 44, 45 Gordon Rioters at, 132 Hall, 38, 59, 65, 76, 96-99, 101 Harcourt Buildings, 74 Hare Court, 68, 89, 92, 93, 101 Johnson’s Buildings, 44, 87 King’s Bench Walk, 87, 91, 102-104 Library, 96, 101, 102 Mitre Court, 89, 92 Buildings, 91, 92 Paper Buildings, 89 _ff._, 93, 102 Parliament, 18 rebuilding of, 96 Revels at, 98 _ff._ solicitors excluded from, 166 sundial, Temple Gardens, 95 Tanfield Court, 97 Treasurer’s House, 97 Irishmen at the, 20 Lane, 102 lawyers first mentioned in, 37, 38

Temple, Middle, 6, 37 _ff._, 45, 64 _ff._, 131. See Temple, Templars Brick Court, 68 _ff._, 90 sundial in, 72 Charter of, 40, 41 crest of the, 31, 32 Elizabethan sailors, 78 Elm Court, 71 Buildings, 74 Essex Court, 81 sundial, 81 _n._ Fountain, 75, 82-84 (or Hall) Court, 76 Garden Court, 70, 84 Gardens, 84 gateways, 1, 65 _ff._, 74 Goldsmith Buildings, 44, 71, 89 Hall, 38, 68, 69, 74 _ff._ Lamb Building, 60 Library, 84, 85 Little Gateway, 82 New Court, 82 Parliaments of, 154 Plowden Buildings, 74, 84 Pump Court, 73, 74 sundial in, 73 Rookery, 71, 72 Vine Court, 74

Temple, New, site of the, 29-31 Outer, 35 Refectory of the Priests, 59 Stairs, 67 St. Dunstan, 66 the Old, 171 Treasure House, 33, 34

Temple, ‘Twelfth Night,’ 24

Temples (Round Churches of the Templars), 28, 29

Thackeray, W. M., quoted, 4, 60-63, 69, 71, 90, 176

Thames, Embankment, 67, 74, 94 River, 9, 29, 30, 67, 68, 74

Thavie’s Inn, 5, 39, 176

Theobald’s Road, 136, 159

Thomson, Archbishop, 116

Thurloe, --, 113

Thurlow, Edward, Lord Chancellor, 93, 94

Titus Gates, 7, 8

Torrigiano, 183

Turnstiles, the, 123

Turton, Sir John, 146

Tyler, Wat, Rebellion, 36

Valence, Aymer de, 35, 36

Virginia, 78

Walpole, Horace, 121

Warburton, Bishop, 116

Warren, Samuel, 104

Watts, G. F., fresco by, 120, 121

Wellesley, Lord, 117

Westbury, Lord Chancellor, 21

Whitefriars, 29

Whitelock, Bulstrode, 130

Willes, C.J., 131, 194

William IV., mandate of, 194

Wine Office Court, 69

Wither, George, 121

Wolsey, Cardinal, 112, 150

Wren, Sir Christopher, 2, 59, 65, 82, 87 _n._, 103 Temple Bar, 7

Wycherley, William, 80

Yelverton, Sir C., 139, 146

Young, Dr., 183

THE END

BILLING AND SONS, LTD., PRINTERS, GUILDFORD

FOOTNOTES:

[1] ‘Survey of London.’

[2] Dugdale, ‘Origines Juridiciales.’

[3] Fortescue, ‘De Laudibus Legum.’

[4] Bedwell, _Quarterly Review_, October, 1908.

[5] Strype.

[6] Pollock and Maitland, ‘History of English Law,’ vol. i., p. 102.

[7] See my ‘Story of Oxford,’ chap. iv.

[8] Kelly, ‘Short History of the English Bar.’

[9] ‘The Glory of Generosity,’ quoted by Herbert, ‘Aniquities of the Inns of Court.’

[10] Kelly, p. 56.

[11] Kelly, p. 127.

[12] Bellot, ‘Inner and Middle Temple,’ p. 36.

[13] Dugdale.

[14] MS. cited by Addison, ‘Knights Templars,’ p. 348.

[15] ‘History of the Temple,’ pp. 64-67.

[16] See Hutchinson, ‘Minutes of Parliament of Middle Temple,’ vol. i., p. 12.

[17] An excellent little brochure on No. 17, Fleet Street, is published by the L.C.C., and obtainable in ‘Prince Henry’s Council Chamber.’

[18] The site is marked by seven large stone slabs. Outside the north door of the old Hall stood the Chapel of St. Thomas. It was connected with the Cloisters, and thereby with the Chapel of St. Anne or with the present main entrance of the Temple Church. Indications of the old cloister are traceable in the present Buttery and the ancient chamber beneath it. The walls of this chamber are of rubble and Kentish rag, and the ceiling is supported by groined arches. Its floor is on the same level as that of the ancient Church. There is an open fireplace of later date. Mr. Inderwick takes this room to have been the old “Refectory of the Priests.”

[19] ‘The Temple Church.’

[20] _Cf._ ‘The Inns of Court and Chancery’ (W. J. Loftie).

[21] ‘Origines Juridiciales.’

[22] ‘Sepulchral Monuments,’ vol. i., pp. 24, 50.

[23] Gough, ‘Sepulchral Monuments.’

[24] Raised 2 feet in 1908, but otherwise unaltered.

[25] Can only be visited by obtaining an order. It would be gracious of the Benchers to relax this restriction.

[26] Bellot, ‘Inner and Middle Temple.’

[27] Thackeray, ‘Pendennis.’

[28] ‘Pendennis.’ Before migrating to No. 2, Brick Court, William Makepeace Thackeray lived at 10, Crown Office Row, probably sharing chambers, which have since disappeared, with Tom Taylor.

[29] ‘Middle Temple Records.’

[30] ‘Life of Wolsey.’

[31] Bellot, p. 269.

[32] ‘English Humourists.’

[33] See Irving, ‘Goldsmith.’

[34] Wheatley, ‘Literary Landmarks of London.’

[35] Vol. v., p. 231.

[36] Restored 1903.

[37] ‘Diary of John Manningham, of the Middle Temple.’

[38] _Quarterly Review_, October, 1908; _Green Bag_, April, 1908.

[39] Upon the seventeenth-century block, which it replaced, there used to be a sundial, which has disappeared. Perhaps its motto, ‘Vestigia nulla retrorsum,’ was deemed too generous a warning against entering upon the perilous paths of litigation.

[40] Dickens, ‘Martin Chuzzlewit.’

[41] Those of Nos. 4 and 5 are attributed to Sir Christopher Wren.

[42] His portrait, by Van Somer, hangs in the Hall.

[43] Inderwick, ‘Inner Temple Records,’ vol. ii., p. lxii.

[44] Inderwick, ‘Inner Temple Records,’ vol. i., p. xxiv. _Cf._ p. 48, _supra_.

[45] Bellot.

[46] The last occasion of a Revel taking place in the Halls of the Inns of Court was upon the elevation of Mr. Talbot to the woolsack (1734). Then, after dinner, the Benchers all assembled in the Great Hall of the Inner Temple, and a large ring having been formed round the fireplace, the Master of the Revels took the Lord Chancellor by the hand, who with his left took Mr. Justice Page, and the other serjeants and benchers being joined together, all danced about the fireplace three times, while the ancient song, ‘Round about our Coal Fire,’ accompanied by music, was sung by the Comedian, Tony Aston, dressed as a barrister. This song of the House has unfortunately been lost.

[47] Bellot, ‘Inner and Middle Temple,’ p. 49.

[48] _Notes and Queries_, April 2, 1892.

[49] Duchy of Lancaster, Ancient Deeds, L, 137; Close Rolls, 14 Edward I., M, 2d.

[50] Quoted by Stow.

[51] Loftie, p. 53.

[52] Dugdale.

[53] ‘Life of Dr. Donne,’ by Izaak Walton.

[54] ‘Black Book of Lincoln’s Inn.’

[55] _Ibid._

[56] Loftie.

[57] Cf. _Daily Telegraph_, January 4, 1909.

[58] Kelly, ‘Short History of the English Bar.’

[59] Stow, vol. i., p. 11; ed. Kingsford.

[60] Douthwaite, ‘Notes on Gray’s Inn,’ 1876.

[61] Luttrell’s ‘Diary,’ June 10, 1684, quoted by Douthwaite.

[62] Douthwaite, p. 175.

[63] Enumerated by Douthwaite, ‘Gray’s Inn,’ 1886, and, with plates, by Dugdale.

[64] _Cf._ Professor A. V. Dicey, in the _Nineteenth Century_, September, 1903.

[65] Spedding, ‘Life and Letters of Francis Bacon.’

[66] Halliwell-Phillipps, ‘Outlines of the Life of Shakespeare,’ p. 104.

[67] _Op. cit._, vol. i., p. 342.

[68] ‘Master Worsley’s Book’--Observations on the Constitution, etc., of the Middle Temple. Written, 1733.

[69] To commemorate the centenary of this date a bronze statue of the Philosopher is shortly to be placed in the centre of the grass plot in South Square.

[70] W. J. Broderip, _Fraser’s Magazine_, 1857.

[71] _Cf._ _Edinburgh Review_, vol. cxxxiv., p. 488.

[72] ‘Calendar of Inner Temple Records,’ vol. i., p. xiii.

[73] Historical MSS. Commission, XII., part i., vol. i., p. 60.

[74] By a charter of Edward IV., 1463, the Staple of wools was set at Leadenhall.

[75] _Cf._ ‘Staple Inn,’ by E. Williams, F.R.G.S., p. 100.

[76] Douthwaite, p. 257.

[77] _Notes and Queries_, April 2, 1892.

[78] A full descriptive catalogue, drawn up by Sir Henry Maxwell Lyte, is obtainable at the Public Record Office.

[79] ‘Black Books of Lincoln’s Inn,’ vol. i., p. xxxix.

[80] See Serjeant Pulling, ‘The Order of the Coif.’

[81] _Notes and Queries_, April 2, 1892.

[82] Fetter Lane is said to be derived from ‘Fewters,’ as the abode of vagrants, cheats, and fortune-tellers.