The Sun.
London, England, 1828-09-19 00:00:00

FISHMONGERS' COMPANY.

Yesterday a respectable Meeting of Citizens,
Liverymen of the Fishmongers'. Company, was held
at the George and Vulture Tavern, pursuant to an
advertisement in the public papers, for the purpose
of taking into consideration the best means of ob-
taiMng a restoration of the privileges of the Com-
monalty of the Company.
LAING, Esq. was called to the Chair.
The CHAIRMAN stated, that this meeting had been
coniretied in obedience to the resolution of a former
meeting, at which it was stated that this most ex-
tensive Company had a princely revenue and pa-
tronage that it was governed entirely by a self-
elected, and irresponsible body, who monopolized all
ptiver and profit, to the exclusion of the great body
of The Commonalty, who paid largely, but were not
permitted to exercise any privilege, or to participate
in .any Advantages of the Company, though by law
entitled to the whole. The meeting had desired
that some preliminary investigation should be made
'by
.Mr.itPullen, jun., the solicitor, for the purpose of
eliciting such facts as might determine the expe-
bency of taking such steps as were requisite to
:obtain for the Commonalty a restoration of their
lost power.

Mr. PULLEN, jun. then said, that, in conformity
with the directions of the present Meeting, he had
entered into an investigation, the results of which
he would now submit to them. The Company was
now governed under a Charter of the reign of Jaroes
the First, which Charter appointed 26 persons to
act as it Court of Assistants, and gave to that Court
and. the then Wardens, the power of choosing six
persons annually from the Company, to serve as
Wardens for the following year. • Shortly after this
Charter had been obtained, the Court of Wardens
and Assistants made by a bye-law, declaring that in
future the Wardens should be chosen from their own
body. This bye-law professed to be in conformity
to the Charter, yet was clearly opposed to it, for
the obvious intention of the Charter was, that the
Wardens should be chosen " from the commonalty,"
'tamely, from the third body, or those of the Livery
who were not of the Court of Assistants-7the body
choosing.—(Hear.)—But the Charter contained
one important clause, which in the strongest man-
ner confirmed all the privileges previously enjoyed
by the Company. And what were those privileges ?
The Company, it appeared, originated by prescrip-
tion, for regulating the supply. of fish and the
markets. By letters patent of the 38th of Edward
111., it was granted to them (the commonalty),
" That the said fishmongers of the said city, and
their successors, fishmongers, may elect, each year,
four persons of their own trade, who shall be sworn
at their Hall-mote twice in the year, in the presence
of the Mayor and Sheriffs, to view the buying and
sale of fish, and to yellN and lawfully govern the said
trade, to the common profit of the people." By a
grant of privileges to the Fishmongers of London,
dated die 22(1 of Richard 11., it was declared, " We
have granted that the aforenamed fishmongers of the
said City, and their successors, fishmongers, may
hold, at two periods of the year, their Hall-mote,
and elect among themselves every year six persons
of their own trade, two of Bridge-street, two of Old
Fish-street, and two of Fishmonger's-row, who
shall govern, &c. and be sworn before the Mayor."
From the change in the circumstances of the times,
it was obvious that the election could not be made
in the manner specified by the grant. The right
of the commonalty to choose th&r Wardens was
confirmed by the Act of the Gth of Henry VI. A
Charter of the llth year of the same reign was, in
fact, their Charter of Incorporation, declaring," that
the Fishmongers shall be incorporated, and be one
body and commonalty ; and that such commonalty
in every year may elect and make from themselves six
Wardens to survey,and rule and govern the mysteryand
commonalty aforesaid, and all the men and affairs of
the said mystery for ever." In some recent cases
attempts had been made to call the reigning body
the commonalty; but it was only by a most partial
and intrepid perversion of language that in this case
such a construction could be sustained. All the
privileges thus mentioned were confirmed by the
Charter of James the First; and before that period
it was evident the Court of Assistants slid not exist.