esident on their estates were like ships in port; their
value and magnitude were felt and acknowledged; but when at a distance,
as their size seemed insignificant, so their worth and importance were
not duly estimated."[239]

A manuscript writer of the times complains of the breaking up of old
family establishments, all crowding to "upstart London." "Every one
strives to be a Diogenes in his house, and an emperor in the streets;
not caring if they sleep in a tub, so they may be hurried in a coach:
giving that allowance to horses and mares that formerly maintained
houses full of men; pinching many a belly to paint a few backs, and
burying all the treasures of the kingdom into a few citizens' coffers;
their woods into wardrobes, their leases into laces, and their goods and
chattels into guarded coats and gaudy toys." Such is the representation
of an eloquent contemporary; and however contracted might have been his
knowledge of the principles of political economy, and of that prosperity
which a wealthy nation is said to derive from its consumption of
articles of luxury, the moral effects have not altered, nor has the
scene in reality greatly changed.

The government not only frequently forbade new buildings within ten
miles of London, but sometimes ordered them to be pulled down--after
they had been erected for several years. Every six or seven years
proclamations were issued. In Charles the First's reign, offenders were
sharply prosecuted by a combined operation, not only against _houses_,
but against _persons_.[240] Many of the nobility and gentry, in 1632,
were informed against for having resided in the city, contrary to the
late proclamation. And the Attorney-General was then fully occupied in
filing bills of indictment against them, as well as ladies, for staying
in town. The following curious "information" in the Star Chamber will
serve our purpose.

The Attorney-General informs his majesty that both Elizabeth and James,
by several proclamations, had commanded that "persons of livelihood and
means should reside in their counties, and not abide or sojourn in the
city of London, so that counties remain unserved." These proclamations
were renewed by Charles the First, who had observed "a greater number of
nobility and gentry, and abler sort of people, with their families, had
resorted to the cities of London and Westminster, residing there,
contrary to the ancient usage of the English nation"--"by their abiding
in th