(1) In A.D. 1228, in the reign of Henry III., Bishop Roger, surnamed Niger, or Le Noir, of London, made a constitution or modus, that every occupier of a house should offer as his tithe to his parish church, ½_d._ for 20_s._ a year rental, and ¼_d._ for 10_s._ a year rental, for every Sunday and every Apostle’s day, whereof the evening was fasted. There were fifty-two Sundays and eight Apostles’ days in the year that were fasted. Two shillings and sixpence a year was then the amount of the _modus decimandi_ which the former occupier had to pay, and one shilling and three pence a year the latter. The amounts would be less when any of the Apostles’ days fell upon Sundays. The above particulars appear in the Records in the Town Clerk’s office, London. It is a well-known point in law that a house _quâ_ house is not liable for the payment of tithes. Tithes were paid for what issued or grew out of the ground. Enormous house properties have been erected in and around all our cities and towns, for which one penny as tithe-money has never been paid, and yet the house property in the City and Liberties of London, and landed property throughout the country, have to pay a modus and tithe-rent charges. (2) Bishop Roger’s modus was paid for 160 years, viz., from 1229 to 1389, when Archbishop Arundel, of Canterbury, interfered with the arrangement in the latter year. He was not satisfied with the interpretation put upon Bishop Roger’s Constitution as regards the number of Apostles’ days, and so he added twenty-two more saints’ days, thus increasing the payments from 2_s._ 6_d._ to 3_s._ 5_d._ a year, and this he did without consulting the payers. The citizens of London were quite indignant at the additional number of saints’ days, and placed on record their protest against the same for the information of future generations. There were constant quarrels between the citizens and their clergy in the ecclesiastical courts, and at the Pope’s court at Rome, with regard to the payment of the extra 11_d._ The Archbishop appealed to the Pope as to the soundness of his interpretation, and as a matter of course, Pope Innocent VII., in 1403, confirmed the interpretation. But the Pope’s bull did not pacify the citizens of London. They considered the additional 11_d._ a cheat—a fraud. Besides, the Pope’s bull could not compel them to pay the additional amount. In 1453, however, it appears, by a record in the Town Clerk’s office,[274] that Archbishop Arundel’s order is declared by the Common Council to be “destructory rather than declaratory, and that it was obtained surreptitiously and deceptiously, without assent on the part of the citizens, or summoning them.” I should imagine that the Church, with its terrible ecclesiastical courts made them pay the 3_s._ 5_d._, for we find no change in the payment until 1535, when the whole subject was considered by the Privy Council, who made an order for the payment of 2_s._ 9_d._ in the pound. Therefore in the same year an Act