“I cannot, Mr. Barnaby Postern, turn from the days of that most notorious rebel, Wat Tyler, without briefly noticing the dispute concerning the Armorial Ensigns of our goodly City, which claim to have had an honourable augmentation arising from the gallantry of the Lord Mayor of that period. If rhyme might pass for reason and argument, we should then be assured of the origin of the City’s Dagger, from the evidence afforded by those verses, which are inscribed beneath Walworth’s effigy in the Fishmongers’ Hall, above us; and which run-- ‘Brave Walworth, Knight, Lord Mayor, yet slew Rebellious Tyler in his alarmes; The King therefore did give in lieu The dagger to the City’s Arms. In the fourth Year of Richard II., Anno Domini, 1381.’ “This, however, can stand for nothing, and the arguments for, and against, the popular reason for the introduction of the weapon, are best learned from the ancient English Chronicles and Historians of London. The principal Authors who assert that King Richard added the Dagger to commemorate the loyal valour of Walworth, are Richard Grafton, in his ‘_Chronicle at large, and meere History of the Affayres of Englande, and Kinges of the same_,’ London, 1569, folio, page 340; in the Margin: Raphael Holinshed, in his ‘_Chronicles of England, Scotland, and Ireland_,’ London, 1586, volume ii., page 436: John Speed, in his ‘_Theatre of the Empire of Great Britaine_,’ London, 1611, folio, volume ii., page 596; and Sir Richard Baker, in his ‘_Chronicle of the Kings of England_,’ London, 1733, folio, page 140.