And that notice hereof be given to such of H. M.’s good subjects as for lack of knowledge of this H. M.’s princely ordonnance might resort to London to sell or buy small wares by retail, and there receive infection, and carry the same into their countries, H. M. commanded that the Lord Mayor of London should cause this proclamation to be presently published in all the usual places in the City, in the time of two or three market days, and to be also Proclaimed by the Sheriffs of Middlesex, Kent, Surrey, and Essex, in some places of those Counties near to the said City, whereby none might resort to the City at this Feast of St. Bartholomew, by pretence of any Fair, but such as should have cause to sell or buy the commodities in gross. Imprisonment, without bail, during the Queen’s pleasure, or further punishment, was to be the penalty for the infraction of this ordinance. Mr. Morley, reviewing this proclamation, says the inference to be drawn from it was that the fair, as a place of wholesale commerce, was not to be suppressed without more injury to trade than the fear of plague would force the Queen’s advisers to inflict. But this consideration must be qualified by the fact that the chief risk came from the throng of pedlers, hawkers, stall-keepers, showmen, and holiday-makers from the country round about; and that the soberer resort of merchants to the fair, while it was certainly in one respect a greater good, was in the other respect also a lesser evil. Also, there was a wealthy nobleman at court unwilling to part with a year’s tolls from the Cloth Fair and the Close, and able to urge actively, from motives of self-interest, considerations that were, at the same time, not wanting in justice. 1596. A formal agreement was made between Lord Rich and the Corporation of London, establishing a composition of the tolls of the fair; and, as to jurisdiction, placing both parties nearly in the relative position occupied by the Priory and the Corporation in 1445.