At the very outset of his reign Charles I. had to face an angry and discontented City; the late King had shown little respect for the ancient liberties of London, and the citizens were prepared to find the same attitude on the part of his successor. The Parliament of 1626 refused to grant supplies until grievances had been redressed, and Charles dissolved it, determining to raise money without its help. He began by calling on the City for £100,000, which was refused. There had been a severe outbreak of the Plague, and London was in a somewhat impoverished condition. Next came the demand for men and ships for the projected expedition to Cadiz. The citizens complied with obvious reluctance, and Charles's habitual disregard of their feelings gradually estranged their affections and caused them later to give their hearty support to the Parliamentary cause. =Source.=—Rushworth's _Collections_, i. 415. His Majesty demanded of the City of London the Loan of an Hundred thousand pounds. But the peoples excuses were represented to the Council Table by the Magistrates of the City. Immediately the Council sent a very strict command to the Lord Mayor and Aldermen, wherein they set forth the enemies strong preparations as ready for an invasion, and the Kings great necessities, together with his gracious and moderate proposals in the sum required, and the frivolous pretences upon which they excuse themselves: Wherefore they require them, all excuses being set apart, to enter into the business again, and to manage the same, as appertaineth to Magistrates so highly entrusted, and in a time of such necessities, and to return to his Majesty a direct and speedy answer, that he may know how far he may rely upon their faith and duty; or in default thereof, may frame his counsels as appertaineth to a King in such extreme and important occasions. Lord Mayor and Commonalty of London petitioned the Council for an abatement of the twenty ships rated upon them, unto ten ships and two pinnaces, alleging disability; whereunto the Council gave this following answer, That the former commandment was necessary, the preservation of the State requiring it; and that the charge imposed on them was moderate, as not exceeding the value of many of their private estates: That petitions and pleadings to this command, tend to the danger and prejudice of the Commonwealth, and are not to be received: That as the commandment was given to all in general, and every particular of the City; so the State will require an account both of the City in general, and of every particular. And whereas they mention precedents, they might know, that the precedents of former times, were obedience, not direction; and that precedents were not wanting for the punishment of those that disobey his Majesty's commands, signified by that Board, which they hope shall have no occasion to let them more particularly understand.