part 7, 173, 174.

[567] Hist. MSS. Com. xi. part 7, 174.

[568] Under Henry the Eighth, he received £10. (Coates’s Reading, 55, 56.) A woman of the town left three silver cups and one gilt cup for the mayoralty in 1479. Public dinners at each election began in 1492, and feasts for the burgesses at Christmas and Shrovetide. (Hist. MSS. Com. xi. part 7, 180-1, 176.)

[569] Ibid. 180.

[570] Eng. Guilds, 298.

[571] Hist. MSS. Com. xi. part 7, 175, 180.

[572] Ibid. 212.

[573] Hist. MSS. Com. xi. part 7, 176.

[574] Coates’s Reading, 52, 53.

[575] Coates’s Reading, 54-5. Hist. MSS. Com. xi. 7, 168-9.

[576] Miller’s Parishes of Worcester, vol. I. Rot. Hun., p. 282, 3 Edward I. In Canterbury there were still in 1835 not less than fifteen precincts within the limits of the corporate authority but exempt from its jurisdiction (Rep. on Mun. Corpor., 31). For crown property in York not under municipal law, see Davies’ Walks through York, 27-28.

[577] Ricart’s Kalendar, 117.

[578] In 1285 the Bristol charter was forfeited because of encroachments on the rights of the constable of the castle. Seyer’s Bristol, ii. 74.

[579] Seyer’s Bristol, ii. 88-109.

[580] Norwich Doc., Stanley _v._ Mayor, &c., 25. Here the fee was given to the citizens as early as 1346.

[581] There were also occasional difficulties as to the jurisdiction of Bristol over the Temple fee, which first belonged to the Templars, then to the Knights of St. John of Jerusalem, and was not finally incorporated with the city till 1543. (Seyer’s Bristol, i. 134-6.)

[582] In 1240 the inhabitants of Redcliffe were combined and incorporated with the town of Bristol; and the ground of S. Austin’s by the river was granted to the commonalty by the abbot for certain money paid by the said commonalty. Ricart, 28.

[583] Lives of the Berkeleys, i. 177, 196-201.

[584] They took to trading about 1367. Berkeleys, i. 365-6. Ibid. i. 23. Thomas Berkeley got leave from Henry the Sixth “for three of his factors to go with the ship called the _Cristopher_ with any lawful merchandise, and to sell the same and return and go again. And the year before, this Thomas and two of his partners had the like licence to go with their ship called the _Trinity of Berkeley_, to Bordeaux, and there to unload and load again, and bring any merchandise into England.” Ibid. ii. 83, 136.

[585] Ibid. ii. 68.

[586] Ibid. ii. 113-4.

[587] The new marquis was very angry at the unworthiness of such a match with so mean blood, and made it an excuse for disinheriting him. Ibid. ii. 172, 173.

[588] Berkeleys, ii. 175, 176.

[589] Journ. Arch. Ass. xxvii. 461.

[590] Journ. Arch. Ass. xxvii. 480.

[591] Ibid. 481.

[592] Journ. Arch. Ass. xxvii. 467.

[593] Journ. Arch. Ass. xxvii. 480.

[594] Gross, ii. 265.

[595] Hist. MSS. Com. vi. 601. Gross, ii. 254.

[596] The bailiff of the Soke was sometimes called the Mayor of the Soke to emphasize his independence.

[597] Gross, ii. 254. For the way in which a bit of the town under ecclesiastical and not under municipal control might serve as a sort of sanctuary against the tax gatherers, see the complaint of the Bristol commonalty about Temple Street. (Rot. Parl. i. 434.)

[598] They had once been occupied by “good citizens,” but all through the Middle Ages were filled by a very poor population. (Kitchin’s Winchester, 75.)

[599] Kitchin’s Winchester, 46-7, 75-7.

[600] In 1264 there was a violent fray near the King’s Gate, the citizens fighting to keep the monks from admitting the followers of De Montfort. (Ibid. 130.) The convent kept control of the King’s Gate till 1520. (Ibid. 132.)

[601] For the bishop’s rights during the fair such as tronage, authority to take all weights and measures and bear them to the Pavilion and there make assay, to demand that the people of the city should come to the Pavilion to present cry raised and bloodshed, and other things touching the peace of our Lord the King, see Hist. MSS. Com. vi. 595-605. Compare his powers in Southampton during the same fair. There he might send his bailiff to see that only food was weighed or sold in the town, that no merchant whether resident or not ventured to sell anything except food, that there was no weighing or measuring, that merchants who came with their goods swore they did not bring them to sell at this time. (Hist. MSS. Com. xi. part 3, pp. 67, 68.) The convent also had its own home and foreign trade on a very large scale. (Kitchin’s Winchester, 161.)

[602] English Guilds, 353, &c. 358. (Hist. MSS. Com. vi. 495-605.)

[603] This custom, once common (Madox, 152-3), was abandoned in Ipswich as early as 1317, and seems to have generally died out in the fourteenth century, though Gloucester sent its bailiffs to Westminster till 1483.

[604] In 1244 a mayor who had obeyed the King’s orders to shut the city gates against a bishop whose election the King opposed, was severely punished by the bishop when he gained possession of his see and palace. (Kitchin’s Winchester, 121.) The mayor was thrown into a London prison because a state prisoner had escaped from Winchester. (Ibid. 139.)

[605] Compare the action of Norwich. In the Wars of the Roses the Winchester people were, like their bishop Wayneflete, Lancastrian, but they had neither energy nor power to play any important part. (Hist. MSS. Com. vi. 147.)

[606] Archæologia, i. 91, 93-4.

[607] Gross, ii. 260-1.

[608] Payments for stalls went to the King’s ferm. (Ibid. 262.) The question was therefore one of revenue and not one of protection.

[609] Archæologia, i. 102.

[610] The fraternity of St. John allowed nearly £35 a year towards the maintenance of the bridge and walls.

[611] Hist. MSS. Com. xi. part 3, 77.

[612] Ibid. vi. 595-605.

[613] Gregory’s Chronicle of London, ed. Gairdner, Early English Text Soc. 199.

[614] A charter of Edward the Fourth still speaks of Winchester as now being “quite unable to pay the fee-farm rent of 100 marks.” (Kitchin’s Winchester, 174.)

[615] See the case of Lincoln, Rot. Parl. i. 156-7.

[616] Hudson’s Leet Jurisdiction of Norwich (Selden Soc.).

[617] Cutts’ Colchester, 149. Hudson’s Norwich Leet-Jurisdiction (Selden Soc.), 17. See pp. xxxvii., xli. The constables of Nottingham at the court leet present the “Master Official (of the archdeacon) for excessive and extorcious taking of fees” for probate of testaments, and for over assessing poor folks and men’s servants at Easter for their tythes. (Records, iii. 364.)

[618] 13 Richard the Second, 1, c. 18. Statute 4 Henry the Fifth, c. 5, repeats with some alterations that of Richard.

[619] 1454, Cutts’ Colchester, 150-1.

[620] Hist. MSS. Com. v. 496.

[621] Freeman’s Exeter, 165.

[622] Freeman’s Exeter, 84-5, 165-6.

[623] Shillingford’s Letters (Camden Society), p. 68. An order of the town had been issued in 1339 that no clerk of the consistory court was to be chosen mayor or bailiff or allowed to meddle with the elections. Freeman’s Exeter, 147.

[624] The bishop had taken an action years before in 1432-3. Shillingford’s Letters, xiv.

[625] Shillingford’s Letters, xxii.-iv.

[626] Ibid. 98.

[627] Ibid. xiv.

[628] Shillingford’s Letters, 86-7.

[629] Shillingford’s Letters, 75-6.

[630] Ibid. p. 95-6.

[631] Ibid. p. 1, 43.

[632] Ibid. 10.

[633] Shillingford’s Letters, p. 43, 44.

[634] Ibid. xiv.-xvi.; Freeman’s Exeter, 158-60.

[635] Shillingford’s Letters, p. 143, _et seq._

[636] Ibid. p. 58.

[637] Shillingford’s Letters, 17.

[638] Ibid. pp. 67, 68.

[639] Ibid. 23.

[640] Shillingford’s Letters, p. 6.

[641] Ibid. p. 12.

[642] Ibid. p. 12-15, 63.

[643] The Recorder of Exeter.

[644] Shillingford’s Letters, 146.

[645] Ibid. 9.

[646] Ibid. 23, 150.

[647] Shillingford’s Letters, 37, 38.

[648] Shillingford’s Letters, 11, 47.

[649] Ibid. 43, 45.

[650] Ibid. 32, see 11, 14, 20.

[651] His temper towards ecclesiastical interference and his urbanity in argument are admirably shown in a letter to the bishop’s counsel. The rough draft of the letter ends with a fine outburst of anger. “We would fain have an end,” he writes, and goes on to ask how it was possible for any one ever to conceive that “John Shillyng, for no dread of great words of malice, disclaunders, language, writings, nor setting up of bulls to that intent to rebuke me and to make me dull to labour for the right that I am sworn to, for truly I will not be so rebuked nor dulled, but the more boldlier.” But he struck out this vigorous passage in the second draft in favour of a less belligerent sentence—”for ye may fully conceive that my fellows and I would fain have a good end and peace, praying you to apply your good will and favour to the same.” Shillingford’s Letters, 25.

[652] Shillingford’s Letters, 52-3.

[653] Ibid. 78.

[654] Shillingford’s Letters, 97.

[655] Ibid. 53.

[656] Ibid. 66, 10, 94.

[657] Shillingford’s Letters, 53.

[658] Ibid. 64.

[659] Ibid. 93, 104.

[660] Shillingford’s Letters, 16.

[661] Ibid. pp. 10, 14, 91, 99, 104.

[662] Ibid. 83-4.

[663] Shillingford’s Letters, 83, 84, 99. Compare Norwich, Blomefield, iii. 62. In Canterbury the murder of a citizen by a waggoner of the priory in 1313 gave rise to a hot dispute as to the jurisdiction of the city coroner. The Convent refused him admittance within the priory gates, smuggled in an alien coroner to view the body, and then had it buried by the prior’s grooms. The story is given in an Inspeximus of Richard the Second; Muniments of Canterbury.

[664] The distribution of taxes was a matter of special arrangement in the different towns. By the request of the canons the ecclesiastical tenants at Grimsby were not tallaged with the burgesses (Madox, 270). In Leicester the tenants of the Bishop’s Fee just without the walls did suit and service to the Bishop of Lincoln; a compromise had been made in 1281 by which it was decided that the Bishop’s tenants should share in certain common expenses, and should in return enjoy the franchises and free customs which had been won by the Merchant Guild of Leicester; but while the burgesses had to bear the charges both of “the community of the town,” and “the community of the guild,” the bishop’s tenants only paid for such matters as touched “the community of the guild,” and were not liable for the general town taxes. (Gross, ii. 140-1.) As early as 1189 the Guild of Nottingham obtained the right to raise contributions to the ferm rent from tenants of all fees whatsoever. In Norwich this was given in 1229 (Norwich Doc., Stanley _v._ Mayor, etc., 5, 6). But the question of collection still remained a burning one, and the itinerant justices having failed in 1239 to settle matters between the convent and the city, the King himself went to Norwich to insist on an agreement in 1241. (Blomefield, iii. 46.) See p. 357, note 4.

[665] Shillingford’s Letters, p. 13.

[666] Ibid. 79.

[667] Shillingford’s Letters, 96.

[668] Ibid. pp. 98, 108.

[669] For the mayor’s defence, see p. x. 107-9.

[670] The tenants of the hospital of S. John in Worcester refused to aid in tallages, to submit to the assize of bread and beer, under the town’s officers, and to keep watch and ward. In 1221 they were ordered to do all these things. (Select Pleas of the Crown, Selden Soc. p. 97.) In 1331 Norwich resisted the handing over of three houses to the prior and convent “for that a very great part of the same city which is inhabited, is in the hands of the prior and convent and of other religious persons, whereby the inhabitants are at their distress, and cannot be tallaged to the tallages and aids of the lord the King and of the city aforesaid as tenants should be, nor can they be in assizes, juries, and recognizances, whereby others dwelling in the same city are burdened and grieved more than usual by such gifts and assignments.” (Norwich Documents, Stanley _v._ Mayor, pr. 1884, 24, 25).

[671] Shillingford’s Letters, 44-45.

[672] Ibid. 52.

[673] Shillingford’s Letters, 91-2, 104-5.

[674] Ibid. 92.

[675] Ibid. 100, 109.

[676] Shillingford’s Letters, 84-5, 99.

[677] In Canterbury also the Convent was bent on getting possession of that part of the covered way which lay along its territory, and the city wall itself so far as it touched the Cathedral precincts. Their first step was taken in 1160, and their final success was not assured till 1492, when the city resigned to the Convent the wall and covered way between Burgate and Northgate with the waste land adjoining, and the chapter was allowed to make a postern and to build a bridge across the foss. Such an arrangement was of course only possible at a time when peace with France, and the close of civil wars and riots at home had freed the town from danger of siege or revolution. (Lit. Cant., i. 60-2, iii. 318-20.) See also Davies’ Walks through York, 11, 12.

[678] Shillingford’s Letters, 88, 89, 96.

[679] Shillingford’s Letters, 93, 94.

[680] Shillingford’s Letters, pp. 85, 86, 101, 110.

[681] Ibid. 9.

[682] Ibid. 20.

[683] Shillingford’s Letters, 12.

[684] Ibid. 10, 19.

[685] The Commons had perhaps some reason to ask in 1371 that none but a layman should have charge of the seal. (Campbell’s Lives of the Lord Chancellors, i. 262.) This system, however only lasted till 1378, and in the next hundred years, out of 35 chancellors only eight were laymen.

[686] Shillingford’s Letters, 11.

[687] Shillingford, 136-140.

[688] In 1463 when Edward granted the city fresh franchises and powers he exempted the close from civic jurisdiction. Freeman’s Exeter, 91.

[689] In 1452 the judges held their assize in the hall of the bishop’s palace; the King being in the town it was proved to him that holding of assize in the bishop’s hall was a breach of the privileges of the church; two traitors who had been condemned were therefore pardoned by the King. Ibid. 89.

[690] Hist. MSS. Com. ix. 150.

[691] Ibid. 169.

[692] Lit. Cant. i., lxi. Sandwich and Stonor were the two ports of London and therefore of considerable consequence. For the history of Stonor see Boys’ Sandwich, 552-5, 658-62.

[693] Hist. MSS. Com. ix. 172-3.

[694] Ibid. 150.

[695] Ibid. 172-3, 141.

[696] Hist. MSS. Com. ix. 139, 145.

[697] Ibid. 173.

[698] The cost was entered on the chamberlain’s accounts, but there is nothing more to tell how the matter ended. Ibid. 144.

[699] Hist. MSS. Com. ix. 169-70.

[700] Ibid. 170.

[701] The details as to the costs of many of these feasts are preserved—the claret and wines white and red, and the beer and ale, which recommended a dinner made up for example of a swan, five capons, two geese, a side of brawn, two lambs, four rabbits, beef, marrow bones, a jowl of salmon, gurnards, roach, bread, spices, salt, vinegar, butter, milk, eggs, lard, and suet. Sacks of coal were always bought for the cooking of these great dinners, either charcoal sold in sacks, or “sea-cole” sold by the tub. Hist. MSS. Com. ix. 146, 163.

[702] Ibid. 143-4.

[703] Hist. MSS. Com. ix. 77.

[704] Ibid. 112.

[705] Lit. Cant. i. 216.

[706] Ibid. iii. 379, 380.

[707] Ibid. 318-320; Hist. MSS. Com. v. 433-4.

[708] These charges were heavy in the southern towns. For example, Canterbury and Sandwich had to provide Warwick and his garrison with victuals in Calais in 1457. Oman’s Warwick, 64.

[709] Lit. Cant. i. 213-222. This quarrel was 100 years old at this time. Hist. MSS. Com. v. 433.

[710] Hist. MSS. Com. ix. 98.

[711] Hist. MSS. Com. v. 521.

[712] The last Jubilee, when the oblations amounted to £600, was celebrated in 1470. In 1520 the Pope demanded a half of the gross receipts, but the archbishop and chapter not being disposed to grant this no Jubilee was held. Literæ Cantuar. iii. xxxv., xxxvi.

[713] Hist. MSS. Com. ix. 145-146.

[714] Ibid. v. 433.

[715] Hist. MSS. Com. v. 433-4.

[716] Ibid. ix. 146-7. The chamberlain’s accounts give the costs of one visit to London of mayor and aldermen on business of the town. Three counsel were paid 10_s._; one of them “in the cloister at Paul’s when he corrected the copy,” got 3_s._ 4_d._ and his clerk 12_d._ The mayor gathered together all the witnesses in a house beside Paul’s to rehearse their evidence “against they came into the Star Chamber,” and paid for bread and drink and house room for them 16_d._ At Westminster Hall the three counsel got 3_s._ 4_d._ each, and for the three days following the same fees were daily paid. In the Star Chamber Master Roydon paid for examination of sixteen persons at 2_s._ 4_d._ a man, 37_s._ 4_d._; two days after fees were again paid to two counsel, and a breakfast given to Sir Matthew Browne. Master Fisher was paid for the fees of the Hilary term 19_s._ Warrants of attorney cost 4_s._, and copies of the panels 2_s._ The counsel had to be looked up in their country houses, and messengers were always crossing Tilbury Ferry to look for “Master Raimond,” and give him a retaining fee “to be our counsel,” or going to Finchley to seek “Master Frowick,” perhaps to find that “he was then ridden to Walsingham, so the said Thomas came to London homeward again.” The Master Recorder of London was met coming to the Temple and besought “to be good master to the city,” and retained at a cost of 6_s._ 8_d._ with a breakfast to his servants in Fleet Street. Then a messenger waited at the Guild Hall for the recorder, and again watched for him “the same day at afternoon at Milord Dawbeny’s place, there waiting till the said Master Recorder had supped, and when he came out we besought him to speed us, for the time of the forfeit passed not three days; which answered that he was sore occupied and might not entende it so shortly, where we took him 6_s._ 8_d._, and then he bade us wait on him on the morrow in the Temple. The next day when Mr. Recorder had contrived the bill and corrected it, for his reward 6_s._ 8_d._ Paid for a pike given to Master Mordaunt 3_s._ 4_d._” The mayor then sent to Canterbury to direct that some gift should be sent up which might be used in “making friends”; and several members of the Common Council travelled up with two trouts (one trout cost about 10_s._) and ten capons. The witnesses examined in the Star Chamber each got 6_s._ 8_d._ and their travelling expenses; after their examination they adjourned to the buttery for an entertainment, and paid “in reward to the officers of the King’s buttery for their good cheer 12_d._ and to the cook of the King’s kitchen 8_d._” Besides all this there was a great deal of feasting and drinking in eight of the London inns, in Southwark, Cheap, Fleet Street, Paul’s Chain, and Holborn. Hist. MSS. Com. ix. 147.

[717] The Plague. Hist. MSS. Com. ix. 147.

[718] Ibid. 150.

[719] Hist. MSS. Com. v. 433-4.

[720] Hist. MSS. Com. v. 434.

[721] The dispute in Norwich was brought before the king’s court in 1512. Documents, Stanley _v._ Mayor, &c., pr. 1884, 50-64.

[722] Gross, i. 241-281.

[723] See the saying of Bacon quoted by Anderson in his Origin of Commerce, ii. 232. “I confess I did ever think that trading in companies is most agreeable to the English nature, which wanteth that same general vein of a republic which runneth in the Dutch and serves them instead of a company; and therefore I dare not advise to adventure this great trade of the kingdom, which hath been so long under government, in a free or loose trade.”

[724] Boys’ Sandwich, 770. The Custumals of Dover, Sandwich, Romney, Rye, and Winchelsea, are given in Lyon’s Dover, ii. 267-387.

[725] The Ports with corporate members were:—Hastings: (Seaford, Pevensey). Sandwich: (Fordwich, Deal). Dover: (Folkestone, Faversham). Romney: (Lydd). Rye: (Tenterden). Hastings had six non-corporate members; Sandwich six; Dover seven; Romney four; and Hythe one; each of which was governed by a Deputy sent by the head Port.

[726] Dover had always remained in the King’s hands, but Hythe and Romney belonged to the Archbishop, while Sandwich had been given to Christ Church, Canterbury, and Hastings, Winchelsea, and Rye had been handed over to the Abbey of Fécamp. A few details about the relations of Fécamp to its possessions at Hastings, Winchelsea, and Rye, may be found in Leroux de Lincy’s Abbaye de Fécamp, pp. 289, 294, 300, 327, 331; and a notice of the tax called _aletot_ which was paid by the inhabitants of Rye to Fécamp, p. 299. The two parish churches of Hastings, being part of the alien priory of Fécamp, were never appropriate or belonging either to the College of S. Mary or to the Priory. They were afterwards granted away by Henry the Eighth (Horsfield’s Hastings, i. 448). The Counts of Eu held the Castle with the whole of the rape of Hastings and the manor till their estates were forfeited by rebellion about 1245 and given by Henry the Third to his son Edward. Moss’ Hastings, 3-4, 63.

[727] There was a considerable change in the century that followed the complete political separation of England from the Continent. Henry the Third got back Rye and Winchelsea, and at least the Castle of Hastings if not more; and Edward the First Sandwich; while Hythe and Romney remained with the Archbishop.

[728] For rights possessed in the time of Henry the Second see Hist. MSS. Com. v. 454.

[729] Confirmed by Edward the First, 1293. Rot. Parl. i. 101. There were no coroners in the Cinque Ports except the mayors of the various towns. Lyon’s Dover, ii. 269, 347, 371, 303.

[730] A writ of error lay to the Shepway Court only from any of the Ports; but from the Shepway finally there might be an appeal to the King’s Bench. (Boys’ Sandwich, 697, 771.) A mayor of Sandwich accused of assaulting the sheriff’s bailiff refused to answer except at the Court of Shepway. (Ibid. 661.)

[731] Lyon’s Dover, ii. 304. See Rot. Parl. i. 332. For the charter of Edward the Third see Boys’ Sandwich, 568-9.

[732] Boys, 470-1.

[733] Montagu Burrows’ Cinque Ports, 73-4. The Cinque Ports joined Simon de Montfort against the King. Possibly this revolt was due to the limits fixed to their territory by Henry in 1259-60, for a little later the Barons’ party extended those limits. (Ibid. 107.) It was in this war too that they finally secured freedom from summons before the King’s Justices.

[734] Boys’ Sandwich, 445. “Within the Cinque Ports there is no trial by jury as in other places.” Ibid. 452. For the system of compurgation see p. 465.

[735] Ibid. 468.

[736] Boys, 681.

[737] Hist. MSS. Com. iv. 1, 425; v. 496; ix. 151.

[738] Boys’ Sandwich, 682.

[739] In 1395 Romney contributed nearly £10 to the maintenance of the liberties of the Cinque Ports, and in 1407, 1408, and 1409, it had to spend over £5 each year in payment for such purposes. The renewal of these charters on one occasion cost Hythe £17 as its share. (Hist. MSS. Com. v. 535, 537.) These payments were over and above the sums which had to be given for the charters of each separate Port, and which were also a heavy cost.

[740] Hist. MSS. Com. v. 545.

[741] Ibid. 525, 494, 517-18, 520.

[742] The usual number was four or five. Lyon’s Dover, i. 251. Romney sent six. Ibid. ii. 342. For the capons, geese, etc., with which they came laden see Hist. MSS. Com. v. 534.

[743] In 1281 the mayor and townsmen of Sandwich were accused of assaulting the sheriff’s bailiffs. Boys’ Sandwich, 661.

[744] Ibid. 462.

[745] Lyon’s Dover, i. 254.

[746] Ibid. i. 260-1.

[747] In 1410 jurats from Romney spent three days and three nights at Dover at such an inquisition. Hist. MSS. Com. v. 538.

[748] From about 1471 the court only met at Shepway for the installation of the Lord Warden and the presentation of the courtesy of £100 offered him on the occasion by his subjects. Montagu Burrows’ Cinque Ports, 186. Hist. MSS. Com. v. 539.

[749] It only took cognizance of five points, high treason, falsifying money, failure of ship service, false judgment, and treasure box.

[750] Montagu Burrows’ Cinque Ports, 66-7, 73-5. See the agreement of the Ports drawn up in 1358. Boys’ Sandwich, 560-3.

[751] See Rot. Parl. i. 32, 332.

[752] Every year a letter was sent to each Port asking “whether a Brotherhood or Guestling is necessary to be arreared this year,” and when the common consent was given the summonses were issued. Burrows’ Cinque Ports, 177.

[753] Hist. MSS. Com. iv. i. 427.

[754] These four bailiffs aided by a provost chosen by the Yarmouth commonalty, took over the keys of the prison, issued all ordinances and held pleas. This went on till 1663. (See Hist. MSS. Com. v. 553, 533, 535, 539-43.) Boys’ Sandwich, 576-7. But the question of the Yarmouth fair gradually declined in importance, and in the fifteenth century became relatively of so little consequence that the Brodhull decreed in 1515 that the yearly report of their bailiffs sent to Yarmouth might be dispensed with. (Lyon’s Dover i. xii.)

[755] Lyon’s Dover i. iv. v.

[756] It was already well established in the fourteenth century, and possibly much earlier, that orders of the Court of Shepway as to the taxes required for the King or for the general purposes of the Ports became the basis of agreements made between the Ports at the Brodhull concerning the share of taxes to be paid by each Port. See Burrows’ Cinque Ports, 180-1.

[757] In 1412 a curious agreement between the mariners of France and England was signed by Romney and Lydd, and probably by all the ports from Southampton to Thanet. It provided that if any master or mariner were captured the only ransom to be asked on either side should be six nobles for the master and three for the mariner with 20 pence a week board for each; a fishing boat with nets and tackles was to be set free for 40 pence; any man taken on either coast should be charged no ransom, but a gentleman or merchant who was taken might be charged any ransom that his captor chose. In case of any dispute, arbitrators were appointed; if these were disobeyed 100_s._ was to be paid on one side to S. Nicholas at Romney, on the other side to the Church of Hope All Saints. (Hist. MSS. Com. v. 537-538.) The arrangement as to the place of payment of the fine was doubtless different in each town of the league. The common serjeant of Hythe in the same year rode to Dover to get a copy of the composition for his own town. In a disputed case when the plaintiff and defendant seem to have been of Romney, questions touching the “Law of Oleron,” _i.e._, the Law Maritime, were decided “by the judgment of the masters of ships and boats of the vills of Hastings, Winchelsea, Sandwich, and Dover,” that is, a majority of the seven towns. (Hist. MSS. Com. vi. 543.)

[758] At any time the court might be summoned to redress a wrong, and not only the jurats and commonalty of a town but any aggrieved person whatever in the whole confederation might claim that a Brodhull should be summoned if he was wronged on any point touching the charters, usages, or franchises of the Ports. Burrows’ Cinque Ports, 181.

[759] Ibid. 177-8. The Guestling sometimes sat separately for special business, generally perhaps at Winchelsea, for the affairs of the three Sussex Ports. For an instance in 1477 see Hist. MSS. Com. v. 489.

[760] Moss’s Hastings, 21. The importance of the Guestling Court gradually declined and in 1601 the Brotherhood Court (then near its own extinction) passed a decree that the yearly Guestling might be abolished. Lyon’s Dover i. xii.

[761] Hist. MSS. Com. v. 539.

[762] Burrows (Cinque Ports, 238) suggests that Lydd, like the supposed case of Faversham, might have owed its incorporation under a mayor and jurats to the Court of Shepway. He does not give any reasons for this supposition. Lydd was under the Archbishop; Faversham under the abbot until the suppression of the abbey. Ibid. 234.

[763] Dover and Sandwich were the first of the Ports to have a mayor, the mayors of Sandwich being continuous from 1226. Then came Rye and Winchelsea about 1297. The other three, Hastings, Hythe, and Romney, were ruled by bailiffs till the time of Elizabeth.

[764] For goods imported into Sandwich see Boys, 435-9, 658-9. Iron was brought from Spain and Cologne and wine from Genoa; all kinds of skins, and furs, with silk, spices, and frankincense from the Levant. For the taxes on merchandise, cellars, and warehouses see Hist. MSS. Com. v. 458. Under Edward the Third it fitted out for the King’s service 22 ships with 504 mariners. Boys, 783-4.

[765] Literæ Cant. i. lxix.-lxxii. Hist. MSS. Com. ix. 74. Boys’ Sandwich, 663. Edward the Third completed the process in 1364. Ibid. 669.

[766] In 1422 an agreement was made that the corporation should go in and out on the quay freely, and use the monks’ gate, “to provide for the guard and the defence of the town.” The ground along the quay was to be deemed a highway. Ibid. 671.

[767] Under a patent of white wax because Sandwich would not obey an Exchequer patent under green wax. Boys, 441, 404, 435-457.

[768] Literæ Cant., i. 46-48. In 1324 the convent however repeated the offence. Ibid. 118-120.

[769] Boys’ Sandwich, 435.

[770] Pleas of the Crown were held at Sandown in a place called the Mastez either on the Monday of the Hundred Court or any other Monday. Ibid. 443.

[771] Ibid. 457.

[772] Ibid. 311, 501. The mayor is the judge and gives such judgment as he thinks proper, whereas the bailiff has nothing further to do with the business than to receive the amercements. Ibid. 459.

[773] Boys’ Sandwich, 527. See also 450.

[774] Ibid. 510, 536-7.

[775] Hist. MSS. Com. v. 533-4, 535,537, 539,541-2. In 1340 Romney was divided into thirteen wards, and 941 persons above fifteen were assessed to the subsidy granted to the King that year. The whole sum assessed was £48 9_s._ 6_d._ Forty-five persons were assessed in Old Romney at 43_s._ 6_d._ The receipts from taxes, rents, etc., in 1381 seem to have been nearly £180. (Boys, 799-801.) Romney seems to have come to the height of its prosperity about 1386. One barge was built 1386; one in 1396; one in 1400; one hired in 1420. (Ibid. 535-40.)

[776] This was an old family in the town, for in 1314-15 complaint was made that Hugh Holyligebroke and the community were sheltering and defending robbers and felons so that the country could not get justice on them. Rot. Parl. i. 324.

[777] Hist. MSS. Com. v. 535-42.

[778] Ibid. 535-42.

[779] Ibid. vi. 543-4.

[780] Hist. MSS. Com. iv. I, 425, 429; Ibid. vi. 541.

[781] Bailiff and jurats were allowed to hold taverns of wine and ale “notwithstanding their office, so that they do not sell more dear on account of their office.” Lyon’s Dover, ii. 337.

[782] Hist. MSS. Com. v. 534, 535, 539, 543, 544.

[783] The twelve jurats were summoned by the common horn to assemble for business in the parish church until they hired a room in 1410 to hold their meetings and to store the goods of the community; in 1421 they built or repaired a common house with thatched roof and glass windows, an exchequer table covered with green cloth, and a bell to ring for the election of jurats. A book of customs was probably drawn up under Richard the Second, a small seal made in 1389, and a bell in 1424. Hist. MSS. Com. v. 534, 537, 540, 541, 546.

[784] Lyon’s Dover, ii. 313-14.

[785] Hist. MSS. Com. v. 535.

[786] Boys’ Sandwich, 806-8.

[787] One bailiff appointed in 1415 was only ratified in 1421. (Hist. MSS. Com. iv. i. 429.) The contrast with the habit in other boroughs is very striking.

[788] Hist. MSS. Com. v. 547.

[789] Boys’ Sandwich, 806-8.

[790] For notices in Domesday on this point see Burrows’ Cinque Ports, 48.

[791] In 1412 Hythe sent two of its citizens to London to see the Archbishop and the Lord Chancellor and succeeded in winning some relief from the ancient customary services to the King. In the fifteenth century the Archbishop sometimes appointed the bailiff of Hythe, and sometimes leased out the appointment to the town for a term of years. Cranmer leased it out for ninety-nine years. It only got a mayor under Elizabeth. (Burrows’ Cinque Ports, 215, 217-218; Hist. MSS. Com. iv. i. 434, 429. Boys’ Sandwich, 811.) One man was bailiff for six years from 1389; and a wealthy publican for two years from 1421.

[792] Hist. MSS. Com. v. 531-2.

[793] Ibid. 525-6, 532, 536.

[794] In 1403 “Jurats of Lydd and Dengemarsh made account in the church of S. Nicholas at Romney before the Jurats there of all their outlays and expenses.” Ibid. 536.

[795] Hist. MSS. Com. v. 524-5.

[796] Ibid. 522, 524, 526, 528.

[797] Ibid. 516, 532.

[798] Hist. MSS. Com. v. 606-7.

[799] It was a common custom in the Cinque Ports for the accuser to be executioner. Burrows’ Cinque Ports, 76.

[800] The customs levied by S. Augustine’s on the imports at Fordwich quay were to be the same as those collected by Christ Church at Sandwich. Hist. MSS. Com. v. 443.

[801] Literæ Cant. iii. 358. Hist. MSS. Com. viii. 326.

[802] See case of Old Romney. Hist. MSS. Com. v. 544.

[803] For the difficulties which attended the government of a group of dependent villages by the head town see Lyon’s Dover, i. 26-29. See also the relations of Sandwich and Stonor. Boys’ Sandwich, 547-8.

[804] Polydore Vergil, 84.

[805] Archæologia Cantiana, vii. 234; Hist MSS. Com. v. 520.

[806] See especially the account of Canterbury in Hist. MSS. Com. IX. 176-7. Lydd incurred heavy expenses in the war of 1460. In Rye there is an entry of 19_s._ 3_d._ for the expenses of the mayor, bailiff, common clerk and four jurats at Dover, “going and returning on carrying the men’s quarters, when the mayor and bailiff with four jurats were sent under the heaviest penalty, and on pain of contempt of our lord the King.” Another two pence was spent in giving them a drink of malmsey before dinner (Hist. MSS Com. v. 492, 493); and the same year “the men of the Lord Warwick entered the town with a strong band and took down the quarter of the man and buried it in the churchyard.” In 1470 Romney and the other Cinque Ports supported Warwick against Edward, 1469-70. (Hist. MSS. Com. v. 545.) For Lydd, p. 525; and Sandwich, Boys’ Sandwich, 676. At the return of Henry the Sixth from October 1470 to April 1471, an entry in Lydd records “on the second Sunday after the feast of St. Michael the Archangel in the year of King Henry the Sixth.” (Hist. MSS. Com. v. 525.) The clerk did not know what year to call it. For the sufferings of Kent in the war see Warkworth’s Chronicle, 21-22.

[807] Luchaire, Communes Françaises, 77, etc.

TRANSCRIBER’NOTE:

—Obvious print and punctuation errors were corrected.