A HISTORY OF HAMPSHIRE 



were disfranchised."* There was evidently no limit 

 to the number of burgesses elected each year, for 

 within five months of the year 1773 no fewer than 

 forty-three were admitted to the freedom of the 

 borough, 130 and in 1834 seventy-eight burgesses were 

 sworn besides nine aldermen. 131 There was apparently 

 no qualification necessary for a burgess. It was not 

 even needful for him to be a resident, for the following 

 names occur on the list of burgesses : John White of 

 Southwick, 1553 ; William Gage of Havant, 1557 ; 

 William Bennet of Fareham, 1634 ; and so on through- 

 out the list. 13 * It was possible also for the soldiers in 

 the garrison and officers in the dockyard to become 

 burgesses ; thus in 1531 Richard Palshyd, a captain of 

 the garrison ; in 1594, Joshua Savour, master gunner ; 

 in 1575, Richard Popinjay, government surveyor; 

 and in 1576, William Davison, admiralty -Serjeant, 

 were burgesses. 1SJ Early in the seventeenth century, 

 however, when the relations between the town and 

 the garrison were somewhat strained, it was considered 

 contrary to the customs of the town for a soldier of 

 the garrison to be given the freedom of the borough, 

 and in 1618 Thomas Mondaie, one of the burgesses, 

 was disfranchised because he had bought a soldier's 

 place, and was under the command of the governor. 134 

 On the other hand an ordinance had been made in 

 1545-6, forbidding the captain of the town from 

 receiving any inhabitant as a soldier there. 134 Before 

 the charter of Charles I (1627), burgesses were elected 

 with the common consent of the mayor and burgesses 

 in the borough court. After 1627 till the Municipal 

 Reform Act of 1835 they were chosen by the mayor 

 and aldermen whenever they thought fit. 136 In 1682 

 an ordinance was made providing against the proposal 

 of any new burgess save in the council in the Council- 

 house. 137 Since 1835 every ratepayer has been ac- 

 counted a burgess. 



The fine paid for the freedom of the borough 

 varied considerably, while in many cases no fine at 

 all is recorded. In 1546 Francis Botkyn gave los. at 

 his election, 138 while Richard Jenens paid 261. 8< on 

 a similar occasion in I593, 1 * 9 and in 1531 John Play- 

 foote of Copnor agreed upon his admission as burgess 

 ' of his mere mind and good will ' to repair the prison 

 house." William Heaton, gentleman, paid io/. fine 

 and io/. upon a breakfast for the burgesses at his 

 election in 1597. These conditions were determined 

 by two arbiters, one representing the town and one 

 the burgess-elect, evidently the customary mode of 

 agreement as to the fine to be paid. 1 * 1 On the 

 election of honorary burgesses at the request of the 

 mayor and aldermen, the town paid certain fees to 

 the town clerk and other officers." 1 Many famous 

 men have thus been burgesses of Portsmouth : the list 

 includes Sir Christopher Hatton, Sir Julius Caesar, 

 Thomas Pride, George Monk, Samuel Pepys, 

 Admirals George and John Byng, Lord Chan- 



cellor Erskine, and many other well-known men. 

 Burgesses were disfranchised before 1662 by the 

 common consent of the mayor and burgesses." 3 In 

 that year many members of the corporation were dis- 

 franchised by the Royal Commissioners on grounds of 

 disaffection," 4 and in the charter of Charles II it was 

 definitely stated that the burgesses and other members of 

 the corporation were removable by the king's sign manual, 

 but this clause was only in force till the proclamation 

 of 1688 annulled the charter of Charles II. 



Once elected the burgesses formerly enjoyed many 

 privileges, which have now fallen into insignificance. 

 Their share in the government of the town was 

 probably considerable until the rise of the twelve 

 assistants and afterwards of the aldermen, and at all 

 times these last have been chosen from their number. 

 Under the charter of Richard I they were free from 

 toll and passage and the many other dues paid by 

 ordinary travellers in the king's realms. They were 

 quit of suit at the shire and hundred courts and from 

 pleas of forest ; in fact, they had all the liberties 

 granted to the citizens of Winchester and Oxford. 1 " 

 The burgesses who brought pleas to the borough 

 courts paid a smaller fee than the ordinary inhabitant 

 or ' stranger.' I46 Besides this they had various trading 

 advantages. They could buy and sell within the 

 town without a licence from the mayor,"' while the 

 non-burgess who did so was amerced in the court 

 leet. 148 Early in the seventeenth century the towns- 

 men struggled to maintain this right against the 

 soldiers of the garrison, who persisted in keeping ale- 

 houses and victualling-houses in the town. 14 * In 

 1630, in answer to a petition from the soldiers 

 stating that, if not allowed to trade, they would not be 

 able to live, since they only had 8< a day, and that 

 not paid, it was ordered that they should be allowed to 

 trade in the town till they received their full pay, or 

 the matter should be debated in the presence of both 

 parties. 150 Two years later it was again ordered that 

 no soldier should trade or keep an ale-house in the 

 town, but the regulation seems to have been broken 

 very soon. 1 * 1 The borough also regulated trade in 

 the harbour, for Robert Reeve was heavily fined in 

 1 594 for having bought a ship in the harbour while 

 not a burgess. 1 " Under Elizabeth's charter of incor- 

 poration neither the burgesses nor inhabitants of the 

 town were to be impanelled on any jury save in 

 causes affecting property within the borough ; and to 

 the present day they are free from serving on county 

 juries. They were for many years exempt from 

 wharfage dues, but this privilege was disputed early in 

 the last century. 153 Perhaps the most important 

 privilege enjoyed exclusively by the burgesses was 

 their right to vote for the two members returned by 

 the town to Parliament. This they retained till 

 the Reform Act of 1832. Their functions primarily 

 included all the responsibility of the government of 



** Extracn from the Portsmouth Records, 

 169. 



" Ibid. 234. > Ibid. 264.. 



lra Ibid. 343, et eq. 



"8 Ibid. Ibid. 155. 



" s Actt ofP.C. (New Scr.), i, 322. 



IU Pat. 4 Chas. I, pt. 24, m. 5. 



18 7 Extracts from Portsmouth Rec. io. 



WIbid. 126. 



Ibid. 141. 



140 Ibid. 1 1 6. 



141 Ibid. 142 and 147. 

 " Ibid. 277. 



"Ibid. 153, 155, &c. 



144 Ibid. 169 and 157. Robert Bold 

 wa> discharged from being a burgess in 

 1625, in respect of his many infirmities, 

 and since he did not inhabit in the 

 town. 



*** It seems probable, however, that 

 these liberties were extended to all in- 

 habitants of the town, for the charter 

 gives them to ' the town of Portsmouth 

 and all our burgesses in it and holding 

 of it.' 



146 See Customs and Usages of Ports- 



I 7 8 



mouth, 1 East, Extractt from the Portsmouth 

 Rec. ^. 7 Ibid. 4. 



148 Ibid. 77, a list of more than thirty- 

 five classes of tradesmen (non-burgeues) 

 amerced for exercising their trades in 

 the town. 



" Add. MS. 33283, fol. 85. 



160 Cat. S.jP. Dam. 162549, P* 375* 



"1 Ibid. 1635, p. 574. 



lsa Extractt from the Portsmouth Rec. 

 142. 



IM Part. Acctt. and Papers, 1835, xxi, 

 799- 



