A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE 



replaced by a bailiff. In 1292" the burgesses asserted 

 that they ' had been accustomed to have ' a bailiff ' of 

 themselves,' i.e. elected by themselves ; numerous 

 local deeds, 17 the earliest dating from 1309, show, 

 however, that there were two bailiffs. The pro- 

 bability is that the burgesses normally elected one, and 

 that the lord appointed the other to look after his dues. 

 When the burgesses held the farm of the town 

 they may have elected both bailiffs. In the only roll 

 of the borough court M of Liverpool which survives 

 from the mediaeval period, the lord's steward pre- 

 sides ; but this may be because the burgesses did not 

 then hold the farm of the town." 



The great advance marked by the charter of 

 Henry III was completed by the concession to the 

 burgesses on the following day, 25 March 1229, of a 

 lease of the farm of the borough 40 at a rent of 

 10. The lease is in the most general terms, but it 

 is clear from the items included in the same rent in 

 1256" that it comprised the burgage rents, the 

 market tolls, and the profits of two water-mills and a 

 windmill." If at this date the burgages at all 

 approximated to their ultimate number of 1 68 the 

 burgesses must have made a substantial profit on this 

 lease. But the lease was only for four years, expiring 

 in 1233. While it lasted, the lease freed the bur- 

 gesses from the intervention of royal agents. 



The burghal system of Liverpool had no sooner 

 been completed by these deeds than the borough 

 passed from royal to baronial control, as a result of 

 the grant of the borough, along with the rest of the 

 Lancashire lands of the Crown, to Ranulf, Earl of 

 Chester. 4 * During Ranulfs occupancy, which lasted 

 for three years only, and that of the three Ferrers, 

 Earls of Derby, whose tenure extended (with the 

 interval of the minority of Robert de Ferrers, 

 1254-62 (?)) until 1266, the material for the history 

 of the borough is singularly scanty. But the Ferrers 

 family appear to have respected the burghal liberties, 

 and to have renewed the lease of the farm (which fell in 



in 1233) regularly at the same rental throughout the 

 period of their control. 44 In 1266, just before his 

 last rebellion and confiscation, Robert de Ferrers con- 

 firmed the charters 4A of Liverpool ; probably as a 

 means of raising money. 



The most important event of the period 

 C4STLE was the erection of the Liverpool Castle, 

 which had taken place before 1235 and 

 may safely be attributed to the first William de 

 Ferrers. 46 There had long been a castle at West 

 Derby ; it was in ruins in 1296,^ but it had been 

 in existence in 1232," when 

 the first Ferrers took posses- 

 sion ; when his son succeeded 

 him, Liverpool Castle had 

 been built ; 49 probably the 

 one was intended to take the 

 place of the other. No re- 

 cord of its erection survives, 

 nor any account of the fabric 

 before a late date. It was 

 demolished in 1720, and no 

 satisfactory views or plans of it 



IATX7 



XAA7 



XAAZ 



survive. 60 It stood at the top 



FERRERS, Earl of 

 Derby. fairy or and 

 gulet. 



of the modern Lord Street 

 that is, on the highest point of land in the town, imme- 

 diately overlooking the entrance to the Pool. Occupy- 

 ing an artificially created plateau, almost exactly 50 yds. 

 square, it was surrounded by a moat some 20 yds. 

 wide, cut out of the solid rock." The main fabric 

 consisted of (i) a great gatehouse surmounted by two 

 small towers, which stood at the north-eastern corner, 

 and looked down Castle Street ; (2) three circular 

 towers at the three other corners ; one of these, 

 probably that at the south-east corner, was built later 

 than the rest of the fabric, in 144.2 ; the south- 

 western tower seems to have been regarded as the 

 keep of the fortress ; (3) curtain walls connected the 

 four main towers ; on the eastern side the wall rose 

 from the edge of the rock-plateau ; on the north and 



88 Plac. de Quo War. (Rec. Com.), 

 381. 



7 Moore D. passim. 

 M Roll of 1324; Lane. Ct. R. (Rec. 

 Soc. xli), 77-88. 



89 As to lesser burghal officers there is 

 no evidence before the i6th century, 

 when we get the titles (Munic. Rec. i, za) 

 of a hay ward, two burleymen, two moss- 

 reeves, two ale-founders, all of whom 

 must have had mediaeval predecessors ; 

 and two water-bailiffs, four merchant 

 prysors, and two leve-lookers, who were 

 probably officials required by the gild 

 powers obtained under the charter of 

 Henry III (Gross, Gild Merchant) ; the 

 1 6th century also shows us in exis- 

 tence a body of jurats like those of 

 Leicester (Bateson, Rec. Leic.), Ipswich 

 (Little Domesday of Ipswich), and other 

 towns. They numbered twelre or twenty- 

 four, and made regulations for the better 

 government of the town, besides making 

 presentments in the portmoot. Their 

 decrees were at that date disregarded, but 

 they were considered to be the representa- 

 tives of an institution which had once 

 been powerful (Picton, Liv. Munic. Rec. 

 i, 52). It is likely, therefore, that in 

 mediaeval Liverpool, as in Leicester, Ips- 

 wich, and all the other boroughs of Eng- 

 land ' (Little Domesday of Ipswich), there 

 was a standing body of jurats who exer- 

 cised a general control over the adminis- 



tration carried on by the bailiff and other 

 elected officers. 



In the i6th century all the officers 

 were elected at an assembly of all freemen 

 held on St. Luke's Day, 18 October. 

 Other assemblies were summoned for 

 special business as occasion required. 

 There were also two solemn courts, or 

 portmoots, in each year ; the great port- 

 moot being held a few days after the 

 electoral assembly. In the mediaeval 

 period the only general bodies of which 

 there is mention (Add. MS. 32103 ; 

 Court Roll of 1324, Lane. Ct. R. 77-88) 

 were two great courts, corresponding 

 to the portmoots of the i6th century, 

 at which all burgesses were bound to be 

 present, and a lesser court held theoreti- 

 cally every three weeks, but in practice at 

 irregular intervals. Thus in 1 3 24 twelve 

 courts were held, at intervals varying 

 from a week to three months. 



It is likely that the i6th century 

 differentiation between the portmoots for 

 legal business and the assemblies for 

 general business did not exist in the early 

 days of the borough ; but that the single 

 governing organ of the borough was the 

 portmoot, at which all burgesses were 

 entitled to be present, and, on two solemn 

 occasions a year, required to be present. 

 For a fuller discussion of the burghal 

 constitution under the charter of Hen. Ill 

 see Hist. Munic. Govt. in Liv. 20-36. 



40 Pat. 1 3 Hen. Ill, m. 9 ; Hist. Munic. 

 Govt. in Liv. 296. 



41 Trans. Hist. Soc. (new ser.), xxi, 8. 

 4a On the history of the mills and 



milling soke of Liverpool, see Bennett and 

 Elton, Hist, of Corn-milling, iv, chap, iv, 

 where the facts are fully marshalled. 



48 Cal. Close, 1227-31, p. 221 ; Chart. 

 R. 1 3 Hen. Ill, pt. i, m. 2. 



44 This is a fair inference from the 

 fact that in 1256, during the minority of 

 Robert and the occupancy of his lands by 

 the king's son Edward, Edward's bailiff 

 renders account for the farm of the vill of 

 Liverpool at the old rent ; Duchy of 

 Lane. Mins. Accts. bdle. 1094, no. n ; 

 Hist. Munic. Govt. in Liv. 39, 296. 



45 Hist. Munic. Govt. 156. Original in 

 Liv. Munic. Archives. 



46 Cal. Pat. 1232-47, p. 89. 



4 ' Inq. p.m. 2$ Edw. I, no. 51. 



48 Cal. Close, 1231-4, p. 169. 



49 Fine Roll, 32 Hen. Ill, pt. i, m. 14. 



* The best discussion and reconstruc- 

 tion of the castle is by E. W. Cor, 

 Trans. Hist. Soc. (new ser.), vi. 



&1 Mr. Cox has been followed in infer- 

 ring these main features of the castle 

 from (i) the Extent of 1346 ; (2) de- 

 tailed instructions for repairs in 1476 

 (Duchy of Laac. Bk. of Orders, etc. 

 Edw. IV, fol. 140) ; (3) report of com- 

 missioners on demolition of the castle, 

 1706, Okill MSS. iv, 337. 



