A HISTORY OF DURHAM 



freedom. Pilkington's charter, followed by one of Bishop Toby Matthew 

 in 1 602 placed the government in the hands of a mayor, twelve aldermen, 

 and twenty burgesses elected by the gilds. The experiment was never a 

 success, and at last in 1780 a fresh and more definite charter was given by 

 Bishop Egerton. The story of the other boroughs contributes no additional 

 information upon the subject of municipal history in Durham. 



One thing alone is clear. Down to the seventeenth century, at least, 

 the bishop retained practically complete control over the boroughs, with the 

 doubtful exception of Hartlepool, and even Hartlepool's freedom was fitful. 

 It will be seen, therefore, that the towns in the Palatinate had not made any 

 serious advance towards self-government in the Middle Ages. So long as he 

 could the bishop treated the towns as a source of revenue. Pudsey tallaged 

 the boroughs as well as the vills of the bishopric, 1 and all the boroughs except 

 Hartlepool were farmed out to the highest bidder in mediaeval times. The 

 amount paid gives us a rough idea of the relative importance of the boroughs. 

 Durham city was, of course, the most important, being farmed for86 3^. ^d. 

 in 1 385,* but Darlington for many years averaged little less. 8 Gateshead was 

 farmed for 22 in 1356.* Sunderland brought in 20 in 1357," but only 

 6 in 1465. 6 Auckland was worth 50 marks in I356, 7 but only 16 6s. in 

 I442. 8 Stockton seems to have grown greatly in importance in the four- 

 teenth century and steadily increased from 4 marks in 1350 i 9 to 4 in 

 1 40 5, 10 and probably superseded Yarm as a port. 



It is significant that these leases of boroughs appear as part of the 

 transactions of the Halmote Court. What they meant can be gathered 

 from one of the few leases given in full. At the Darlington halmote 

 Ingelram Gentill and two others came before the steward and took to farm 

 the borough of Darlington with the bailiwick of the same, and with the mill 

 there and of Haughton and Blackwell with the oven of the said burg with the 

 soken of the same, and with the court of the burg the soken fines, amerce- 

 ments, and services of the same, and with other courts there ; likewise with 

 whatever toll ' Shamelhires ' rents and services approvements, &c., as is 

 accustomed by lease ; and likewise with all other commodities and profits to 

 the same burg and bailiwick belonging and thereof coming ; except escheat 

 and forfeitures of lands and tenements there falling. It is granted also to the 

 same firmars that they have power to arrest and punish and adjudge all the 

 trespasses against the peace in the same burg. And likewise that they may 

 have the office of marshal to their own use with the profits of the same, 

 according to the law and custom of the county, so that no sheriff or marshal 

 or other bailiff shall intrude himself unless by default of the same firmars 

 during their term To have and to hold, &c., for one whole year, rendering 

 for the said year 80." 



Under such a system a real corporation could not exist. It was not 

 applied to Hartlepool so far as we know, but over Hartlepool and Durham 



1 BoUon Book (Surtees Soc. xxv), App. ri. 



* Dur. Curs. No. 32, m. 8 d. ' Ibid. No. 12, fbl. 83, 164 ; No. 13, fol. 165 d. 



4 Ibid. No. 12, fol. 1 61. ' Ibid. 191 d. 



Ibid. No. 1 6, fol. 1 10 d. ' Ibid. No. 12, fol. 164 d. 



8 Ibid. No. 15, fol. 167. ' Ibid. No. 12, fol. 52. 

 10 Ibid. No. 14, fol. 9. According to Bf. Hatfield't Surv. the firm was io6s. SJ. in 1380. 

 "Ibid. No. 13, fol. i66d. 



254 



