A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE 



regularly until 1393,'°' when it was replaced by a still 

 more extensive lease granted by John of Gaunt, which 

 represents the highest point attained by the municipal 

 liberties of Liverpool during the Middle Ages.'"' 

 The rent was raised to £iS, but the lease included a 

 grant of control over the whole of the waste, a power 

 which the burgesses were never to lose, though it is 

 not mentioned in later leases ; it included all the 

 lord's jurisdictional rights (embracing, apparently, the 

 right of holding a court for the Salthouse Moor tenants, 

 which brought these tenants under the control of the 

 borough courts and officers) ; and it included the 

 right of taking escheats and forfeitures. In brief, the 

 effect of this lease was to extrude the feudal power 

 entirely from the borough, except within the walls of 

 the castle. The lease was for seventeen years, and 

 expired in 1410. It thus extended well into the new 

 period which began when, by the accession of the 

 House of Lancaster to the throne, the borough was 

 once more brought into direct relation with the 

 Crown. 



The extension of municipal powers represented by 

 these leases was accompanied by a development of 

 the burghal system of government. In 1 3 5 i there is 

 the first mention of a mayor of Liverpool.'"^ No 

 royal or ducal grant of the right to elect such an 

 officer survives, and the probability is that his appear- 

 ance is the result of the re-acquisition of the lease of 

 the farm, and perhaps dates from 1346, or even earlier. 

 Up to that time it seems probable that the burgesses 

 had only elected one bailiff,"* the other being nomi- 

 nated by the lord ; and as the functions performed 

 by the latter (collection of dues and presidency of the 

 court) were much the more important, he would be 

 very definitely major ballivus. When these functions 

 pass into the hands of the burgesses, they elect their 

 own major ballivus. It was as major ballivus that the 

 mayor began,'"' but later he nominated a bailiff of 

 his own. It is instructive to find that this second 

 bailiff was always regarded as representing the Crown 

 (i.e. the lord) as well as the mayor.'"' 



It is possible that the same period also saw the 

 institution of another element in burghal government 

 — the Court of Aldermen.'"' Each of the leases from 

 1357 was granted to a group of leading citizens, most 

 of whom repeatedly occupied the mayoral chair, and 

 who were probably selected as substantial men, able to 

 stand surety for the payment of the rent. In the 

 lease of 1393 they were formally empowered to hold 

 the borough courts. Both in its functions and in its 

 personnel, this group closely resembles the Court of 

 Aldermen as it is found in the i6th century, when 

 records begin to be abundant. 



Thus the 14th century, in spite of the disorders of 

 its first half, and the distresses caused by plague and 

 war in its second half, witnessed firstly a steady growth 

 of the town and a steady expansion of its prosperity ; 

 and secondly a striking revival and development of its 

 municipal liberties. One exception to this statement, 



however, must be made. Though there is no trace of it 

 in the records, it would appear that the influence of the 

 Peasants' Revolt extended to Liverpool. One of the 

 demands made by the rebels was the withdrawal of the 

 monopoly enjoyed by the privileged burgesses in 

 towns ; and it is probably to some such demand that we 

 must attribute the grant of the charter of Richard II in 

 1382, the year after the rising."" The only distinc- 

 tive feature of this charter is its revocation of the 

 power of prohibiting trade by non-members of the 

 gild which had been contained in the earlier charters 

 and it is inconceivable that the burgesses can have 

 applied for this. But in spite of this charter, clearly 

 the little borough was thriving ; and it is possible 

 through the greater abundance of material, to get 

 some notion of its life and working at this, the moment 

 of its greatest prosperity. 



The burgess roll appended to the extent of 1346 

 shows that there were 196 householders in Liverpool 

 paying rent to the lord. On the usual basis of calcu- 

 lation, this would give a population of just under 

 1,000. But as the more substantial burgesses, who 

 held large holdings in the fields or engaged largely in 

 trade, must have had dependants not included in this 

 estimate, the population may perhaps be put down at 

 something like 1,200. It probably did not increase— it 

 may have decreased — during the second half of the 

 century, for Liverpool suffered severely fi-om the 

 Black Death ; in 1360 the deaths were so numerous 

 that the dead could not be buried in Walton 

 Churchyard, and a licence was obtained fi:om the 

 Bishop of Lichfield for burials in St. Nicholas's 

 Churchyard."" 



This population must be regarded as being still, for 

 the most part, except on market days, engaged in 

 agriculture. Every burgess had holdings in the fields. 

 The commonest holding was half a burgage, with 

 about I acre in the fields, but some of the leading 

 townsmen held much larger allotments. The will of 

 William de Liverpool,"" the leading burgess in the 

 second half of the 13 th century, survives, and an 

 inventory of his property attached to it shows that his 

 wealth was almost purely agricultural in character. 

 He has grain in his barn worth {fi 1 3/. \\d., and 

 24 selions of growing wheat in the fields, worth [/]. 

 He has nine oxen and cows worth about 10/. apiece, 

 six horses worth about 7/. each, and eighteen pigs 

 valued at \s. 6d. each. His domestic furniture is 

 valued at £j 6s. Sd. But no merchandise is included 

 in the inventory. As we shall see, William de Liver- 

 pool derived most of his wealth from milling. 



The trade of the borough was probably mainly local 

 in character. The weekly market, held every Saturday, 

 and the annual fair on St. Martin's Day, probably 

 mainly dealt in agricultural produce from the neigh- 

 bouring parts of Lancashire and Cheshire. The ferries 

 over the Mersey were of first-rate importance for this 

 purpose ; of these there seem to have been three. 

 There seem to have been two ferries included in 



101 Tram. Hist. Soc. loc. cit. 26-7 ; Hist. 

 Munic. Go-ut. in. Liv. 47-54, 304-6. 



'"' The original of this is lost. A copy 

 is printed in Gregson'a Fragwetits, 352 ; 

 there is another copy among Okill's 

 manuscripts in the municipal archives. 

 Printed in Hist. Muiiic. Govt, in Liv. 

 306. 



"" Elton, 'Early Recorded Mayors of 

 Liv.' Tram. Hist. Soc. (new «cr.), xviii, 



1 1 9 ff. gives a catalogue of the early 

 mayors, taken from the witnesses to the 

 deeds in the Moore and Crosse collections. 



'"■• They only claim one bailiff in the 

 Quo Warranto Plea of 1292. 



105 Willielmo filio Ade tunc maiorc de 

 LyverpuU, Roberto filio Mathaei tunc altera 

 ballivorum ibidem ; Add. MS. 32105, GG. 

 219. 



i»s Thus in 1647 Richard Williamson 



8 



nominates et electus est Ballivus prt 

 domino rege et majore burgi predicti ; 

 Johannes Sturzaker nominatus et electus 

 est Ballivus pro villa et burgo predicto. 



"7 On this see Hist. Munic. Govt, in 

 Liv. 51. 



108 Original in Liv. Munic. Archives i 

 Hist. Munic. Govt, in Liv. 52 and 159. 



'™ Lich. Epis. Reg. v, 44,-e. 



"0 Crosse Deeds, 77. 



Digitized by Microsoft® 



