HERTFORD HUNDRED 



jiayor). The sixteen assistants were chosen by the 

 mayor and aldermen from the commonalty. Their 



powers w 



e extended, i 



) far as th 



ey v 



in all the business of the borough, and limited 

 election of the mayor, for the mayor, aldermen, 

 recorder and chamberlain joined with them in the 

 final vote. The recorder, indeed, assisted the mayor 

 and aldermen in most of their functions. He took 

 the place of the old steward of the court, and was 

 elected by the common council. He assisted in the 

 making of by-laws and in the choice of the two 

 Serjeants- at- mace. He paired with the mayor in his 

 judicial work in the borough court, which was to be 

 held on Wednesdays. The limit of damages was 

 raised to £60. The mayor, recorder and one free- 

 man, chosen by the mayor and aldermen, were to be 

 the borough justices, and the mayor, in virtue of the 

 older charter, remained clerk of market. The charter 

 created an official, the chamberlain, who had long 

 been wanting. He was elected by the mayor and 

 aldermen, to hold office during their pleasure, giving 

 account when they required. He collected the fines 

 and amercements, made payments and managed the 

 borough finance. The chief steward, the Earl of 

 Salisbury, was to hold his place for life, after which it 

 was to be filled by election, as in the charter of 1605. 



This was the form of the constitution until 1835. 

 The charter repeated the mistake of 1605. The 

 mayor and aldermen had a monopoly of power with- 

 out responsibility. The assistants, who shared in the 

 making of by-laws, 10 were chosen, and perhaps 

 removable, by the mayor. The usual life tenure of 

 office increased the irresponsibility of the corporation. 



The ordinances preserved resemble for the most 

 part those of 1635, with an increasing tendency to 

 the prescription of banquets. 11 Possibly the corpora- 

 tion was careless, if not corrupt, if the treatment of 

 the pastures from 1645 to 1709 is a fair instance. 

 In 1 834 the mayor and council were unpopular rather 

 for their politics than for any malpractice. 13 



During the 18th century practices untouched by 

 charter hardened into customs- Thus in 1834 'the 

 junior alderman who had not passed the chair ' was 

 usually elected mayor. 13 Otherwise no changes had 

 taken place among the borough authorities. Even 

 the two serjeants-at-mace still stood at the head of 

 the police force ; but there were seven constables 

 chosen by the parishes, and watchmen and patrol 

 under the Paving Act of 1787. 14 



The salient feature of the report of 1834 is the 

 decay of the borough courts. The Wednesday court 

 of record had fallen into disuse by 1782. In 1827 

 the inhabitants petitioned for its revival, and it was 

 duly held in 1828. As, however, there were then 

 only twenty-three summonses, and from 1830 to 

 1833 an average of three a year, 15 the court was 

 not worth holding. The quarter sessions likewise did 

 a very inconsiderable business. The petty sessions on 

 Wednesdays was apparently the court of most resort. 



Under the Municipal Corporations Act (1835) 



10 Hertf. Corp. Papers, i, 

 nMunit. 0.^.(1835),!,, 2 



11 Ibid. ; BiA MSS. Co, 

 App. viii, 159, ,63. 



rs Rep. ..*«, Corp. (1835), 

 13 Ibid. 2885. 



BOROUGH OF 

 HERTFORD 



Hertford lost its archaisms. The ratepayer burgesses 

 elected twelve councillors, who chose four aldermen, 

 aldermen and councillors composing the council. 16 

 This body elected the mayor. 



When the borough boundary was extended in 

 1 892, and two wards formed, twelve councillors were 

 given to the town ward and three to Bengeo, and 

 one alderman was added to the council. 17 



The borough court of record has not survived. 

 The quarter sessions of the borough justices were 

 continued under the Act of 1835, 1R and are still 

 held. The petty sessions are now held for the county 

 every fortnight on Saturdays, and by the borough 

 magistrates every Thursday. 



The tennrial qualification for burgesshood had 

 weakened by i6oj, when burgesses to the number of 

 three were admitted from the out-portions of St. John's 

 and St. Andrew's by the charter. Nevertheless, it 

 left definite traces. An out-burgess might join in 

 municipal elections and the giving of counsel, but he 

 could not be mayor. Deeper traces remained in the 

 pasture rights. In 1 62 1 the rights of pasture were 

 said to belong to the ' ancient messuages,' thus 

 following the burgage tenements. Later the right 

 was claimed for all cottages above thirty years old ; 

 but in 17 19 the commoners were still regarded as 

 the "owners of burgage tenements,' and in 1737 are 

 described as the inhabitant householders of the 

 ancient borough. 



With regard to the freedom of the borough, as far 

 as we can judge, the 16th-century qualification was 

 seven years' apprenticeship to a freeman. The direct 

 evidence for it only dates from 1 6 5 5 19 ; it was Still 

 the usual one in 1834. As early as 1598 the free- 

 dom could be bought 20 ; the payment varied in the 

 early 19th century from £5 to £z$. The eldest 

 sons of aldermen took up their freedom on paying is. 

 lo the mayor and the usual fees. 



In the 17th century the corporation treated appli- 

 cants very fairly. Apprentices' indentures were entered 

 on the rolls, and they could not be denied the freedom 

 on payment of is. and the fees, after the completion 

 of their service. The most important privilege was 

 the exclusive right to trade and manufacture in the 

 borough. It was re-asserted in the by-laws of 1692, 

 1731 and 1752, 21 and was maintained in l834. 3a 

 The corresponding duty was the ' quarterage,' 

 apparently a payment for stalls in the market, 33 com- 

 parable with the earlier stall pence. Until 1731 

 the rate was higher for freemen dwelling outside the 

 borough than for those dwelling within it 24 ; in 

 1635 the former paid \d. a quarter, the latter id? 1 

 After 1624 the freeman, like the inhabitant house- 

 holders, had the Parliamentary vote, 36 and this right 

 was guarded in the Reform Act. 27 By 1834 almost 

 all qualified as freemen voted either as £10 house- 

 holders or as inhabitant householders within the 

 ancient borough. 38 In 1 8 39 there were only 366 

 freemen in a population of 5,63 i. 29 The privilege 

 was clearly not worth preserving. 



16 Ibid. 2886-8. 

 16 Stat. 5 & 6 Will. 



