THE COMMON LANDS
The burgesses exercised common rights over
much of the liberty. The common land was
divided into two types, whole year land, on
which the burgesses and other landholders had
common all the year round, and half year land
on which the burgesses only had common from
Lammas to Candlemas. The main whole year
commons comprised detached areas of pasture
in wood, heath, and waste in the outlying parishes,
especially Mile End. The half year commons
consisted of grazing rights on the borough fields,
the ancient open fields of the town which lay
chiefly, although not exclusively, within the
parishes of the intramural churches. (fn. 40)
THE WHOLE YEAR COMMONS.
The whole
year commons may have originated in common
rights in a large area of woodland covering the
north and north-west quarters of the liberty,
divided between the royal forest of Kingswood
and the borough's wood or Cestrewald. (fn. 41) Kingswood had been in the hands of the burgesses
before 1168 but was then reclaimed by Henry
II, although the townsmen retained their common rights. (fn. 42) In the 17th century the burgesses
still claimed an ancient right to feed cattle and
take wood from 2,000 a. in Kingswood heath,
but the area of common was by then probably
much smaller because of extensive medieval
inclosure and clearance in the south part and
centre of Mile End parish. (fn. 43) In the 14th century
the burgesses also claimed common rights in St.
John's abbey's Soane wood, north-east of the
town in Greenstead. By the early 16th century
the burgesses' main year-round pasture was
Mile End heath; they also had common rights
in Parsons heath and Cross heath in Greenstead
and Rovers Tye heath along the Ipswich road. (fn. 44)
The rump of Kingswood, in the north part of
Mile End, was acquired once more by the
borough in 1535 and became known as the
Severalls estate when it was leased and inclosed
after 1576. (fn. 45) About 1590 the inclosures there
caused c. 150 poor townsmen to claim that they
had been much injured by the loss of their
common land. (fn. 46)
Certain highways were apparently whole year
commons, including in the early 14th century a
road leading through St. John's abbey land in
Greenstead to Wivenhoe. The road along the
bank of the Colne between North bridge and
North mill was common in 1366, and in the same
year common rights were claimed in the road
through the St. Botolph's priory land south of
the town towards Old Heath. In 1447 the prior
was said to hold in severalty another way through
his land which ought to have belonged to the
commonalty of Colchester. (fn. 47) Land inclosed in
1411 for a rabbit warren apparently obstructed
the burgesses's common hunting rights at Clingo Hill in Greenstead. (fn. 48) The 80 a., and the 8 p.
about the town wall, in the burgesses' common
in 1086 may represent whole year common land
within and around the walls, where much open
space survived into the medieval period, rather
than the borough fields. (fn. 49)
HALF YEAR COMMONS: LOCATION AND
ORIGIN.
The disposition of the half year lands
suggests that they probably originated as fallow
and spring-field grazing rights on the open fields
belonging to the borough, rather than as rights
enjoyed as part of the farm of the royal demesne
or a late extension of pasturage rights from
Colchester's meadow land. (fn. 50) The furlongs of
Borough field in St. Mary's-at-the-Walls parish
do not appear to show in their layout the influence of the underlying Roman features such
as roads, cemeteries, and suburban buildings, so
Colchester's open fields were probably laid out
in the late Anglo-Saxon period. The 1,304 a. held,
mostly in parcels of 1-10 a., by 276 burgesses in
1086 were perhaps open field holdings made up of
scattered strips with commensurate common rights
lying within the area later covered by the borough fields. (fn. 51) Later inclosure may have severely
reduced the area of commoning, for by 1599
there were only c. 626 a. of half year commons
and c. 1634 there were said to be only 400-500
a. (fn. 52) In the mid 18th century the half year lands
were estimated to contain 500 a., including most
of the land in St. Mary's-at-the-Walls parish,
although it was claimed that the commons had
recently been extended. (fn. 53) Nonetheless, in the
early 19th century half year lands were stated to
comprise 1,020 a.: 564 a. in Head ward; 189 a.
in North ward; 118 a. in East ward, and 147 a.
in South ward, an area not far short of that held
by the burgesses in 1086. (fn. 54)
There were three main concentrations of half
year land: one south-west of the town known as
Borough field, which may have originally lain
entirely within St. Mary's-at-the-Walls parish;
one to the south-east, which may have originally
formed one great field within St. James's parish;
and one to the north-east, which may once have
formed a third field within Mile End and Greenstead parishes. The tithes of many lands were
later transferred to other parishes, particularly
with the foundation of St. Botolph's priory c.
1100 and St. Mary Magdalen's hospital in the
early 12th century. (fn. 55) The continuation of furlongs across the boundary from St.
Mary's-at-the-Walls into Lexden parish and the
use of the names Borough field, Bury field, and
Dole field in an area of Lexden adjoining St.
Mary's-at-the-Walls suggest that the original
open fields extended into Lexden. (fn. 56) The parishes
of Stanway, Lexden, and St. Mary's-at-theWalls certainly remained intermixed throughout
the Middle Ages. (fn. 57) The division of tithes between the intramural parishes had the effect of
fossilizing evidence of earlier agrarian arrangements including individual open field strips. In
Borough field, for example, the strips, and later
irregular inclosures and sub-divisions, were
accommodated within a series of large curving
furlongs of clearly open field type, and 'common
baulks' were also identifiable as late as the 19th
century. (fn. 58)
HALF YEAR COMMONS: INCLOSURE TO c. 1600.
There is no evidence when inclosure of
the borough fields began, but by the later Middle
Ages consolidation had become a serious obstacle to the exercise of common rights. In 1311
the borough court recorded that all of Nicholas
le Gros's newly inclosed arable lands north of
the river had been half year lands from time
immemorial, and in the same year John Person
was charged with making several a croft near
Colebaynes land. (fn. 59) The land which the bailiffs
licensed Roger Moriss to inclose in 1348-9
presumably lay in the borough fields, and other
inclosures which threatened to extinguish common rights were made in 1353 in Bury field
within the walls, Partridge fen in Borough field,
and Someres field at Dilbridge in Mile End. A
croft, perhaps an assart, called la Brache or
Bruche, was also made several in 1365-6. (fn. 60)
Between 1401 and 1447 common land was
made several in Holmere near Butt Lane, at
Bourne mill, in Bury field, at Shrub wood, in
Synchedown next to North Street, and at the
Hythe. (fn. 61) In 1466 a ship builder held common
soil, probably meadow, beyond the crane at the
Hythe as several. (fn. 62) Another phase of inclosure
occurred in the later 16th century when unlawful
inclosures proved a 'great impediment' to the
burgesses' cattle. (fn. 63) The problem recurred a century
later, between 1654 and 1655, when the free
burgesses were said to be suffering great
prejudice from encroachments, tillage, and inclosure. (fn. 64) Common rights were also obstructed by
agricultural improvements from the 17th
century onwards, including new buildings,
farmyards, and root crops. (fn. 65)
Disputes between the burgesses and St. John's
abbey over grazing rights suggest that the abbey
had extinguished common rights on its land
south and east of the town. In the early 14th
century the abbot encouraged new tenants to
inclose their land in Monkdown, (fn. 66) and in 1340
the abbot inclosed his land there so that the
burgesses could not common, an action which
they were still disputing in 1427. In that year
the abbot was also accused of keeping his boundaries open at Stowersland, in Greenstead
towards East bridge, in order to impound the
burgesses' cattle when they strayed from neighbouring commons. (fn. 67) The abbot had also inclosed
Oldgate field or Maryland outside East gate in
1364, but the burgesses continued to demand
that the land be thrown open, and in 1489 broke
the abbey's closes there. The abbot retaliated by
impounding their cattle. (fn. 68) The burgesses also
claimed that the abbot had bought land from
them in order to make it several and so had
obstructed common grazing rights on a total of
400 a. of arable, meadow, and pasture which
used to be common 'at the usual times', presumably a reference to half year lands. (fn. 69)
If the abbot of St. John's had encroached on
some of the borough's half year lands, the
borough itself had consented to the inclosure of
others. In 1516 the bailiffs and commonalty gave
the wardens of St. Anne's guild permission to
inclose all the chapel lands, which presumably
lay near the chapel along the Harwich road. At
the same time they extinguished rights of common on land adjoining the Crutched friars'
orchard, south of the later Crouch Street. (fn. 70) A
proposal c. 1536 to inclose all the land in the
liberty except the whole year commons and to
charge the owners a rent of 3d. an acre for
meadow and 2d. an acre for arable and pasture
came to nothing, perhaps because of the inclosure riot that same year. (fn. 71) That or a similar plan
may have led to the order, made by the commissioners appointed to settle differences in the
town in 1549, (fn. 72) that inclosures or sales of commons should be made only with the unanimous
consent of the bailiffs, aldermen, and common
councillors. (fn. 73)
In 1564 the borough assembly agreed to inclose
and lease the half year land and to use the rents
to support a hospital for the poor. (fn. 74) The 5s. rent
agreed that year by the holder of Golden field,
near the later Military Road, for his intercommoning, (fn. 75) may have been one such rent for a new
inclosure, and the 2s. 6d. rent agreed for a parcel
of half year ground in St. Leonard's at the Hythe
in 1602 was to be paid to the town's poor. (fn. 76) The
provision for a workhouse partly financed by
rents of half year lands was repeated in 1613 and
the lease in 1618 of land on the north side of
Magdalen Street, between Magdalen green and
Spittleman's wash, which allowed the tenant to
inclose the land may have helped to finance the
scheme. (fn. 77)
HALF YEAR COMMONS: MANAGEMENT TO c. 1790.
Where landowners and tenants farmed
their half year land as arable they could not sow
winter crops and had to grow oats and barley,
crops which were well suited to the light sandy
soils of the liberty. (fn. 78) Nearly three quarters of the
crops possessed by Colchester taxpayers in 1296
and 1301 comprised oats, barley, and peas, and
the court rolls also contain references to lands
occupied by spring-sown crops. (fn. 79) The c. 500 a.
of several 'rye ground' in St. Giles's parish in
the late 16th century may reveal greater use of
winter-sown crops outside the area of half year
commonage. (fn. 80) Although the half year lands were
commonable between Lammas and Candlemas
the dates were probably more flexible in practice, for at Dilbridge farm in 1699 commoning
was delayed until 'the corn is off'. Similarly, in
the early 14th century rights were claimed 'from
the carrying of hay to Candlemas' on half year
land in Salt meadow and Eastmead, near the
Hythe. (fn. 81) Nonetheless, when the burgesses'
rights were challenged in the mid 18th century
they retaliated by driving their cattle over the
commons whether or not the harvest had been
completed. (fn. 82)
There is no direct evidence for a stint until
1573 when it was set at three great cattle or 30
sheep for each burgess. (fn. 83) Nonetheless, from the
early 14th century the commons were often
overloaded with flocks of up to 400 sheep,
besides cattle, horses, and pigs. Burgesses were
occasionally amerced, but foreigners, having no
right of common, were more frequently presented
for burdening the commons to the prejudice of the
commonalty. Those at fault included the prior
of St. Botolph's, the almoner of St. John's, the
rector of Mile End, and the tenants of the
manors of Lexden and West Donyland. (fn. 84) In the
late 15th century the commoners' cattle were
tended by a common cowherd, who impounded
unauthorized beasts and reported defects and
trespasses to the bailiffs; in 1538 burgesses were
forbidden to put cattle on the commons except
in the cowherd's charge. (fn. 85)
The management of the half year lands was
one of the matters in dispute between the corporation and the burgesses in the years before
1635. (fn. 86) The disposal of money received from the
land seems to have been of as much importance
to the burgesses as the rights themselves. In 1627
the assembly repeated the stint of 1573 and
agreed that the bailiffs should appoint 2-4 burgesses from each ward to drive the commons as
often as necessary, fining owners 3s. 4d. for each
beast illegally grazed. Pigs were similarly to be
driven and impounded. In 1629 new ordinances
confirmed the stint laid down in 1573 and
provided for the election of four treasurers, one
from each ward, who were to appoint the drivers
of the commons and to receive the fines collected. Land already inclosed was to remain so,
and no more leases were to be granted without
the consent of a majority of the commonalty at
a public meeting. All fines and rents were to be
distributed to poor burgesses and their
families. (fn. 87)
The burgesses seem to have achieved a modification of the rules for the appointment of drivers
in 1633, (fn. 88) but in 1634 they claimed a stint of 3
great cattle or 90 sheep and again objected to the
ordinance for the driving of the half year lands.
They also complained that some aldermen had
tried to prevent them from commoning by laying
their several lands open to the half year lands so
that cattle could be impounded for trespass, and
by sowing the land with roots or by building on
it. The burgesses were equally concerned that
the lease of Kingswood heath made in 1572 was
about to be renewed, thus again depriving them
of wood and timber besides their rights of
common. (fn. 89) They almost succeeded in getting a
clause into the new borough charter in 1635
forbidding the inclosure or other interruption of
their commons, (fn. 90) and they did succeed in having
the drivers' powers confined to foreigners' cattle
while freemen's cattle were to be placed under
the care of one herdsman from each ward. (fn. 91)
The disputed election of 1742 led to the lapse
of Colchester's charter, and in 1749 the burgesses claimed that they were deprived of their
half year commons, their cattle were impounded,
and they had no redress. (fn. 92) Landowners seized
the opportunity to press for the abolition of the
commons, which they considered hindered improvement and encouraged poor stock-keeping.
In 1753 Philip Yorke, Lord Hardwicke, lord of
Mile End, Greenstead, and Dilbridge manors,
briefed by the historian Philip Morant, claimed
that he and his fellow landowners had been
powerless against 'a thousand furious fellows
backed by a bullying mayor' who were determined to extend their half year lands and
prepared to put their cattle on them at the
beginning of August whether or not the corn was
cut. Among the landowners only the wealthy
widow and brewer Elizabeth Selly had refused
to be intimidated. The burgesses hired an attorney to sue for their pasture rights, but in 1753
the attorney-general advised them that all their
privileges, franchises, and lands had reverted to
the Crown on the lapse of the charter. The
dispute led to agitation in the town during the
parliamentary election of 1753, in which Lord
Hardwicke supported the Tory candidates. (fn. 93)
The half year commons were restored to the
mayor and commonalty under the 1763 charter. (fn. 94)
HALF YEAR COMMONS: MANAGEMENT
AND SALE c. 1790 TO c. 1900.
The dissolution
of the half year lands began in the last decade of
the 18th century. In 1794 the burgesses offered
to surrender rights of common on land south of
Magdalen Street for the barracks, and further
rights were surrendered to the government in
1796. In 1806 rights of common were sold to the
government on 34 a. acquired for the rapidly
expanding military site. Those sales may have
suggested a way of raising money at a time of
serious financial problems for the borough. In
1797 a committee was appointed to examine
whether compensation had been received for
inclosures and to determine how far expansion
at the Hythe had encroached upon common
land. In 1801 the treasurers were requested to
survey the half year lands, including lands which
claimed to be exempt but were once common.
A proposal that year to sell the half year commons to cover the corporation's debts was
rejected by the burgesses, but two years later an
amended proposal that a sufficient quantity be
sold to redeem the corporation's land tax was
approved. In 1806 another committee recommended the sale of the common rights to
discharge the corporation's debts, including a
£2,493 mortgage on the corporation estates. (fn. 95)
In 1807 Benjamin Strutt, the chamberlain,
claimed that the treasurers and drivers were
prevented from enforcing the burgesses' common rights by fear of prosecution or physical
assault and 'by bribes and other treacherous
dealings'. Of the money which they did collect,
twice as much was spent on treats and feasts as
on widows, orphans, and sick, weak, and poor
burgesses, a form of embezzlement noted by
Morant in 1748. (fn. 96) Strutt's condemnation resulted
in a new constitution creating the 'conservators' of
the commons, four men elected annually on 27
July, who were to survey and record the half year
lands and might at the request of the four
treasurers or any 12 burgesses enter inclosed or
cultivated fields to preserve common rights. An
annual assembly, held in late July in the moot
hall, was to consider proposals for the purchase
of common rights at £30 an acre for meadow
and £20 for arable. Where cultivation obstructed
regular commoning the conservators were empowered to negotiate a licence at a rate not less
than one quarter of the annual rent charge.
Those moneys, together with the fines taken for
illegal grazing, were to be placed in government
security or used to purchase estates. The annual
interest or rent was to be paid by seven trustees
to the chamberlain for distribution in equal
shares to resident burgesses. (fn. 97)
Initially, purchases of common rights were
negligible and in 1808 the standard charge was
reduced to £20 an acre for meadow and £15 an
acre for arable. Sales were allowed at lower
prices in 1809 and 1811, and charges were
further reduced to £7 an acre for arable and
pasture in 1815. From 1809 onwards the balance
in the conservators' accounts arising from sales
of half year rights amounted to between £100
and £200 each year, with occasional larger sales
such as the 27 a. which brought in £472 in 1812.
Total sales between 1805 and 1820 were 554 a.,
followed by a further 200 a. by 1825, leaving
only 266 a. of half year land. (fn. 98)
In 1825 seven common councillors claimed
that money arising from the sales had not been
distributed to the free burgesses as the constitution of 1807 required and they demanded their
equal share of moneys paid to Strutt between
1818 and 1824. Strutt was ordered to resist the
claims and the borough assembly committed
itself to defending him against any legal actions. (fn. 99) In 1829, perhaps as a result of that
dispute, it was proposed that the remaining
common rights be sold and the proceeds placed
in 3 per cent annuities, so as to improve the
income distributed annually among the burgesses. A further proposal to sell off the Severalls
and land bought with money from the sale of
half year lands, was successfully opposed. (fn. 1) After
1825 sales were much reduced, although 39 a.
were sold in St. Mary's-at-the-Walls parish as
late as 1862, and common rights in Drury farm
in that parish were still subject to legal disputes
and transfers of ownership in the later 19th
century. (fn. 2)
A group of litigious burgesses, led by Jeremiah
Prestney and James Coveney, claimed that all
income derived from ancient rights of fishing,
hunting, and grazing properly belonged to the
freemen rather than the corporation. In one legal
action brought against the corporation, as conservators of the commons, they claimed the
profits of the common land but the suit was
dismissed with costs awarded against the plaintiffs in 1898. The costs were still in dispute in
1904, when they were ordered to be paid out of
the money invested by the trustees of the half
year lands. The great expense to the town of
contesting the case led to the suggestion that the
freemen should be abolished, but the final verdict, and the death of Prestney in 1899 and
Coveney in 1909, brought the episode to a close.
The freemen continued to receive small pensions
from the fund in 1993. (fn. 3)