INTRODUCTION.
Consisting of (a.) Books, (b.) Charters and Letters Patent,
(c.) Deeds, Municipal and Private, (d.) Letters and Loose
Memoranda, and (e.) Rolls and Miscellaneous Documents, the
manuscripts belonging to the Corporation of Southampton,
like the muniments of several of our other provincial municipalities, have been recovered from extreme confusion, and reduced
to order at the instance of the Commission on Historical
Manuscripts.
(a.) Books.—Of the 504 MS. volumes belonging to the Corporation, the most deserving of consideration are—(1) The Oak
Book, exhibiting on 60 vellum leaves, in penmanship of the
time of Edward the Second, the ancient Laws, Ordinances, and
Customs of the town of Southampton; (2.) The Black Book,
otherwise styled Liber Niger nigro carbone notatus, otherwise
styled Niger Papyrus, otherwise styled The Blak Papyr, a
large folio of Municipal Remembrances, that was used for the
enrolment of acknowledgments of deeds from the 16th of Richard
the Second to the 12th year of Elizabeth; (3.) A curious
treatise in English verse On The Philosopher's Stone and Aurum
Potabile, the manuscript being the performance of a fifteenth
century copyist; (4.) the Book of Remembrances of the Town of
Southampton, from the year of grace 1445 to the time of James
the First, containing a characteristic memorandum of the pious
observances with which the people of the borough returned
thanks in the 2nd year of Henry the Seventh for the birth of
the sovereign's first-born son; (5) the Liber de Finibus ville
Suthampton from 1489 to 1593 A.D., affording particulars of the
costs and charges incurred by the town for Queen Elizabeth's
entertainment in 1569 A.D.; (6) the Book of Oaths, Ordinances,
and Burgesses's Admissions from 1496 to 1794 A.D., affording
in its records of admissions numerous data that may be serviceable to the future biographers of the more memorable of the
eminent persons who during that period condescended to accept
the franchise of the borough; (7) the Book of Remembrances
from 1591 to 1689 A.D.; and (8) the imperfect series of
Assembly Books, that afford many curious illustrations of the
social life of the borough in the seventeenth century. Of the
minor minutes of these last-mentioned folios few are more
startling than the orders given to churwomen (sic.), to place
themselves in regular service, if they would escape whipping.
For instance, on 28th April 1615, "Mary Quinton a churwoman
was this daie sent for to this house and charged to gett herselfe
into service presentlie uppon payne of a whippinge." On the
same day, two other churwomen were ordered "at their peril"
to place themselves in domestic service within the next month.
In the ensuing report extracts are given from all the afore-mentioned books. Notice is also taken in the same report of (1) the
folio of the Letters that passed between John Flamsteed of the
Greenwich Observatory and his friend William Molyneux, the
Dublin mathematician, from 2nd September 1681 to 10th May
1690, and (2) the Letter Book of Samuel Molyneux, of Trinity
College, Dublin, containing copies of letters interchanged by
Samuel Molyneux and his scientific friends between 9th January
1707 and 19th December 1709.
(b.) Charters and Letters Patent.—Opening with a charter
dated by King John to his burgesses of Southampton in the first
year of his reign, the collection of Charters and Letters Patent
comprises fifty-eight several writings, one of the more interesting
of them being the Letters Patent of the Exemplification (13
Feb., 2 Henry V.) of the enrolment, on the roll of the last parliament, of the petition of the burgesses of Southampton to the
King for a diminution of their burdens, together with the
sovereign's reply to the prayer.
(c.) Deeds, Municipal and Private.—Consisting, for the most
part, of documents of strictly local significance and interest, that
may be serviceable to future historians of the borough, and will
not fail to afford some measure of entertainment to the Hampshire antiquaries, but have no claim to be rated with important
historical evidences, the large assemblage of writings, catalogued
under "Deeds, Municipal and Private," comprises matters of
higher moment and value in (1) the Indenture of the Agreement,
made on 13 July, 13 Edward III., between Edward the Black
Prince of the one part and Thomas Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick,
of the other part, for the safe keeping of the town of Southampton,
with lists of the men-at-arms and archers under the Earl's command
at Southampton, from the 25th of July to the 25th of August in
that year; (2) the Indenture of the Agreement, made 31st
December, 42 Edward III., at Farnham, in the diocese of Win
chester, between William of Wykeham of the one part, and the
Mayor and the Community of Southampton of the other part, for
the observance of ordinances and agreements for cessation from
business in the said town during the fairs held yearly at St.
Giles's Hill, near the City of Winchester; (3) the Indenture of a
curious agreement, by way of a marriage settlement, made on
10 May, 2 Henry IV., between William Lelham "dominum de
Grove" and his wife Cecilia of the one part, and John Benet of
Oxford, cook, of the other part, in anticipation of the marriage
of William Lelham (son and heir of the aforesaid William) with
Juliana, daughter of the said John Benet; and (4) the remarkable
Letters of Evidence, dated by John Ingler, Mayor of New Salisbury, on 2 December, 18 Edward IV., touching the testament of
the late William Nycoll, sometime burgess and merchant of
Southampton, and setting forth the circumstances under which the
said William Nycoll's hand was used fraudulently for the sealing
of a certain deed of enfeoffment, and certain letters of attorney for
livery of seisin, when he was so completely in extremis that "his
wittes were passed away and mynde allso so that he nother herd
sey spake nor made any signe or tokene thereto to knowleiche";
it being alleged in the same Letters of Evidence that this
fraud was committed by certain persons conspiring to compass
the disinherison of the testator's niece 'Alice,' "the whiche was
weddyd to a bondeman at Twyford."
(d.) Letters and Loose Memoranda.—It is for the writings,
catalogued under this heading in the ensuing report, that the
Southampton MSS. are especially deserving of the consideration
of historical students. Opening with letters dated under the
sign manual and signet of Henry the Sixth, the goodly show of
privy seals, sign manuals, and bills prepared for the sovereign's
signature, described in the earlier pages of the catalogue, comprises seven writings under the sign manual and signet of
Edward the Fourth, eight writings of the same kind by Richard
the Third, one by Henry the Seventh, five by Henry the Eighth,
and one by Edward the Sixth, in all, twenty-three sign manuals.
The letters so dated by Richard will not fail to arrest and hold the
attention of readers. Beginning with letters, dated before Richard's
accession to the throne, to the Mayor of Southampton, this remarkable assemblage of epistles by a sovereign, whose sign manuals
are not plentiful, comprises an epistle dated to the Mayor, Sheriff,
and Aldermen of Southampton on the 13th of October in the
first year of the sovereign's reign, and running in these words.
"Trusty and welbelowed, we grete you wele, and let you wit
that the Duc of Buckingham is tratorously turned upon us contrary to the deutie of his liegeaunce and entendith thutter distruccion of us, you, and alle othre our trewe subgiettes that
have taken oure part, whose traiterus entent we with Goddes
grace entend briefly to resist and subdue. Pray you hertly
therefore and naithles upon your leigeaunce charge you that
with as many as ye may reise and make in defensible
array on horsbak ye do sende to be with us at our Citie of
Coventre the xxii day of this present moneth withouten faile
in any wise as ye tendre our honnour and your owne wele, and
we shall soo see to you for your reward and charges, as ye shal
hold you right wele content. Yeven under our signet at our
Citie of Lincoln the xiii day of Octobre." The series of
Richard's epistles to the people of Southampton closes with the
letters for the seizure of seditious bills and the arrest of
seditious speakers, dated under his sign manual and signet
to the Mayor and his brethren of the town on 5th April
1485, and running in these words:—"Trusty and Welbiloved
We grete you wele, And wher it is soo that diverses sedicious
and evil disposed personnes both in our citie of London and
elliswhere within this our Reame enforced thaymself dailly to
sowe sede of noyse and dislaundre ayenst our persoune and
ayenst many of the lordes and estates of our landes, to abuse the
multitude of our subgiettes, and averte thaire myndes from us if
they coude by any mean attaigne to that thaire mischevous
entent and pourpos, somme by setting up of billes, some by
messages and sending furth of fals and abhominable languages
and lyes, somme by bold and presumptuous open speche and
comitacioun oon with othre, Wherethurgh the innocent people,
which wold lyve in rest and peax and truly under our obeissance, as thay ought to doo, be greatly abused and oftentymes put in daunger of their lifes, landes, and goodes as ofte as
thay folowe the steppis and advises of the said sedicious and
myschevous personnes to our great hevinesse and pitie, For
remedie whereof and to thentent the trouth openly declared
shuld represse al such fals and continued invencions, We now
of late called us the Maire and Aldremen of our Citie of London,
togidre with the moost sadde and discrete personnes of the same
citie in great nombre being present, many of the Lordes spirituel
and temporall of our land and the substance of al our houshold
to whom We largely shewed our trewe entente and mynde in al
suche thinges as the said noyse and disclaundre ronne upon, in
such wise as We doubt not, al wele disposed persounes were and
bee right wele content with, Wher we also at the same tyme
yave straitly in charge aswele to the said Maire as to al othre
our officers servantes and feithful subgettes Whersover they be
that from hensforth as often as they finde any persoune speking
of us or any othre lord or estate of this our land othrwise than
is according to honour, trouth, and peax and restfulnesse of this
oure Reame, or telling of talys and tidinges Wherby the people
myght bee stirred to commocions and unlawful assembles, or any
strife and debate aryse betwix lord and lord or us any of the
lordes and estates of this our land, thay take and arreste the
same persoune unto to the tyme he have brought forth hym or
thaym of whom he understode that that soo is spoken and soo
proceeding from oon to othre unto the tyme the furst auctor
and maker of the said sedicious speche and language be taken
attached and punisshed according to his defautes, and that
Whosoever furst fynde any sedicious bille sette up in any
place he take it down and without redyng or shewyng
the same to any othre persoune bring it furthwith to
us or somme of the Lordes or othre of our Counsaill, all
which direccions, charges, and commandements, so by us taken
and geven by our mouth in our Citie of London, We notifie
unto you by these our lettres to thentent that ye shewe the
same within al the places of your jurisdiccioun, and see ther the
due execucioun of the same from tyme to tyme, as ye wol eschewe
our grevous indignacioun and answer to as at your extreme
perelles. Yeven undre our signet in our Citie of London the vth
day of Aprile." Amongst the one hundred and twenty-seven
more or less noteworthy writings described in this catalogue
after the notices of the royal letters, the searcher of the Southampton archives comes upon epistles by Nicholas Holmage
[alias Holmegge], W. Clerk, and Richard Gryme, Mayors of
Southampton in the time of Henry the Sixth, and letters from
Lords of the Council temp. Henry VIII., Edward VI., Elizabeth,
James I., and Charles the First. That the Southampton archives
have proved so rich in historic letters is the more remarkable,
because no inhabitant of the town was aware of the existence of
these particular writings, until they came to light during the
inspection that was made of the muniments of the borough by
the inspector of the Commission.
(e.) Rolls and Miscellaneous Documents.—With a single exception, the Southampton Rolls are comparatively unimportant;
but the single exception, the Roll of the Account of John Bentham, steward of the town, from Michaelmas, 7 Henry VI., to
Michaelmas, 8 Henry VI., is a record to be examined no less
carefully by general students of our social history than by annalists
of the particular community to which it pertains.
Though it preserves no bundles of personal correspondence,
and is poor in respect to several kinds of manuscripts, for which
some collections of municipal writings are chiefly valuable,
the King's Lynn muniment-room possesses in its Hall Books
(beginning with the famous Red Register, 35 Edw. I. to
19. Ric. II.), and in certain of its Letters Patent and corporate
indentures, a body of evidences that should be examined by
students who would observe the constitutional growth and
social life of the boroughs of medieval England. It has also
in its Chamberlain's Accounts and Trinity Gild Rolls, an assemblage of records that are of inferior moment to students, only
because successive antiquaries have done so much more for the
sufficient exhibition of their most interesting particulars. That
the Hall Books have hitherto missed the proper share of
attention is the more surprising, because in a well known letter
which was published so long since as 1832, in the Transactions
of the Royal Society of Antiquaries, the late Mr. Hudson
Gurney gave our constitutional historians to understand that
it would be worth their while to examine the volumes of which
he spoke at second hand. The epistle which showed that at
least on two occasions in Henry the Sixth's reign the parliamentary burgesses of Bishop's Lynn were chosen by a committee of twelve men of the borough, created no appetite
for a larger measure of information respecting the electoral
usages of the Norfolk town; and the length of the period is
only now ascertained, during which the burgesses of parliament for Lynn appear from the records of the corporation to
have been usually, if not invariably, chosen by a committee of
twelve persons, and also to set forth the extent of the much
longer period during which the ordinary freemen of the borough,
the burgesses at large as they were disdainfully designated in the
seventeenth century, had no direct voice in choosing the parliamentary representatives of their municipality. From an entry in
the Red Register, it appears that on 9th October, 48 Edw. III.,
a committee of twelve burgesses made choice of Robert Bathe
and John Waryn, to attend the parliament as the representatives
of Bishop's Lynn. Two years later (50 Edw. III.), John Dockyngg and Thomas . . . . (his surname has vanished from the
defaced record) were in like manner selected for parliamentary
service by a committee of twelve persons, appointed to choose two
fit and proper burgesses to attend the King's parliament. Henceforth to Henry the Eighth's time, all the persons, whose elections
to serve the borough as burgesses of parliament are recorded in the
extant archives of the municipality, were chosen for that purpose
by a committee of twelve individuals, taken from the ruling
body of the borough, whether that body consisted (as it did till
the eighth year of Henry the Fifth) of twenty-four jurats, or of
the "twenty-four" jurats and a subordinate council of "twentyseven" burgesses chosen yearly from the nine constabularies of
the town (viz., three representatives for each constabulary), in
accordance with the concessions made in 8 Hen. V. to the
burgesses of Lynn by their lord, the Bishop of Norwich. The
precise year of the last of these elections of parliamentary burgesses
made by a committee of twelve does not appear. But, though
burgesses of parliament for the borough were so chosen in the 1st
and 3rd years of Henry VIII., the practice of electing parliamentary representatives by a committee appointed for the purpose was
nearing its end. On 31st March, 14 Hen. VIII., instead of being
elected by a committee, Mr. Thomas Miller and Mr. Bewshere
were chosen to serve the borough in parliament by a majority
of "the twenty-four" and "the twenty-seven;" and from this
date the searcher of the Hall Books comes upon no evidence of
a revival of a usage, that seems to have been the invariable
method of making elections of this kind from the time of Edward
the Third, and may have originated in the 7th year of Edward II.,
when a congregation of the burgesses appointed a committee
of twenty-six persons to elect twelve of the more sufficient
individuals of the community, to make provision in respect to
all business touching the borough in the King's parliament and
elsewhere.
The practice of electing parliamentary representatives by a
committee having thus come to an end in the time of Henry
the Eighth, elections of that kind were henceforth, till the
middle of the seventeenth century, made by the ruling burgesses
at congregations, specially summoned for the purpose. This
change of electoral practice was followed at a brief interval by the
charter dated on 27th June, 16 Henry VIII., for the reconstitution
of the borough, a measure that, abolishing the ancient council of
"the twenty-four" jurats and the subordinate council of "the
twenty-seven" representatives of the constabularies, replaced
them with a court of twelve aldermen and a court of eighteen
common councilmen. Thus reconstituted the municipal assembly,
or "this House" as it is usually styled in the Hall Books, kept
the right of electing burgesses of parliament in its own hands
no less tenaciously and exclusively, than "the House" of "the
twenty-four" and "the twenty-seven" had held the same
privilege, to the exclusion of the inferior burgesses from participation in the power of choosing the parliamentary representatives of the community. None the less for the reconstitution
of the borough were the burgesses at large, viz., the freemen
who were neither aldermen nor common councilmen, shut out
from the parliamentary franchise. Chosen by "the House,"
taking their wages at various rates from "the House," and
holding communication on parliamentary matters with "the
House" and no other body of the townspeople, the members of
parliament for the borough regarded themselves as responsible
only to "the House" and as in no way under an obligation to
consider the wishes or to study the feelings of the burgesses,
who were not "of the House." That this state of things lasted
to the revolutionary period of the 17th century appears from
the abundant testimony of the Hall Books. But that the
"burgesses at large" not only asserted their right to vote at
the elections of their parliamentary representatives, but exercised the right in 1640, is shown by the Order of the Commons
House of Parliament, dated 15th Oct. 1642, which required the
mayor, aldermen, and common council of King's Lynn to "pay
and allowe out of the towne stocke as formerly unto John Percevall
and Thomas Toll their burgesses, for this present parliament,
as lardge an allowance per diem as they heretofore allowed
any of their aldermen that hath bene burgesses in parliament for that towne, notwithstanding the freemen of the
towne had their voyces in the choice of the said John Percivall and Tho. Toll to be their burgesses for this present parliament." During the years, that intervened between the
election of these last-named parliamentary burgesses and
the choice of members for the first parliament to meet after
Charles the Second's restoration, the question of the right of the
"burgesses at large" to vote at such elections was a source of
much contention amongst the keener politicians of the borough.
From the wording of a municipal order (8 September, 1649)
touching the election, it seems that the burgesses-at-large took
part in the choice of the Earl of Salisbury to be a parliamentary
burgess for King's Lynn; for whilst the order represents that
"the House" granted the Earl the freedom of the burgh, it adds
that "the cominalty of the burgh hath elected him a burgess
"of the parliamentt of England." But in August, 1656, General
John Desbrow and Major-General Phillip Skippon were chosen
burgesses of parliament for the borough by the municipal
"house," without the co-operation of the mere freemen; and on
the 11th of the next month it was ordered by the mayor, aldermen, and common council "that Mr. John Horsnell of London be
sent unto by this house as their solicitor in this behalfe to
attende upon the Committee of Previledges at Westminster to
make good this house's auncient custom of electing of burgesses
to set in parliament, and that an abbreviate of the records be
sent up to him in order to his prosecution of the same." That
the decision of the Committee of Privileges favoured the claims
of the house may be inferred from successive entries in the Hall
Books. In the several ensuing elections that preceded the King's
restoration the freemen at large seem to have had no share. On
19th Dec., 1656, Sir John Thorowgood was chosen to be a burgess
of parliament by "this house." In like manner on the 3rd of Jan.
1658, Mr. Toll and Captain Griffith Lloyd were chosen burgesses of
parliament for King's Lynn by the "mayor, aldermen, and common council," though "several burgesses of this burrough of the
commons at large" appeared at the town-hall and requested that
they might be allowed to take part in the election. On this occasion, after considering the claims and arguments of the petitioners,
and before proceeding to the election of the members who were in
due course chosen, the governing body of the corporation came
to a recorded judgment "that the right of election of the said
burgesses is at present in this house according to the aforesaid
order" (viz., the Order of the Committee of Privileges and the
Parliament). But on 16th April, 1660, yielding to another
demonstration of sentiment on the part of the "burgesses at
large," the House decided that, for the present election, and
without prejudice in coming time to the ancient right and
custom of the Assembly, the mere freemen should be permitted
to vote; the record of this remarkable concession running in
the Hall Book in these words, "Whereas Mr. Mayor hath this
day caused a Common Hall to be warned in order to the elec
tion of burgesses to serve in parliament to be houlden at
Westminster and severall of the members of the House being
mett together in this House, divers of the free burgesses of
this burgh came and requested that they might be admitted
to elect burgesses as theire right, which being taken into consideration this house doth think fitt for the present satisfaction of the people to suffer the commons to elect, and to wave
the election in this house for this present election." Having
thus yielded to popular feeling for a single turn, the ruling
body of the corporation never again ventured to exclude the
mere freemen from proceedings for the choice of parliamentary
burgesses. The practical effect of this tardy concession, which
implied the existence of a dormant right in the populace who
had for successive centuries been prevented from exercising it,
was that the freemen at large were admitted to the franchise
without any parliamentary enactment for their enfranchisement.
In their orders and other memoranda, touching the payment
of members of parliament, the King's Lynn Hall Books preserve
several matters to be considered by social historians. Changing
with the gradual depreciation of current money, the wages paid
to burgesses of parliament for the borough rose from two to five
shillings a day to each burgess, for each day spent either in
attendance on the parliament, or in travelling to or fro between
the parliament or the borough; and in a few cases the municipal
allowance to a burgess of parliament was as much as ten shillings a day. On his election to represent the borough in parliament, Sir Robert Hitcham, Anne of Denmark's attorney-general
and judge of the county-palatine of Ely, undertook to serve the
borough gratuitously; in consideration of which tender care for
their pecuniary resources the corporation, on the occasion of his
passing through the town on his way to Ely in July 1610,
entertained lawyer handsomely and gave him a gratuity of
twenty pounds. Four years later the Mayor of Lynn, by a municipal order dated 20th June, 1614, was "allowed for his burgis
wages for every day wherein he served this last parliament the
sum of tenne shillinges per day," it being noted in the memorandum that "he went from hence the first of Aprill last and
returned the xi of June next following." In December 1620, on
the election of Mr. Matthewe Clark and Mr. John Wallis, two
aldermen of the corporation, to serve as parliamentary burgesses,
it was ordered with the same excessive or at least unusual liberality
"that either of the said burgesses shall have for their wages
tenne shillings for every day of the said parliament and for
every day of their traveill outward and homeward." It does
not appear whether the exceptional magnitude of these three
allowances was due to exceptional circumstances. Anyhow,
though the House of Commons in 1642 ordered the Mayor,
aldermen, and common council of King's Lynn to pay their
then burgesses, Messrs. John Percevall and Thomas Toll, "as
lardge an allowance per diem as they have heretofore allowed
any of their aldermen that have been burgesses of parliament
for that towne," the municipal house had no regard for the
munificence, shown to the Mayor in 1614, and to Messrs. Clark
and Wallis in 1620, in ordering the wages of Messrs. Percevall
and Toll, who each received five shillings a day and no more for
parliamentary service from the borough treasurer.
A curious and instructive view of the dissensions and rivalries,
that troubled the inhabitants of Lynn (Bishops Lenn as the
borough was then styled) in the fifteenth century, is afforded by
the Inspeximus dated 25th Nov., 14 Henry IV. (vide pp. 191 to
194) of a memorandum touching certain decrees, made by Thomas
Archbishop of Canterbury and Lord Chancellor upon certain discords and controversies between divers of the Potentiores of
Bishop's Lenn of the one part and the Mayor, burgesses, and
community of the other part, respecting certain oppressions and
extortions committed by the said "potentiores" on the said
Mayor, burgesses, and community. From this remarkable record
it may be seen how the inhabitants of the little borough were
not only historically divisible, but were sharply and hardly
divided into three several orders, styled respectively the Potentiores, the Mediocres, and the Inferiores non Burgenses, and how
these three classes were so rigidly defined, and their respective
members so precisely catalogued, that it was known to every
man of them, and to all his acquaintance, to which of the three
orders he belonged. Further information respecting the feuds
and discords, that stirred the rival classes in the same period of
the borough's history, may be gathered (vide pp. 195 to 203)
from the Exemplification, dated 2 June, 4 Henry V., of a certain
instrument for the revocation of divers new ordinances and constitutions, and for the re-establishment of the ancient constitutions
and customs, for the election of officers in the town of Bishops
Lenn. Devised and established in the interest of municipal
peace though they were, the new ordinances and constitutions
made matters so much worse, and especially so by rendering
quarrels fiercer and spites more rancorous, that in the opinion
of the townspeople, or at least in the judgment of the prevailing party of the borough, it was needful to abolish them utterly,
in order to recover the town from evils that threatened it with
quick destruction. A few years later (8 Henry V., vide pp. 245,
246) a better remedy for the insolence of the jurats, and the
passionate discontent of the poorer burgesses and other inferior
inhabitants of the town, was devised by the Bishop of Norwich,
when he established the annually elected common-council of
"the twenty-seven," in order that, in respect to taxes for the
sovereign and talliages for local charges and necessities, the
populace of the nine constabularies should not be left completely
at the mercy of the jurats, who were invariably drawn from
the overbearing Potentiores. If they were not wholly wanting
in the virtues, it is manifest from earlier records of the community that the Potentiores were not wholly exempt from the
failings, of a dominant class. It indicates the spirit in which
they dealt with the meaner freemen and the unenfranchised residents of their town, that in the 33rd year of Edward the First,
they were at pains to procure Letters Patent under the great
seal of "Pardon and Release" (vide p. 187) "to the burgesses of
Lenn, in respect to all trespass, &c. said to have been done by
them in assessing divers talliages on the community of the said
town, without the unanimous consent of the same community, and
in levying the same talliages from the poor and but moderately
endowed men of the same community, and other great sums
under colour of certain common fines, heretofore made by them
for divers causes, beyond the sums to which the same fines
extended themselves, and in converting to their own use, and
not to the advantage of the said community, nor to the corporation of the same town, a great part of the same talliages and
other different sums of money formerly levied in the same town,
as well by occasion of the aforesaid fines as by occasion of
murage granted unto them" by the Crown. In the composition
made a few years later (October, 3 Edward II.), between the
Bishop of Norwich of the one part and the Mayor and community of the town of Lenne of the other part, it was especially
provided, for the correction of the extortionate disposition of the
Potentiores and for the fairer treatment of the Mediocres of the
community and of the Inferiores non Burgesses of the town, that
the mayor and community should henceforth cease to exact from
the poorer people of the place such immoderate "taskes and
tallyages unleeful and unresonable grevous," as had heretofore
been put "by the grete men of the towne aforesaid upon the
mene peple and the povere to their oppression and hyndryng."
The Potentiores having shown themselves thus greedy and
rapacious, it was well alike for them and their victims, when
the Bishop, as Lord of Bishop's Lenne, empowered the more
numerous but feeble folk to vote yearly for the twenty-seven
representatives, without whose concurrence the hitherto unbridled jurats should henceforth be powerless to settle the
assessments of such taxes as tenths and fifteenths, or of sums to
be levied within the borough for repairs of houses, walls, bridges,
watercourses, and other local charges.