Saxon Period.
We know little of the government of London during the Saxon period,
and it is only incidentally that we learn how the Londoner had become
possessed of special privileges which he continued to claim with
success through many centuries. One of the chief of these was the
claim to a separate voice in the election of the king. The citizens
did not dispute the right of election by the kingdom but they held
that that election did not necessarily include the choice of London.
An instance of this is seen in the election of Edmund Ironside,
although the Witan outside London had elected Canute. The remarkable
instance of this after the Conquest was the election of Stephen, but
William the Conqueror did not feel secure until he had the sanction of
the Londoners to his kingship, and his attitude towards London when he
hovered about the neighbourhood of the city for a time shows that he
was anxious to obtain this sanction freely rather than by compulsion.
His hopes and expectations were fulfilled when the gates of London
were opened to receive him, as already related. Athelstan's acceptance
of the London-made law for the whole kingdom, as pointed out by Mr
Gomme, is another instance of the independence of the Londoner. When
William the Conqueror granted the first charter to London he addressed
the bishop and the portreeve--the bishop as the ecclesiastical
governor and the portreeve as the representative of the civil power.
The word "port" in the title "portreeve" does not indicate the Port of
London as might naturally be supposed, for Stubbs has pointed out that
it is _porta_ not _portus_, and "although used for the city generally,
seems to refer to it specially in its character of a Mart or City of
Merchants." The Saxon title of reeve was continued during the Norman
period and the shire-reeve or sheriff has continued to our own time.
There were originally several distinct reeves, all apparently officers
appointed by the king. Some writers have supposed that a succession of
portreeves continued in London, but J. H. Round holds that this title
disappeared after the Conqueror's charter. Henry I. granted to the
city by charter the right of appointing its own sheriffs; this was a
great privilege, which, however, was recalled in the reigns of Henry
II. and Richard I., to be restored by John in 1199.
J. H. Round holds that the office of Justiciar was created by Henry
I.'s charter, and as he was the chief authority in the city this
somewhat takes off from the value of the privilege of appointing
sheriffs.
In the 12th century there was a great municipal movement over Europe.
Londoners were well informed as to what was going on abroad, and
although the rulers were always willing to wait for an opportunity of
enlarging their liberties, they remained ready to take advantage of
such circumstances as might occur. Their great opportunity occurred
while Richard I. was engaged abroad as a crusader.
In 1889 a medal was struck to commemorate the 700th anniversary of the
mayoralty which according to popular tradition was founded in 1189.
With respect to this tradition Round writes (_Commune of London_, p.
223): "The assumption that the mayoralty of London dates from the
accession of Richard I. is an absolute perversion of history," and he
adds that "there is record evidence which completely confirms the
remarkable words of Richard of Devizes, who declares that on no terms
whatever would King Richard or his father have ever assented to the
establishment of the _Communa_ in London."
The Commune.
In October 1191 the conflict between John the king's brother and
Longchamp the king's representative became acute. The latter bitterly
offended the Londoners, who, finding that they could turn the scales
to either side, named the Commune as the price of their support of
John. A small party of the citizens under Henry of Cornhill remained
faithful to the chancellor Longchamp, but at a meeting held at St
Paul's on the 8th of October, the barons welcomed the archbishop of
Rouen as chief justiciar (he having produced the king's sign manual
appointing a new commission), and they saluted John as regent. Stubbs,
in his introduction to the Chronicle of Roger de Hoveden, writes:
"This done, oaths were largely taken: John, the Justiciar and the
Barons swore to maintain the _Communa_ of London; the oath of fealty
to Richard was then sworn, John taking it first, then the two
archbishops, the bishops, the barons, and last the burghers with the
express understanding that should the king die without issue they
would receive John as his successor." Referring to this important
event Mr Round writes: "The excited citizens, who had poured out
overnight, with lanterns and torches, to welcome John to the capital,
streamed together on the morning of the eventful 8th of October at the
well-known sound of the great bell swinging out from its campanile in
St Paul's Churchyard. There they heard John take the oath to the
'Commune' like a French king or lord; and then London for the first
time had a municipality of her own."
The Mayor and Échevins.
Little is known as to what the Commune then established really was.
Round's remarkable discovery among the manuscripts of the British
Museum of the Oath of the Commune proves for the first time that
London in 1193 possessed a fully developed "Commune" of the
continental pattern. A striking point in this municipal revolution is
that the new privileges extended to the city of London were entirely
copied from those of continental cities, and Mr Round shows that there
is conclusive proof of the assertion that the Commune of London
derived its origin from that of Rouen. This MS. gives us information
which was unknown before, but upsets the received opinions as to the
early governing position of the aldermen. From this we learn that the
government of the city was in the hands of a mayor and twelve échevins
(_skivini_); both these names being French, seem for a time to have
excluded the Saxon aldermen.
Twelve years later (1205-1206) we learn from another document,
preserved in the same volume as the oath, that _alii probi homines_
were associated with the mayor and échevins to form a body of
twenty-four (that is, twelve _skivini_ and an equal number of
councillors). Round holds that the Court of Skivini and _alii probi
homines_, of which at present we know nothing further than what is
contained in the terms of the oaths, was the germ of the Common
Council. We must not suppose that when the city of London obtained the
privilege of appointing a mayor, and a citizen could boast in 1194
that "come what may the Londoners shall have no king but their
mayor," that the king did not occasionally exert his power in
suspending the liberties of the city. There were really constant
disagreements, and sometimes the king degraded the mayor and appointed
a custos or warden in his place. Several instances of this are
recorded in the 13th and 14th centuries. It is very important to bear
in mind that the mayors of London besides holding a very onerous
position were mostly men of great distinction. They often held rank
outside the city, and naturally took their place among the rulers of
the country. They were mostly representatives of the landed interests
as well as merchant princes.
There is no definite information as to when the mayor first received
the title of lord. A claim has been set up for Thomas Legge, mayor for
the second time in 1354, that he was the first lord mayor, but there
is positively no authority whatever for this claim, although it is
boldly stated that he was created lord mayor by Edward III. in this
year. Apparently the title was occasionally used, and the use
gradually grew into a prescriptive right. There is no evidence of any
grant, but after 1540 the title had become general.
Aldermen.
No record has been found of the date when the aldermen became the
official advisers of the mayor. The various wards were each presided
over by an alderman from an early period, but we cannot fix the time
when they were united as a court of aldermen. Stubbs writes: "The
governing body of London in the 13th century was composed of the
mayor, twenty-five aldermen of the wards and two sheriffs."
As we do not find any further evidence than the oath of the Commune
alluded to of the existence of "échevins" in London, it is possible
that aldermen were elected on the mayor's council under this title.
This, however, is not the opinion of Mr Round, who, as before stated,
is inclined to believe that the body of échevins became in course of
time the Court of Common Council. The aldermen are not mentioned as
the colleagues of the mayor until the very end of the 13th century,
except in the case of Fitz-Ailwin's Assize of 1189, and this, of
course, related specially to the duties of aldermen as heads of the
wards of the city.
In March 1298-1299 letters were sent from "the Mayor and Commune of
the City of London" to the municipalities of Bruges, Caen and Cambray.
Although the official form of "The Mayor and Commune" was continued
until the end of the 13th century, and it was not until early in the
14th century that the form "Mayor, Aldermen and Common Council" came
into existence, there is sufficient evidence to show that the aldermen
and common council before that time were acting with the mayor as
governors of the city. In 1377 it was ordered that aldermen could be
elected annually, but in 1384 the rule was modified so as to allow an
alderman to be re-elected for his ward at the expiration of his year
of office without any interval.
In 1394 the Ordinance respecting annual elections was repealed by the
king (Richard II.). Distinct rank was accorded to aldermen, and in the
_Liber Albus_ we are told that "it is a matter of experience that ever
since the year of our Lord 1350, at the sepulture of aldermen, the
ancient custom of interment with baronial honours was observed." When
the poll-tax of 1379 was imposed the mayor was assessed as an earl and
the aldermen as barons.
Sheriffs.
The government of the city by reeves dates back to a very early
period, and these reeves were appointed by the king. The prefix of the
various kinds of reeves made but little difference in the duties of
the office, although the area of these duties might be different.
There was slight difference between the office of sheriff and that of
portreeve, which latter does not appear to have survived the Conquest.
After the establishment of the Commune and the appointment of a mayor
the sheriffs naturally lost much of their importance, and they became
what they are styled in _Liber Albus_ "the Eyes of the Mayor." When
Middlesex was in farm to London the two sheriffs were equally sheriffs
of London and Middlesex. There is only one instance in the city
records of a sheriff of Middlesex being mentioned as distinct from the
sheriffs, and this was in 1283 when Anketin de Betteville and Walter
le Blond are described as sheriffs of London, and Gerin as sheriff of
Middlesex. By the Local Government Act of 1888 the citizens of London
were deprived of all right of jurisdiction over the county of
Middlesex, which had been expressly granted by various charters.
In 1383 it was ordained and agreed "that no person shall from
henceforth be mayor in the said city if he have not first been sheriff
of the said city, to the end that he may be tried in governance and
bounty before he attains such estate of the mayoralty."
Common Council.
The two courts--that of aldermen and that of the common council--were
probably formed about the same time, but it is remarkable that we have
no definite information on the subject. The number of members of the
common council varied greatly at different times, but the right to
determine the number was indirectly granted by the charter of Edward
III. (1341) which enables the city to amend customs and usages which
have become hard.
There have also been many changes in the mode of election. The common
council were chosen by the wards until 1351, when the appointments
were made by certain companies. In 1376 an ordinance was made by the
mayor and aldermen, with the assent of the whole commons, to the
effect that the companies should select men with whom they were
content, and none other should come to the elections of mayors and
sheriffs; that the greater companies should not elect more than six,
the lesser four and the least two. Forty-seven companies nominated 156
members. In 1383 the right of election reverted to the wards, but was
obtained again by the livery companies in 1467.
Common Hall.
The Common Hall was the successor of the folkmote, the meetings of
which were originally held in the open air at the east end of St
Paul's and afterwards in the Guildhall. These general assemblies of
the citizens are described in the old city records as _immensa
communitas_ or _immensa multitudo_ civium. The elections in Common
Hall were by the whole body of citizens until Edward I.'s reign,
citizens were then specially summoned to Common Hall by the mayor. In
Edward IV.'s reign the elections of mayor, sheriffs and other officers
and members of parliament were transferred to liverymen. Various
alterations were subsequently made and now the qualification of
electors at the election of the corporate offices of lord mayor,
sheriffs, chamberlain and minor offices in Common Hall is that of
being a liveryman of a livery company and an enrolled freeman of
London. The election of aldermen and common councilmen takes place in
the wardmotes.
Officials of the city.
The recorder, the chief official, is appointed for life. He was
formerly appointed by the city, but since the Local Government Act of
1888 he is nominated by the city and approved by the lord chancellor.
The common sergeant was formerly appointed by the city, but since 1888
by the lord chancellor. The town clerk is appointed by the city and
re-elected annually.
The chamberlain or comptroller of the king's chamber is appointed by
the livery. He was originally a king's officer and the office was
probably instituted soon after the Conquest. The remembrancer is
appointed by the common council.
The common hunt, an office abolished in 1807, was filled by John
Courtenay in 1417. The sword-bearer is noticed in the _Liber Albus_
(1419) and the first record of an appointment is dated 1426.
Later history of the corporation.
Few fundamental alterations have been made in the constitution of the
city, but in the reign of Charles II. the most arbitrary proceedings
were taken against its liberties. The king and his brother had long
entertained designs against the city, and for the purpose of crushing
them two pretexts were set up--(1) that a new rate of market tolls had
been levied by virtue of an act of common council, and (2) that a
petition to the king, in which it was alleged that by the prorogation
of parliament public justice had been interrupted, had been printed by
order of the Court of Common Council. Charles directed a writ _quo
warranto_ against the corporation of London in 1683, and the Court of
King's Bench declared its charter forfeited. Soon afterwards all the
obnoxious aldermen were displaced and others appointed in their room
by royal commission. When James II. found himself in danger from the
landing of the Prince of Orange he sent for the lord mayor and
aldermen and informed them of his determination to restore the city
charter and privileges, but he had no time to do anything before his
flight. The Convention which was summoned to meet on the 22nd of
January 1689 was converted by a formal act into a true parliament
(February 23). One of the first motions put to the House was that a
special Committee should be appointed to consider the violations of
the liberties and franchises of all the corporations of the kingdom
"and particularly of the City of London." The motion was lost but the
House resolved to bring in a bill for repealing the Corporation Act,
and ten years later (March 5) the Grand Committee of Grievances
reported to the House its opinion (1) that the rights of the City of
London in the election of sheriffs in the year 1682 were invaded and
that such invasion was illegal and a grievance, and (2) that the
judgment given upon the _Quo Warranto_ against the city was illegal
and a grievance. The committee's opinion on these two points (among
others) was endorsed by the House and on the 16th of March it ordered
a Bill to be brought in to restore all corporations to the state and
condition they were in on the 29th of May 1660, and to confirm the
liberties and franchises which at that time they respectively held and
enjoyed.[15]
When the Act for the reform of Municipal Corporations was passed in
1835 London was specially excepted from its provisions. When the
Metropolitan Board of Works was formed by the Metropolis Management
Act of 1855 the city was affected to a certain extent, but by the
Local Government Act of 1888 which founded the London County Council
the right of appointing a sheriff for Middlesex was taken away from
the city of London.
When the county of Middlesex was dissociated from the city of London
one portion was joined to the administrative county of London, and the
other to the county of Middlesex.
Privileges of the lord mayor.
The lord mayor of London has certain very remarkable privileges which
have been religiously guarded and must be of great antiquity. It is
only necessary to mention these here, but each of the privileges
requires an exhaustive examination as to its origin. They all prove
the remarkable position of Old London, and mark it off from all other
cities of modern Europe. Shortly stated the privileges are four: