272
ORIGIN OF TOWN COUNCILS
Four other towns, Shrewsbury, Lincoln, Gloucester, and
Northampton, obtained charters essentially identical with
that of Ipswich in this first year of John’s reign,1 a promise,
not destined to be fulfilled, of a standard type of borough
charter. Unluckily, none of the four has left a record of the
steps taken on receipt of its charter to compare with the
procedure at Ipswich. Before the end of the reign two of them,
Lincoln and Northampton, made a further advance and took
unto themselves mayors after the London fashion.2 There is
some reason to think that we have a definite record of the
first institution of a mayor and a council to act with him in
the second of these towns.
3. Northampton. On 17th February, 1215, the king in-
formed his probi homines there that he had accepted (recepimus)
William Thilly as mayor, and therefore ordered them to be
intendent to him as their mayor and to elect twelve of the more
discreet and better of their town to dispatch with him their
affairs in their town (“ ad expedienda simul cum eo négocia
vestra in villa vestra ”).3
The early date and unquestionable authenticity of this
enrolment, unknown hitherto to the historians of North-
ampton,4 make it, despite its brevity, perhaps the most valu-
able piece of information we have on the creation of town
councils in this country. The king’s acceptance of the mayor
need not in itself imply that Thilly was the first mayor of
Northampton, but the instruction to elect a council to assist
him makes it almost certain that he was.6
Notifications of the acceptance of mayors and mandates
of intendence can be paralleled from the next reign,β but the
second part of the mandate is so very exceptional as to seem
to need some special explanation. Perhaps this may be found
in the fact that it was issued from Silverstone, fourteen miles
south-west of Northampton, which John reached two days
later. He was then seeking support everywhere against the
barons who were demanding his confirmation of the charter
of Henry I. His writ may be compared, from this point of
1 B.B.C. i. 244-5, a∏d for Northampton, cf. Markham, Records of
Northampton, i. 30-1.
2 Infra, p. 198. 3 Rotuli Litterarum Clausarum, i. 188a.
11 must share the credit of calling attention to it with Miss Cam who
independently noted it in preparing a history of the borough for the Victoria
County Histories.
6 Three days later a writ was addressed to "the mayor and reeves of
Northampton" (Rot. Litt. Pat., p. 129).
β Patent Rolls, Henry III, vols. i. and ii.
NORTHAMPTON 273
view, with his more formal recognition of the London mayoralty
some eleven weeks later (9th May).
The duties of the twelve elected discretiores of Northampton
are described in general terms, but with sufficient clearness to
indicate a marked divergence from the Ipswich type of govern-
ing body. They are to transact the business of the town along
with the mayor, and though the relation may have been one
of equality at first, it is easy to understand how such a body
of well-to-do burgesses developed later into a close “ mayor’s
council.” The Ipswich jurés, on the contrary, were elected
to govern the town without any reference to the bailiffs,
though these were members of their body. They would not,
one would think, have developed naturally into the later
“ bailiffs’ council ” found in towns which had not mayors.
Indeed, as described, they are not colleagues or assistants of
any magistrate but a committee of the community, two-thirds
of whom were officials, invested with wide powers of adminis-
tration. We must suppose that this was a solution of the
problem of urban government which was found unsatisfactory
or at any rate not generally adopted. Which of these con-
trasting types of administration, if either, the burgesses of
Northampton had set up when they received their charter in
1200, it would be idle to speculate. So far as the wording
of the writ of 1215 goes, they might never have had a governing
body at all until then, but we must not strain so concise a
document. The Northampton council of twelve was after-
wards doubled, perhaps within half a century. It is not until
1358 that there is definite mention of “ the Mayor’s 24 co-
burgesses,” 1 but two lists of twenty-four burgesses in the third
quarter of the thirteenth century may represent the enlarged
council, (ɪ) The second custumal (c. 1260) is headed :
“ Consideraciones facte per xxiiii iuratos Norhampton'
scilicet Robertum Speciarium maiorem, Robertum filium
Ricardi [twenty-two other names].” 2 This suggests an official
body rather than a jury of inquiry. (2) A writ of 2nd June,
1264, addressed in the name of the captive king to twenty-four
named burgesses headed by Thomas Keynne, but not describing
him as mayor.3 If both lists represent the council it is strange
1 Bridges, Northants, i. 364. I owe this reference and the suggestion
of the early date of the doubling to Miss Cam.
2 Bateson, Borough Customs, I, xlii. Contrast the heading of the first
custumal (c. 1190) with its forty names, probably representing an assembly
of the community.
3 Foedera (Rec. ed.), i. 441.