An Act of Common Council was also passed in the following July, providing
for the election of an alderman by the inhabitants of the borough. This
ordinance was never acted upon, the appointment of Alderman of Bridge
Without remaining in the hands of the Court of Aldermen. The constitution
of the ward was never completed, no representatives were elected as Common
Councilmen, and the office of alderman for this ward consequently became a
sinecure. It has long been held by the senior member of the Court of
Aldermen, or the next in seniority who is willing to accept it; when a
vacancy occurs it is offered to the senior alderman, and on his refusal to
the next in seniority, and so on. The alderman who accepts it is called
the Father of the City, and thereupon vacates the aldermanship of his own
ward, for which a vacancy is duly declared. The curious spectacle is thus
seen of a ward presided over by an alderman, but being without a
constituency or any local representation.
The Corporation of London, having been Lord of the Manor of Southwark,
exercised their rights through the Recorder of London, whom they appointed
High Steward of Southwark. In that capacity he held Courts Leet as Steward
of the Corporation, charging the leet juries and appointing days for
receiving their reports as to nuisances. This slight jurisdiction of the
City over the ancient borough has now disappeared, consequent upon the
constitution of Southwark into a municipality by itself.
Now, having spoken of the City's jurisdiction, which, as we have seen, was
of a very light description, we must revert shortly to the earlier history
of the borough. The year 1347 found the larger part of Southwark still in
the possession of the powerful family of the Earls De Warren, whose
ancestor, William de Warren, was a great favourite of the Conqueror. This
young lord married William's daughter or stepdaughter, and received as her
dowry some 300 manors. Early in the reign of Edward III. the Earl's
Bailiff and the King's had a common box for the toll collected. The King's
Bailiff had the box, and the Earl's Bailiff the keys. At each division of
the toll the King received two-thirds and the Earl one-third of the amount
collected. In course of time the manors became vested in a larger number
of owners. This appears from the names of the manors, of which the
principal were the "Gildable Manor," or the Liberty of the Mayor, the
Manor of the Maze, the Liberty of my Lord of Barmesey (the Abbot of
Bermondsey), the Liberty of the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Liberty of
Paris Garden, and the Suffolk Manor, which comprised the property of
Brandon, duke of Suffolk.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account