Page:The New International Encyclopædia 1st ed. v. 14.djvu/154

MUNICIPALITY. 123 MUNICIPALITY. burglis were subjci-t to the rule of an elective officer called the •poitreve," who e.xerciseU in the buryh^ functions similar to those of the shire levc in the shire. The Xormans recognized the already existing privileges of the towns by granting them charters. One of the most im- portant of these privileges was the firma burgi, or lease of the town to the inhabitants in con- sideration of the pajnient of a fixed sum in lieu of all feudal dues. This involved the right of the inhabitants to elect their own niagislrales, the independent exercise of jurisdiction in their payment of the local taxes, and tlic performance of the (juota of ta.xes assigned by Parliament. . sherilf or viscount was placed by the King over each shire, and a bailitf instead of the former elective officer over each burgh. In the larger towns the bailill was allowed to assume the Xor- nian appellation of mayor. The municipal fran- chise seems to have been vested in all the resi- dent and trading inhabitants, who shared in the payment of the local taxes and the jjerformance of local duties. Titles to freedom of the town were also recognized on the grounds of birth, appren- ticeship, marriage, and sometimes free gift. In all the larger towns the trading ])opulation came to l)e divided into guilds or trading companies, through membership of which admission was ob- tained to the municipal franchise. Eventually the whole conununity was enrolled in one or other of the guilds, each of which had its prop- erty, its by-laws, and its common hall, and the conununity elected the chief officers. It was on the wealthier and more influential inhabitants that municipal offices were generally conferred; and it gradually became the practice for these functionaries to perpetuate their authority by coi')])tation. Contentions and disputes arose re- garding the right of election, and eventually the Crown threw the weight of its influence into the scale of self-elective ruling bodies. This was the period of incorporation, when charters were granted incorporating not the inha1)itants of the town, but the governing body. Xo new govern- mental powers were conferred, but the corpora- tions were given the right to hold property and to sue and be sued. The desire of the Crown to control the representatives which the towns were now allowed to send to Parliament led to a reck- less policy of granting nuinicipal charters, so that presently the urban communities were over- represented in Parliament. During the period of the early Stuarts the writ of Quo ir</)iv/(i/o was iised frecpiently to de|)rive the towns of their lilieral charters, with a view to replacing them with (barters of a less liberal type, in ordrr that the Crown might the more easily control the Par- liamentary representation of the towns. The burghs of Scotland had a history much like that of the burghs of England: their earlier charters were mere recognitions of already existing rights, and were granted to the inhabitants at large. In the course of the fourteenth and fifteenth cen- turies the municipal siifFrage fell more and more into the hands of restricted bodies of men until an act nf I4lilt gave to the councils the right of appointing their successors, the old and new council together electing the office-bearers of the corjioratinn. This state of things continued till 1S.T3. nr)l without much complaint. In the Scot- tish burghs the several trades possessed a much more exclusive monopoly than in England. Along %vith the outcry for Parliamentarv reform arose an outcry for uuiniLipal rcforni ; and a separate municipal reform act putting an end to the close system was passed fur each part of the kingdom. In the United States the English system of municipal administration became the type for the government of the early towns and cities. In nearly everi* instance a special organization was provided for the cities and was outlined in a charter granted by the colonial legislature or by the Crown. Generally the governing body of the municipality consisted of the mayor, recorder, aldermen, and councilmen. At first the corpora- tion seldom acted as the agent of the State, but was an organ for the .satisfaction of |)urcly local needs, such as the management of local [jroperty and finance. It had no power of government ex- cept the right to issue local police ordinances, (xradually, however, the municipal corporation came to be an organ for the administration of matters of State concern, as well as of purely local matters. Thus the regulation of matters relating to public education, the public health, poor relief, elections, local justice, etc.. is quite generally intrusted to the municipalities. As now undei'stood, therefore, a municipal corjiora- tion in the United Slates is a body politic and corporate created by the State for the purpose of State administration as well as of local admin- istration, and vested with certain privileges, such as the right to hold property, to sue and be sued, etc. The transformation of the municipal- ity from an organ of local government to an organ for the administration of central matters created the necessity for legislative control, which has had the result of depriving the cities to a very large extent of the management of their local affairs. The corporation is not the body of the people, nor is it the officers collectively considered, but rather that artificial body or legal entity created by the act of incorporation and limited thereby. A distinction must be made between a municipal corporation proper and what are known as fiiiasi corporations not created upon petition of the people of the district, but rather as territorial or political divisions of the State, such as counties, townships, and school districts created for the convenience of State ad- ministration. The laws regulating the incor- jmration of English towns and cities liave little application to municipal corporations in this country. Here none arc founded on coinmon law or royal charter, and liut f<"W are based upon prescription. It may be said that they exist only by legislative enactment, and possess no powers not created by statute. A few municipal corporati(ms are created by charter singly, hut general laws of incorporation have been passed in many States, and at the present time the con- stitutions of more tliaii twenty States forbid the Legislature to incorporate cities and. as a rule, villages by special act. In twelve of these the juoliil)ition extends also to amendments or changes of charters. When the incorporation is single or special the charter sets out that the inhabitants are constituted a body politic with such a name and style; that by that name they may have perfietiial succession, and may u.se a common seal, sue and be sued. etc. The terri- torial boundaries are defined and provision made as to the fonii of government — u-ually by a council made up of aldermen and councilmen. or by trustees — as to division into wards, qualifica- tions of voters, powers of city council to collect