Chapter 4

(H. Cl.)

Authorities.—Among early works may be mentioned, S. Blommaert,Discours ende ghelegentheyt van het eylandt Borneo int Jear 1609;Hachelyke reystogt van Jacob Jansz. de Roy na Borneo en Atchin in het jaar 1691; Beeckman,Visit to Borneo, 1718, in J. Pinkerton’sGeneral Collections(1808-1814); F. Valentijn inOnd en Nieuw Oost Indiën(Dordrecht, 1724-1726). See also H. Keppel,Expedition to Borneo of H.M.S. “Dido”(London, 1846); R. Mundy,Narrative of Events in Borneo and Celebes(London, 1848); F.S. Marryat,Borneo, &c. (1848); P.J. Veth,Borneo’s Westerafdeeling(Zalt-Bommel, 1854 and 1856); S. Müller,Reizen en onderzoekingen in den Indischen Archipel(Amsterdam, 1857); C. Bock,Head-hunters of Borneo(London, 1881), andReis in Oost en Zuid-Borneo(The Hague, 1887); J. Hatton,The New Ceylon, a Sketch of British North Borneo(London, 1882); F. Hatton,North Borneo(London, 1885); T. Posewitz,Borneo ... Verbreitung der nutzbaren Mineralien(Berlin, 1889), Eng. trans.,Borneo; its Geology and Mineral Resources(London, 1892); J. Whitehead,Exploration of Mount Kini Balu(London, 1893); Mrs W.B. Pryor,A Decade in Borneo(London, 1894); H. Ling Roth,The Natives of Sarawak and North Borneo(London, 1896); G.A.F. Molengraaf,Geologische Verkinningstochten in Centraal Borneo(Leiden, 1900, Eng. trans. 1902); A.W. Niewenhuis,In Centraal Borneo(Leiden, 1901), andQuer durch Borneo(Leiden, 1904), &c.; W.H. Furness,Home Life of Borneo Head-hunters(London, 1902); O. Beccari,Nelle Foreste di Borneo(Florence, 1902), Eng. trans.,Wanderings in the Great Forests of Borneo(London, 1904); D. Cator,Everyday Life among the Head-hunters(London, 1905). For geology, besides the works of Posewitz and Molengraaf already cited, see R.B. Newton inGeol. Mag., 1897, pp. 407-415, andProc. Malac. Soc., London, vol. v. (1902-1903), pp. 403-409. A series of papers on the palaeontology of the island will be found in the several volumes of theSamml. Geol. R. Mus., Leiden.

BORNHOLM,an island in the Baltic Sea, 22 m. S.E. of the Swedish coast, belonging to Denmark, lying on 15° E., and between 55° and 55° 18′ N., and measuring 24 m. from S.E. to N.W. and 19 (extreme) from E. to W. Pop. (1901) 40,889. The surface is generally hilly; the scenery is fine in the north, where the cliffs reach a height of 135 ft., and the granite hill of Helligdomsklipper dominates the island. Besides freestone, exported for building, limestone, blue marble, and porcelain-clay are worked. A little coal is found and used locally, but it is not of good quality. Oats, flax and hemp are cultivated. The inhabitants are employed in agriculture, fishing, brewing, distillation and the manufacture of earthenware. Weaving and clock-making are also carried on to some extent. The capital is Rönne (115 m. by sea from Copenhagen), and there are five other small towns on the island—Svanike, Neksö, Hasle, Allinge, and Sandvig. A railway connects Rönne with Neksö (22 m. E. by S.), where a bust commemorates J.N. Madvig, the philologist, who was born there in 1804 (d. 1886). Blanch’s Hotel, 10 m. N. of Rönne, is the most favoured resort on the island, which attracts many visitors. On the north-west coast are the ruins of the castle of Hammershus, which was built in 1158, and long served as a state prison; while another old castle, erected by Christian V. in 1684, and important as commanding the entrance to the Baltic, is situated on Christiansö, one of a small group of islands 15 m. E. by N. The island of Bornholm has had an eventful history. In early times it was long the independent seat of marauding Vikings. In the 12th century it became a fief of the archbishop of Lund. In 1510 it was captured by the Hanseatic League, in 1522 it came under Danish sway, and in 1526 it was made directly subject to the city of Lübeck. In 1645 the Swedes took it by storm, and their possession of it was confirmed by the peace of Roskilde in 1658; but the sympathies of the people were with Denmark, and a popular insurrection succeeded in expelling the Swedish forces, the island coming finally into the possession of Denmark in 1660.

BORNIER, HENRI,Vicomte de(1825-1901) French poet and dramatist, was born at Lunel (Hérault) on the 25th of December 1825. He came to Paris in 1845 With the object of studying law, but in that year he published a volume of verse,Les Premières Feuilles, and the Comédie Francaise accepted a play of his entitledLe Mariage de Luther. He was given a post in the library of the Arsenal, where he served for half a century, becoming director in 1889. In 1875 was produced at the Théâtre Français his heroic drama in verse,La Fille de Roland. The action of the play turns on the love of Gérald, son of the traitor Ganelon, for the daughter of Roland. The patriotic subject and the nobility of the character of Gérald, who renounces Berthe when he learns his real origin, procured for the piece a great success. The conflict between honour and love and the grandiose sentiment of the play inevitably provoked comparison with Corneille. The piece would indeed be a masterpiece if, as its critics were not slow to point out, the verse had been quite equal to the subject. Among the numerous other works of M. deBornier should be mentioned:Dimitri(1876), libretto of an opera by M.V. de Jonciêres; and the dramas,Les Noces d’Allila(1880) andMahomet(1888). The production of this last piece was forbidden in deference to the representations of the Turkish ambassador. Henri de Bornier was critic of theNouvelle Revuefrom 1879 to 1887. HisPoésies complèteswere published in 1894. He died in January 1901.

BORNU,a country in the Central Sudan, lying W. and S. of Lake Chad. It is bounded W. and S. by the Hausa states and N. by the Sahara. Formerly an independent Mahommedan sultanate it has been divided between Great Britain, Germany and France. To France has fallen a portion of northern Bornu and also Zinder (q.v.), a tributary state to the north-west, while the south-west part is incorporated in the German colony of Cameroon. Three-fourths of Bornu proper, some 50,000 sq. m., forms part of the British protectorate of Nigeria.

Bornu is for the most part an alluvial plain, the country sloping gradually to Lake Chad, which formerly spread over a much larger area than it now occupies. The Komadugu (i.e.river) Waube—generally known as the Yo—and its tributaries rise in the highlands which, beyond the western border of Bornu, form the watershed between the Niger and Chad systems, and flow north and east across the plains to Lake Chad, the Yo in its last few miles marking the frontier between the French and British possessions. In the south-west a part of Bornu drains to the Benue. The rivers are intermittent, and water in southern Bornu is obtained only from wells, which are sunk to a great depth. The vast plain of Bornu is stoneless, except for rare outcrops of ironstone, and consists of the porous fissured black earth called “cotton soil” in India, alternating with, or more probably overlaid by, sand. Throughout the flat country water is apparently found everywhere at a depth of 54 ft., corresponding to the level of Chad. Towards Damjiri in the north-west the country becomes more broken, hilly and timbered. In the south limestone is found near Gujba and also along the Gongola tributary of the Benue. A forest of red and green barked acacia, yielding the species of gum most valuable in the market, extends from the Gongola to Gujba. Immense baobabs (Adansonia digitata), fine tamarinds and a few trees of the genusFicusare met with in the south. North of Maifoni (latitude 12° N.) the baobab ceases, except at Kuka, where extensive plantations have been made, and its place is taken by theKigeliaand also by a very handsome species ofDiospyros. North of Kuka is a dense belt ofHyphaenepalm with fine tamarinds and figs. Cotton and indigo grow wild, and afford the materials for the cloths, finely dyed with blue stripes, which form the staple fabric of the country. On the shores of Lake Chad the cotton grown is of a peculiarly fine quality. Rice and wheat of excellent quality are raised, but in small quantities, the staple food being a species of millet calledgussub, which is made into a kind of paste and eaten with butter or honey. Ground-nuts, yams, sweet potatoes, several sorts of beans and grains, peppers, onions, water-melons and tomatoes are grown. Of fruit trees the country possesses the lime and fig.

Wild animals, in great numbers, find both food and cover in the extensive districts of wood and marsh. Lions, giraffes, elephants, hyenas, crocodiles, hippopotami, antelopes, gazelles and ostriches are found. The horse, the camel and the ox are the chief domestic animals; all are used as beasts of burden. The country abounds with bees, and honey forms one of the chief Bornuese delicacies.

The climate, especially from March to the end of June, is oppressively hot, rising sometimes to 105° and 107°, and even during most of the night not falling much below 100°. In May the wet season begins, with violent storms of thunder and lightning. In the end of June the rivers and lakes begin to overflow, and for several months the rains, accompanied with sultry weather, are almost incessant. The inhabitants at this season suffer greatly from fevers. In October the rains abate; cool, fresh winds blow from the west and north-west; and for several months the climate is healthy and agreeable.

Inhabitants.—The inhabitants, of whom the great majority profess Mahommedanism, are divided into Negroes and those of mixed blood,i.e.Negro and Berber, Arab or other crossing. The total population of British Bornu is estimated at 500,000. The dominant tribe, called Bornuese, Berberi or Kanuri, a Negro race with an infusion of Berber blood, have black skins, large mouths, thick lips and broad noses, but good teeth and high foreheads. The females add to their want of beauty by extensive tattooing; they also stain their faces with indigo, and dye their front teeth black and their canine teeth red. The law allows polygamy, but the richest men have seldom more than two or three wives. The marriage ceremonies last for a whole week, the first three days being spent in feasting on the favourite national dishes, and the others appropriated to certain symbolical rites. A favourite amusement is the watching of wrestling matches. A game bearing some resemblance to chess, played with beans and holes in the sand, is also a favourite occupation.

The pastoral districts of the country are occupied by the Shuwas, who are of Arab origin, and speak a well-preserved dialect of Arabic. Of the date of their immigration from the East there is no record; but they were in the country as early as the middle of the 17th century. They are divided into numerous distinct clans. Their villages in general consist of rudely constructed huts, of an exaggerated conical form. Another tribe, called La Salas, inhabits a number of low fertile islands in Lake Chad, separated from the mainland by fordable channels.

The Bornuese are noted horsemen, and in times of war the horses, as well as the riders, used to be cased in light iron mail. The Shuwas, however, are clad only in a light shirt, and the Kanembu spearmen go almost naked, and fight with shield and spear. It is indispensable to a chief of rank that he should possess a huge belly, and when high feeding cannot produce this, padding gives the appearance of it. Notwithstanding the heat of the climate, the body is enveloped in successive robes, the number indicating the rank of the wearer. The head likewise is enclosed in numerous turbans. The prevailing language in Bornu is the Kanuri. It has no affinity, according to Heinrich Barth, with the great Berber family. A grammar was published in 1854 by S.W. Koelle, as well as a volume of tales and fables, with a translation and vocabulary.

The towns in Bornu, which have populations varying from 10,000 to 50,000 or more, are surrounded with walls 35 or 40 ft. in height and 20 ft. in thickness, having at each of the four corners a triple gate, composed of strong planks of wood, with bars of iron. The abodes of the principal inhabitants form an enclosed square, in which are separate houses for each of the wives; the chief’s palace consists of turrets connected together by terraces. These are well built of a reddish clay, highly polished, so as to resemble stucco; the interior roof, though composed only of branches, is tastefully constructed. Maidugari, which in 1908 became the seat of the native government, is a thriving commercial town some 70 m. south-west of Lake Chad. The former capital, Kuka (q.v.), and Ngornu (the town of “blessing”), are near the shores of Lake Chad. On the Yo are still to be seen extensive remains of Old Bornu or Birni and Gambarou or Ghambaru, which were destroyed by the Fula about 1809. Dikwa, the capital chosen by Rabah (see below), lies in the German part of Bornu.

History.—The history of Bornu goes back to the 9th centuryA.D., but its early portions are very fragmentary and dubious. The first dynasty known is that of the Sefuwa or descendants of Sef, which came to the throne in the person of Dugu or Duku, and had its capital at Njimiye (Jima) in Kanem on the north-east shores of Lake Chad. The Sefuwa are of Berber origin, the descent from Sef, the Himyaritic ruler, being mythical. From this Berber strain comes the name Berberi or Ba-Berberche, applied by the Hausa to the inhabitants of Bornu. Mahommedanism was adopted towards the end of the 11th century, and has since continued the religion of the country. From 1194 to 1220 reigned Selma II., under whom the power of the kingdom was greatly extended; and Dunama II., his successorwas also a powerful and warlike prince. In the following reigns the prosperity of the country began to diminish, and about 1386 the dynasty was expelled from Njimiye, and forced to seek refuge in the western part of its territory by the invasion of the Bulala. Mai Ali (I.) Ghajideni, who founded the city of Birni, rendered his country once more redoubtable and strong. His successor, Idris II., completely vanquished the Bulala and subjugated Kanem; and under Mahommed V., the next monarch, Bornu reached its highest pitch of greatness. At this period Zinder became a tributary state. A series of for the most part peaceful reigns succeeded till about the middle of the 18th century, when Ali (IV.) Omarmi entered upon a violent struggle with the Tuareg or Imoshagh. Under his son Ahmed (about 1808) the kingdom began to be harassed by the Fula, who had already conquered the Hausa country. Expelled from his capital by the invaders, Ahmed was only restored by the assistance of the fakir Mahommed al-Amin al-Kanemi, who, pretending to a celestial mission, hoisted the green flag of the Prophet, and undertook the deliverance of his country. The Fula appear to have been taken by surprise, and were in ten months driven completely out of Bornu. The conqueror invested the nearest heir of the ancient kings with all the appearance of sovereignty—reserving for himself, however, under the title of sheik, all its reality. The court of the sultan (shehu) was established at New Bornu, or Birni, which was made the capital, the old city having been destroyed during the Fula invasion; while the sheik, in military state, took up his residence at the new city of Kuka. Fairly established, he ruled the country with a rod of iron, and at the same time inspired his subjects with a superstitious notion of his sanctity. His zeal was peculiarly directed against moral or religious offences. The most frivolous faults of women, as talking too loud, and walking in the street unveiled, rendered the offender liable to public indictment, while graver errors were visited with the most ignominious punishments, and often with death itself. Kanemi died in 1835, and was succeeded by his son, Sheik Omar, who altogether abolished the nominal kingship of the Sefuwa.

During Omar’s reign, which lasted about fifty years, Bornu was visited by many Europeans, who reached it via Tripoli and the Sahara. The first to enter the country were Walter Oudney, Hugh Clapperton and Dixon Denham (1823). They were followed in 1851-1855 by Heinrich Barth. Later travellers included Gerhard Rohlfs (1866) and Gustav Nachtigal. All these travellers were well received by the Kanuri, whose power from the middle of the 19th century began to decay. This was foreseen by Barth; and Nachtigal, who in 1870 conveyed presents sent by King William of Prussia, in acknowledgment of the sheik’s kindness to many German explorers, writes thus in December 1872:

“The rapid declension of Bornu is an undeniable and lamentable fact. It is taking place with increasing rapidity, and the boundless weakness of Sheik Omar—otherwise so worthy and brave a man—must bear almost all the blame. His sons and ministers plunder the provinces in an almost unheard-of manner; trade and intercourse are almost at a standstill; good faith and confidence exist no more. The indolence of the court avoids military expeditions, and anarchy and a lack of security on the routes are the consequences.... Thus the sheik and the land grow poorer and poorer, and public morality sinks lower and lower.”

After the visit of Nachtigal the country was visited by no European traveller until 1892, when Colonel P.L. Monteil resided for a time at Kuka during his great journey from the Senegal to Tripoli. The French traveller noticed many signs of decadence, the energy of the people being sapped by luxury, while a virtual anarchy prevailed owing to rivalries and intrigues among members of the royal family. The chief of Zinder had ceased to pay tribute, and the sultan was not strong enough to exact it by force. At the same time a danger was threatening from the south-east, where the negro adventurer Rabah, once a slave of Zobeir Pasha, was menacing the kingdom of Bagirmi. After making himself master of the fortified town of Manifa, Rabah proceeded against Bornu, defeating the army of the sultan Ahsem in two pitched battles. In December 1893 Ahsem fled from Kuka, which was entered by Rabah and soon afterwards destroyed, the capital being transferred to Dikwa in the south-east of the kingdom. These events ruined for many years the trade between Tripoli and Kuka by the long-established route via Bilma. Rabah had raised a large, well-drilled army, and proved a formidable opponent to the French in their advance on Lake Chad from the south. However in 1900 he was killed at Kussuri near the lower Shari, by the combined forces of three French expeditions which had been converging from the Congo, the Sahara and the Niger.

By an Anglo-French agreement of 1898 the tributary state of Zinder in the north had been included in the French sphere, and after the defeat of Rabah French military expeditions occupied both the German and British portions of Bornu, but in 1902 on the appearance of British and German expeditions the French withdrew to their own country east of the Shari. The British placed on the throne of Bornu Shehu Garbai, a descendant of the ancient sultans, and Kuka was again chosen as the capital of the state. From that date British Bornu has been under administrative control. It has been divided into East and West Bornu, the line of division being fixed approximately at longitude 12°, and placed under the administration of a resident. Maifoni and Kuka were selected for British stations in the east, and Damjiri and Gujba in the west. Garrisons are quartered at these points. The province has been mapped, and a network of tracks available for wheeled transport has been made through it. Water communication with the Benue and Niger has been opened through the Gongola river. Theshehu, who took the oath of allegiance to the British crown on the occasion of his formal installation in November 1904, is maintained in all local dignity as a native chief, and co-operates loyally with the British administration. Peace has prevailed in Bornu since the British occupation, and it is estimated that the population has increased by immigration to about 50% more than it was in 1902. The people are industrious. Extensive areas are being brought under cultivation, and taxes are collected without difficulty. Owing to its increasing commercial importance, the native capital was in 1908 transferred to Maidugari (see alsoNigeria:History;andRabah).

Authorities.—Heinrich Barth’sTravels in North and Central Africa(1857, new ed., London, 1890) contains an exact picture of the state in the period (c. 1850) preceding its decay. The earlierTravelsof Denham and Clapperton (London, 1828) may also be consulted, as well as Rohlfs,Land und Volk in Afrika(Bremen, 1870); Nachtigal,Sahara und Sudan, vol. i. (Berlin, 1879); and Monteil,de St.-Louis à Tripoli par le lac Tchad(Paris, 1895). For later information consult Lady Lugard’sA Tropical Dependency(London, 1905), and theAnnual Reports, from 1900 onward, on Northern Nigeria, issued by the Colonial Office, London.

(F. L. L.)

BORODIN, ALEXANDER PORFYRIEVICH(1834-1887), Russian musical composer, natural son of a Russian prince, was born in St Petersburg on the 12th of November 1834. He was brought up to the medical profession, and in 1862 was appointed assistant professor of chemistry at the St Petersburg academy of medicine. He wrote several works on chemistry, and took a leading part in advocating women’s education, helping to found the school of medicine for women, and lecturing there from 1872 till his death. But he is best known as a musician. His interest in music was indeed stimulated from 1862 onwards by his friendship with Balakirev, and from 1863 by his marriage with a lady who was an accomplished pianist; but in his earlier years he had been proficient both in playing the piano, violin, ’cello and other instruments, and also in composing; and during life he did his best to pursue his studies in both music and chemistry with equal enthusiasm. Like other Russian composers he owed much to the influence of Liszt at Weimar. His first symphony was written in 1862-1867; his operaPrince Igor, begun in 1869, was left unfinished at his death, and was completed by Rimsky-Korsakov and Glazounov (1889); his symphonic sketch, “In the Steppes” (1880) is, however, his best-known work. Borodin also wrote a second symphony (1871-1877), part of a third (orchestrated after his death by Glazounov), and a few string quartets and some fine songs. His music is characteristically Russian, and of an advanced modern type. He died suddenly at St Petersburg, on the 28th of February 1887.

BORODINO,a village of Russia, 70 m. W. by S. of Moscow, on the Kolotscha, an affluent of the river Moskva, famous as the scene of a great battle between the army of Napoleon and the Russians under Kutusov on the 7th of September 1812. Though the battle is remembered chiefly for the terrible losses incurred by both sides, in many respects it is an excellent example of Napoleon’s tactical methods. After preliminary fighting on the 5th of September both sides prepared for battle on the 6th, Napoleon holding back in the hope of confirming the enemy in his resolution to fight a decisive battle. For the same reason the French right wing, which could have manoeuvred the Russians from their position, was designedly weakened. The Russian right, bent back at an angle and strongly posted, was also neglected, for Napoleon intended to make a direct frontal attack. The enemy’s right centre near the village of Borodino was to be attacked by the viceroy of Italy, Eugene, who was afterwards to roll up the Russian line towards its centre, the so-called “great redoubt,” which was to be attacked directly from the front by Ney and Junot. Farther to the French right, Davout was to attack frontally a group of field works on which the Russian left centre was formed; and the extreme right of the French army was composed of the weak corps of Poniatowski. The cavalry corps were assigned to the various leaders named, and the Guard was held in reserve. The whole line was not more than about 2 m. long, giving an average of over 20 men per yard. When the Russians closed on their centre they were even more densely massed, and their reserves were subjected to an effective fire from the French field guns. At 6A.M.on the 7th of September the French attack began. By 8A.M.the Russian centre was driven in, and though a furious counter-attack enabled Prince Bagration’s troops to win back their original line, fresh French troops under Davout and Ney drove them back again. But the Russians, though they lost ground elsewhere, still clung to the great redoubt, and for a time the advance of the French was suspended by Napoleon’s order, owing to a cavalry attack by the Russians on Eugene’s extreme left. When this alarm was ended the advance was resumed. Napoleon had now collected a sufficient target for his guns. A terrific bombardment by the artillery was followed by the decisive charge of the battle, made by great masses of cavalry. The horsemen, followed by the infantry, charged at speed, broke the Russian line in two, and the French squadrons entered the gorge of the great redoubt just as Eugene’s infantry climbed up its faces. In a fearfulmêléethe Russian garrison of the redoubt was almost annihilated. The defenders were now dislodged from their main line and the battle was practically at an end. Napoleon has been criticized for not using the Guard, which was intact, to complete the victory. There is, however, no evidence that any further expenditure of men would have had good results. Napoleon had imposed his will on the enemy so far that they ceded possession of Moscow without further resistance. That the defeat and losses of the Russian field army did not end the war was due to the national spirit of the Russians, not to military miscalculations of Napoleon. Had it not been for this spirit, Borodino would have been decisive of the war without’the final blow of the Guard. As it was, the Russians lost about 42,000 men out of 121,000; Napoleon’s army (of which one-half consisted of the contingents of subject allies-Germany, Poland, Switzerland, Holland, &c.) 32,000 out of 130,000 (Berndt,Zahl im Kriege). On the side of the French 31 general officers were killed, wounded or taken, and amongst the killed were General Montbrun, who fell at the head of his cavalry corps, and Auguste Caulaincourt, who took Montbrun’s place and fell in themêléein the redoubt. The Russians lost 22 generals, amongst them Prince Bagration, who died of his wounds after the battle, and to whose memory a monument was erected on the battle-field by the tsar Nicholas I.

BOROLANITE,one of the most remarkable rocks of the British Isles, found on the shores of Loch Borolan in Sutherlandshire, after which it has been named. In this locality there is a considerable area of granite rich in red alkali felspar, and passing, by diminution in the amount of its quartz, into quartz-syenites (nordmarkites) and syenites. At the margins of the outcrop patches of nepheline-syenite occur; usually the nepheline is decomposed, but occasionally it is well-preserved; the other ingredients of the rock are brown garnet (melanite) and aegirine. The abundance of melanite is very unusual in igneous rocks, though some syenites, leucitophyres, and aegirine-felsites resemble borolanite in this respect. In places the nepheline-syenite assumes the form of a dark rock with large rounded white spots. These last consist of an intermixture of nepheline or sodalite and alkali-felspar. From the analogy of certain leucite-syenites which are known in Arkansas, it is very probable that these spots represent original leucites which have been changed into aggregates of the above-named minerals. They resemble leucite in their shape, but have not yet been proved to have its crystalline outlines. The “pseudo-leucites,” as they have been called, measure one-quarter to three-quarters of an inch across. The dark matrix consists of biotite, aegirine-augite and melanite. Connected with the borolanite there are other types of nepheline-syenite and pegmatite. In Finland, melanite-bearing nepheline rocks have been found and described as Ijolite, but the only other locality for melanite-leucite-syenite is Magnet Cove in Arkansas.

(J. S. F.)

BORON(symbol B, atomic weight 11), one of the non-metallic elements, occurring in nature in the form of boracic (boric) acid, and in various borates such as borax, tincal, boronatrocalcite and boracite. It was isolated by J. Gay Lussac and L. Thénard in 1808 by heating boron trioxide with potassium, in an iron tube. It was also isolated at about the same time by Sir H. Davy, from boracic acid. It may be obtained as a dark brown amorphous powder by placing a mixture of 10 parts of the roughly powdered oxide with 6 parts of metallic sodium in a red-hot crucible, and covering the mixture with a layer of well-dried common salt. After the vigorous reaction has ceased and all the sodium has been used up, the mass is thrown into dilute hydrochloric acid, when the soluble sodium salts go into solution, and the insoluble boron remains as a brown powder, which may by filtered off and dried. H. Moissan (Ann. Chim. Phys., 1895, 6, p. 296) heats three parts of the oxide with one part of magnesium powder. The dark product obtained is washed with water, hydrochloric acid and hydrofluoric acid, and finally calcined again with the oxide or with borax, being protected from air during the operation by a layer of charcoal. Pure amorphous boron is a chestnut-coloured powder of specific gravity 2.45; it sublimes in the electric arc, is totally unaffected by air at ordinary temperatures, and burns on strong ignition with production of the oxide B2O3and the nitride BN. It combines directly with fluorine at ordinary temperature, and with chlorine, bromine and sulphur on heating. It does not react with the alkali metals, but combines with magnesium at a low red heat to form a boride, and with other metals at more or less elevated temperatures. It reduces many metallic oxides, such as lead monoxide and cupric oxide, and decomposes water at a red heat. Heated with sulphuric acid and with nitric acid it is oxidized to boric acid, whilst on fusion with alkaline carbonates and hydroxides it gives a borate of the alkali metal. Like silicon and carbon, very varying values had been given for its specific heat, until H.F. Weber showed that the specific heat increases rapidly with increasing temperature. By strongly heating a mixture of boron trioxide and aluminium, protected from the air by a layer of charcoal, F. Wöhler and H. Sainte-Claire Deville obtained a grey product, from which, on dissolving out the aluminium with sodium hydroxide, they obtained a crystalline product, which they thought to be a modification of boron, but which was shown later to be a mixture of aluminium borides with more or less carbon. Boron dissolves in molten aluminium, and on cooling, transparent, almost colourless crystals are obtained, possessing a lustre, hardness and refractivity near that of the diamond. In 1904 K.A. Kühne (D.R.P. 147,871) described a process in which external heating is not necessary, a mixture of aluminium turnings, sulphur and boric acid being ignited by a hot iron rod, the resulting aluminium sulphide, formed as a by-product, being decomposed by water.

Boron hydride has probably never been isolated in the pure condition; on heating boron trioxide with magnesium filings, a magnesium boride Mg3B2is obtained, and if this be decomposed with dilute hydrochloric acid a very evil-smelling gas, consisting of a mixture of hydrogen and boron hydride, is obtained. This mixture burns with a green flame forming boron trioxide; whilst boron is deposited on passing the gas mixture through a hot tube, or on depressing a cold surface in the gas flame. By cooling it with liquid air Sir W. Ramsay and H.S. Hatfield obtained from it a gas of composition B3H3. The mixture probably contained also some BH3(W. Ramsay and H.S. Hatfield,Proc. Chem. Soc., 17, p. 152). Boron fluoride BF3was first prepared in 1808 by Gay Lussac and L. Thénard and is best obtained by heating a mixture of the trioxide and fluorspar with concentrated sulphuric acid. It is a colourless pungent gas which is exceedingly soluble in water. It fumes strongly in air, and does not attack glass. It rapidly absorbs the elements of water wherever possible, so that a strip of paper plunged into the gas is rapidly charred. It does not burn, neither does it support combustion. A saturated solution of the gas, in water, is a colourless, oily, strongly fuming liquid which after a time decomposes, with separation of metaboric acid, leaving hydrofluoboric acid HF·BF3in solution. This acid cannot be isolated in the free condition, but many of its salts are known. Boron fluoride also combines with ammonia gas, equal volumes of the two gases giving a white crystalline solid of composition BF3·NH3; with excess of ammonia gas, colourless liquids BF3·2NH3and BF3·3NH3are produced, which on heating lose ammonia and are converted into the solid form.Boron chloride BCl3results when amorphous boron is heated in chlorine gas, or more readily, on passing a stream of chlorine over a heated mixture of boron trioxide and charcoal, the volatile product being condensed in a tube surrounded by a freezing mixture. It is a colourless fuming liquid boiling at 17-18° C, and is readily decomposed by water with formation of boric and hydrochloric acids. It unites readily with ammonia gas forming a white crystalline solid of composition 2BCl3·3NH3.Boron bromide BBr3can be formed by direct union of the two elements, but is best obtained by the method used for the preparation of the chloride. It is a colourless fuming liquid boiling at 90.5° C. With water and with ammonia it undergoes the same reactions as the chloride. Boron and iodine do not combine directly, but gaseous hydriodic acid reacts with amorphous boron to form the iodide, BI3, which can also be obtained by passing boron chloride and hydriodic acid through a red-hot porcelain tube. It is a white crystalline solid of melting point 43 C.; it boils at 210° C., and it can be distilled without decomposition. It is decomposed by water, and with a solution of yellow phosphorus in carbon bisulphide it gives a red powder of composition PBI2, which sublimesin vacuoat 210° C. to red crystals, and when heated in a current of hydrogen loses its iodine and leaves a residue of boron phosphide PB.Boron nitride BN is formed when boron is burned either in air or in nitrogen, but can be obtained more readily by heating to redness in a platinum crucible a mixture of one part of anhydrous borax with two parts of dry ammonium chloride. After fusion, the melt is well washed with dilute hydrochloric acid and then with water, the nitride remaining as a white powder. It can also be prepared by heating borimide B2(NH)3; or by heating boron trioxide with a metallic cyanide. It is insoluble in water and unaffected by most reagents, but when heated in a current of steam or boiled for some time with a caustic alkali, slowly decomposes with evolution of ammonia and the formation of boron trioxide or an alkaline borate; it dissolves slowly in hydrofluoric acid.Borimide B2(NH)3is obtained on long heating of the compound B2S3·6NH2in a stream of hydrogen, or ammonia gas at 115-120° C. It is a white solid which decomposes on heating into boron nitride and ammonia. Long-continued heating with water also decomposes it slowly.Boron sulphide B2S3can be obtained by the direct union of the two elements at a white heat or from the tri-iodide and sulphur at 440° C., but is most conveniently prepared by heating a mixture of the trioxide and carbon in a stream of carbon bisulphide vapour. It forms slightly coloured small crystals possessing a strong disagreeable smell, and is rapidly decomposed by water with the formation of boric acid and sulphuretted hydrogen. A pentasulphide B2S5is prepared, in an impure condition, by heating a solution of sulphur in carbon bisulphide with boron iodide, and forms a white crystalline powder which decomposes under the influence of water into sulphur, sulphuretted hydrogen and boric acid.Boron trioxide B2O3is the only known oxide of boron; and may be prepared by heating amorphous boron in oxygen, or better, by strongly igniting boric acid. After fusion the mass solidifies to a transparent vitreous solid which dissolves readily in water to form boric acid (q.v.); it is exceedingly hygroscopic and even on standing in moist air becomes opaque through absorption of water and formation of boric acid. Its specific gravity is 1.83 (J. Dumas). It is not volatile below a white heat, and consequently, if heated with salts of more volatile acids, it expels the acid forming oxide from such salts; for example, if potassium sulphate be heated with boron trioxide, sulphur trioxide is liberated and potassium borate formed. It also possesses the power of combining with most metallic oxides at high temperatures, forming borates, which in many cases show characteristic colours. Many organic compounds of boron are known; thus, from the action of the trichloride on ethyl alcohol or on methyl alcohol, ethyl borate B(OC2H5)3and methyl borate B(OCH3)3are obtained. These are colourless liquids boiling at 119° C. and 72° C. respectively, and both are readily decomposed by water. By the action of zinc methyl on ethyl borate, in the requisite proportions, boron trimethyl is obtained, thus:—2B(OC2H5)2+ 6Zn(CH3)2= 2B(CH3)3+ 6Zn<{ CH3/ OC2H5} as a colourless spontaneously inflammable gas of unbearable smell. Boron triethyl B(C2H5)3is obtained in the same manner, by using zinc ethyl. It is a colourless spontaneously inflammable liquid of boiling point 95° C. By the action of one molecule of ethyl borate on two molecules of zinc ethyl, the compound B(C2H5)2·OC2H5diethylboron ethoxide is obtained as a colourless liquid boiling at 102° C. By the action of water it is converted into B(C2H5)2·OH, and this latter compound on exposure to air takes up oxygen slowly, forming the compound B·C2H5·OC2H5·OH, which, with water, gives B(C2H5)·(OH)2. From the condensation of two molecules of ethyl borate with one molecule of zinc ethyl the compound B2·C2H5·(OC2H5)5is obtained as a colourless liquid of boiling point. 112° C. Boron triethyl and boron trimethyl both combine with ammonia.The atomic weight of boron has been determined by estimating the water content of pure borax (J. Berzelius), also by conversion of anhydrous borax into sodium chloride (W. Ramsay and E. Aston) and from analysis of the bromide and chloride (Sainte-Claire Deville); the values obtained ranging from 10.73 to 11.04. Boron can be estimated by precipitation as potassium fluoborate, which is insoluble in a mixture of potassium acetate and alcohol. For this purpose only boric acid or its potassium salt must be present; and to ensure this, the borate can be distilled with sulphuric acid and methyl alcohol and the volatile ester absorbed in potash.

Boron chloride BCl3results when amorphous boron is heated in chlorine gas, or more readily, on passing a stream of chlorine over a heated mixture of boron trioxide and charcoal, the volatile product being condensed in a tube surrounded by a freezing mixture. It is a colourless fuming liquid boiling at 17-18° C, and is readily decomposed by water with formation of boric and hydrochloric acids. It unites readily with ammonia gas forming a white crystalline solid of composition 2BCl3·3NH3.

Boron bromide BBr3can be formed by direct union of the two elements, but is best obtained by the method used for the preparation of the chloride. It is a colourless fuming liquid boiling at 90.5° C. With water and with ammonia it undergoes the same reactions as the chloride. Boron and iodine do not combine directly, but gaseous hydriodic acid reacts with amorphous boron to form the iodide, BI3, which can also be obtained by passing boron chloride and hydriodic acid through a red-hot porcelain tube. It is a white crystalline solid of melting point 43 C.; it boils at 210° C., and it can be distilled without decomposition. It is decomposed by water, and with a solution of yellow phosphorus in carbon bisulphide it gives a red powder of composition PBI2, which sublimesin vacuoat 210° C. to red crystals, and when heated in a current of hydrogen loses its iodine and leaves a residue of boron phosphide PB.

Boron nitride BN is formed when boron is burned either in air or in nitrogen, but can be obtained more readily by heating to redness in a platinum crucible a mixture of one part of anhydrous borax with two parts of dry ammonium chloride. After fusion, the melt is well washed with dilute hydrochloric acid and then with water, the nitride remaining as a white powder. It can also be prepared by heating borimide B2(NH)3; or by heating boron trioxide with a metallic cyanide. It is insoluble in water and unaffected by most reagents, but when heated in a current of steam or boiled for some time with a caustic alkali, slowly decomposes with evolution of ammonia and the formation of boron trioxide or an alkaline borate; it dissolves slowly in hydrofluoric acid.

Borimide B2(NH)3is obtained on long heating of the compound B2S3·6NH2in a stream of hydrogen, or ammonia gas at 115-120° C. It is a white solid which decomposes on heating into boron nitride and ammonia. Long-continued heating with water also decomposes it slowly.

Boron sulphide B2S3can be obtained by the direct union of the two elements at a white heat or from the tri-iodide and sulphur at 440° C., but is most conveniently prepared by heating a mixture of the trioxide and carbon in a stream of carbon bisulphide vapour. It forms slightly coloured small crystals possessing a strong disagreeable smell, and is rapidly decomposed by water with the formation of boric acid and sulphuretted hydrogen. A pentasulphide B2S5is prepared, in an impure condition, by heating a solution of sulphur in carbon bisulphide with boron iodide, and forms a white crystalline powder which decomposes under the influence of water into sulphur, sulphuretted hydrogen and boric acid.

Boron trioxide B2O3is the only known oxide of boron; and may be prepared by heating amorphous boron in oxygen, or better, by strongly igniting boric acid. After fusion the mass solidifies to a transparent vitreous solid which dissolves readily in water to form boric acid (q.v.); it is exceedingly hygroscopic and even on standing in moist air becomes opaque through absorption of water and formation of boric acid. Its specific gravity is 1.83 (J. Dumas). It is not volatile below a white heat, and consequently, if heated with salts of more volatile acids, it expels the acid forming oxide from such salts; for example, if potassium sulphate be heated with boron trioxide, sulphur trioxide is liberated and potassium borate formed. It also possesses the power of combining with most metallic oxides at high temperatures, forming borates, which in many cases show characteristic colours. Many organic compounds of boron are known; thus, from the action of the trichloride on ethyl alcohol or on methyl alcohol, ethyl borate B(OC2H5)3and methyl borate B(OCH3)3are obtained. These are colourless liquids boiling at 119° C. and 72° C. respectively, and both are readily decomposed by water. By the action of zinc methyl on ethyl borate, in the requisite proportions, boron trimethyl is obtained, thus:—2B(OC2H5)2+ 6Zn(CH3)2= 2B(CH3)3+ 6Zn<{ CH3/ OC2H5} as a colourless spontaneously inflammable gas of unbearable smell. Boron triethyl B(C2H5)3is obtained in the same manner, by using zinc ethyl. It is a colourless spontaneously inflammable liquid of boiling point 95° C. By the action of one molecule of ethyl borate on two molecules of zinc ethyl, the compound B(C2H5)2·OC2H5diethylboron ethoxide is obtained as a colourless liquid boiling at 102° C. By the action of water it is converted into B(C2H5)2·OH, and this latter compound on exposure to air takes up oxygen slowly, forming the compound B·C2H5·OC2H5·OH, which, with water, gives B(C2H5)·(OH)2. From the condensation of two molecules of ethyl borate with one molecule of zinc ethyl the compound B2·C2H5·(OC2H5)5is obtained as a colourless liquid of boiling point. 112° C. Boron triethyl and boron trimethyl both combine with ammonia.

The atomic weight of boron has been determined by estimating the water content of pure borax (J. Berzelius), also by conversion of anhydrous borax into sodium chloride (W. Ramsay and E. Aston) and from analysis of the bromide and chloride (Sainte-Claire Deville); the values obtained ranging from 10.73 to 11.04. Boron can be estimated by precipitation as potassium fluoborate, which is insoluble in a mixture of potassium acetate and alcohol. For this purpose only boric acid or its potassium salt must be present; and to ensure this, the borate can be distilled with sulphuric acid and methyl alcohol and the volatile ester absorbed in potash.

BOROUGH[Burrough, Burrowe, Borrows],STEVEN(1525-1584), English navigator, was born at Northam in Devonshire on the 25th of September 1525. In 1553 he took part in the expedition which was despatched from the Thames under Sir Hugh Willoughby to look for a northern passage to Cathay and India, serving as master of the “Edward Bonaventure,” on which Richard Chancellor sailed as pilot in chief. Separated by a storm from the “Bona Esperanza” and the “Bona Confidentia,” the other two ships of the expedition, Borough proceeded on his voyage alone, and sailing into the White Sea, in the words of his epitaph, “discouered Moscouia by the Northerne sea passage to St Nicholas” (Archangel). In a second expedition, made in the “Serchthrift” in 1556, he discovered Kara Strait, between Novaya Zemlya and Vaygach island. In 1560 he was in charge of another expedition to Russia, and, probably in 1558, he also made a voyage to Spain. At the beginning of 1563 he was appointed chief pilot and one of the four masters of the queen’s ships in the Medway, and in this office he spent the rest of his life. He died on the 12th of July 1584, and was buried at Chatham. His son, Christopher Borough, wrote a description of a trading expedition made in 1579-1581 from the White Sea to the Caspian and back.

His younger brother,William Borough, born in 1536, also at Northam, served as an ordinary seaman in the “Edward Bonaventure” on her voyage to Russia in 1553, and subsequently made many voyages to St Nicholas. Later he transferred his services from the merchant adventurers to the crown. As commander of the “Lion” he accompanied Sir Francis Drake in his Cadiz expedition of 1587, but he got himself into trouble by presuming to disagree with his chief concerning the wisdom of the attack on Lagos. He died in 1599. He was the author ofA Discourse of the Variation of the Compas, or Magneticall Needle(1581), and some of the charts he made are preserved at the British Museum and Hatfield.

BOROUGH(A.S. nominativeburh, dativebyrig, which produces some of the place-names ending inbury, a sheltered or fortified place, the camp of refuge of a tribe, the stronghold of a chieftain; of. Ger.Burg, Fr.bor,borc,bourg), the term for a town, considered as a unit of local government.

History of the English Borough.—After the early English settlement, when Roman fortifications ceased to shelter hostile nations, their colonies and camps were used by the Anglo-Saxon invaders to form tribal strongholds; nevertheless burhs on the sites of Roman colonies show no continuity with Roman municipal organization. The resettlement of the Roman Durovernum asthe burh of the men of (East) Kent, under a changed name, the name “burh of the men of Kent,” Cant-wara-byrig (Canterbury), illustrates this point. The burh of the men of West Kent was Hrofesceaster (Durobrivae), Rochester, and many otherceastersmark the existence of a Roman camp occupied by an early English burh. The tribal burh was protected by an earthen wall, and a general obligation to build and maintain burhs at the royal command was enforced by Anglo-Saxon law. Offences in disturbance of the peace of the burh were punished by higher fines than breaches of the peace of the “ham” or ordinary dwelling. The burh was the home of the king as well as the asylum of the tribe, and there is reason to think that the boundary of the borough was annually sanctified by a religious ceremony, and hence the long retention of a processional perambulation. Possibly the “hedge” or “wall” of the borough gave it, besides safety, a sanctity analogous to that enjoyed by the Germanic assembly while gathered within its “hedge,” which the priests solemnly set up when the assembly gathered, and removed when it was over. While the “peace” of the Germanic assembly was essentially temporary, the “peace” of the burh was sacred all the year round. Its “hedge” was never removed. The sanctity of the burh was enjoyed by all the dwellings of the king, at first perhaps only during his term of residence. Neither in the early English language nor in the contemporary Latin was there any fixed usage differentiating the various words descriptive of the several forms of human settlement, and the tribal refuges cannot accordingly be clearly distinguished from villages or the strongholds of individuals by any purely nomenclative test. It is not till after the Danish invasions that it becomes easier to draw a distinction between the burhs that served as military strongholds for national defence and the royal vills which served no such purpose. Some of the royal vills eventually entered the class of boroughs, but by another route, and for the present the private stronghold and the royal dwelling may be neglected. It was the public stronghold and the administrative centre of a dependent district which was the source of the main features peculiar to the borough.

Many causes tended to create peculiar conditions in the boroughs built for national defence. They were placed where artificial defence was most needed, at the junction of roads, in the plains, on the rivers, at the centres naturally marked out for trade, seldom where hills or marshes formed a sufficient natural defence. The burhs drew commerce by every channel; the camp and the palace, the administrative centre, the ecclesiastical centre (for the mother-church of the state was placed in its chief burh), all looked to the market for their maintenance. The burh was provided by law with a mint and royal moneyers and exchangers, with an authorized scale for weights and measures. Mercantile transactions in the burhs orports, as they were called when their commercial rather than their military importance was accentuated, were placed by law under special legal privileges in order no doubt to secure the king’s hold upon his toll. Over the burh or port was set a reeve, a royal officer answerable to the king for his dues from the burh, his rents for lands and houses, his customs on commerce, his share of the profits from judicial fines. At least from the 10th century the burh had a “moot” or court, the relation of which to the other courts is matter of speculation. A law of Edgar, about 960, required that it should meet three times a year, these being in all likelihood assemblies at which attendance was compulsory on all tenants of the burghal district, when pleas concerning life and liberty and land were held, and men were compelled to find pledges answerable for their good conduct. At these great meetings the borough reeve (gerefa) presided, declaring the law and guiding the judgments given by the suitors of the court. The reeve was supported by a group of assistants, called in Devon the “witan,” in the boroughs of the Danelaw by a group of (generally twelve) “lawmen,” in other towns probably by a group of aldermen, senior burgesses, with military and police authority, whose office was in some cases hereditary. These persons assisted the reeve at the great meetings of the full court, and sat with him as judges at the subordinate meetings which were held to settle the unfinished causes and minor causes. There was no compulsion on those not specially summoned to attend these extra meetings. At these subordinate jurisdictional assemblies, held in public, and acting by the same authority as the annual gathering of all theburh-wara, other business concerning borough administration was decided, at least in later days, and it is to these assemblies that the origin of the town council may in many cases be ascribed. In the larger towns the division into wards, with a separate police system, can be traced at an early time, appearing as a unit of military organization, answerable for the defence of a gate of the town. The police system of London is described in detail in a record of 930-940. Here the free people were grouped in associations of ten, each under the superintendence of a headman. The bishops and reeves who belonged to the “court of London” appear as the directors of the system, and in them we may see the aldermen of the wards of a later time. The use of the wordberthafor ward at Canterbury, and the fact that the London wardmoot at a later time was used for the frankpledge system as well as for the organization of the muster, point to a connexion between the military and the police systems in the towns. At the end of the 9th and beginning of the 10th century there is evidence of a systematic “timbering” of new burhs, with the object of providing strongholds for the defence of Wessex against the Danes, and it appears that the surrounding districts were charged with their maintenance. In charters of this period a “haw,” or enclosed area within a burh, was often conveyed by charter as if it were an apanage of the lands in the neighbourhood with which it was conveyed; the Norman settlers who succeeded to lands in the county succeeded therewith to houses in the burhs, for a close association existed between the “thegns” of the shire and the shirestow, an association partly perhaps of duty and also of privilege. The king granted borough “haws” as places of refuge in Kent, and in London he gave them with commercial privileges to his bishops. What has been called the “heterogeneous” tenure of the shirestow, one of the most conspicuous characteristics of that particular type of borough, was further increased by the liberty which some burgesses enjoyed to “commend” themselves to a lord of their own choosing, promising to that lord suit and service and perhaps rent in return for protection. Over these burgesses the lords could claim jurisdictional rights, and these were in some cases increased by royal grants of special rights within certain “sokes.” The great boroughs were honeycombed with sokes, or areas of seignorial jurisdiction, within which the royal reeve’s authority was greatly restricted while that of the lord’s reeve took precedence. Even the haws, being “burhs” or strongholds within a stronghold, enjoyed a local “peace” which protected from official intrusion. Besides heterogeneity of tenure and jurisdiction in the borough, there was also heterogeneity of status; there were burh-thegns and cnihts, mercatores, burgesses of various kinds, the three groups representing perhaps military, commercial and agricultural elements. The burh generally shows signs of having been originally a village settlement, surrounded by open fields, of which the borough boundary before 1835 will suggest the outline. This area was as a rule eventually the area of borough jurisdiction. There is some evidence pointing to the fact that the restriction of the borough authority to this area is not ancient, but due to the Norman settlement. The wide districts over which the boroughs had had authority were placed under the control of the Norman castle which was itself built by means of the old English levy of “burh-work.” The borough court was allowed to continue its work only within its own immediate territory, and, to prevent conflict, the castle was placed outside the borough. Losing their place in the national scheme of defence, the burgess “cnihts” made commerce their principal object under the encouragement of the old privileges of the walled place.

Besides the great co-operative strongholds in which many lords had burgesses, there were small boroughs held by a single lord. In many cases boroughs of this “seignorial” type were created upon the royal estates. Out of the king’s vill, as a rule the jurisdictional centre of a hundred, there was sometimes createda borough. The lines of division before Domesday Book are obscure, but it is probable that in some cases, by a royal grant of jurisdiction, the inhabitants of a populous royal vill, where a hundred court for the district was already held, were authorized to establish a permanent court, for the settlement of their disputes, distinct from the hundred court of the district. Boroughs of this type with a uniform tenure were created not only on the king’s estates but also on those of his tenants-in-chief, and in 1086 they were probably already numerous. A borough was usually, though perhaps not invariably, the companion of a Norman castle. In some cases a French “bourg” was created by the side of an English borough, and the two remained for many generations distinct in their laws and customs: in other cases a French “bourg” was settled by the side of an English village. A large number of the followers of the Norman lords had been almost certainly town-dwellers in their own country, and lost none of their burghal privileges by the migration. Every castle needed for its maintenance a group of skilled artisans, and the lords wished to draw to the castle gates all kinds of commodities for the castle’s provision. The strength of the garrison made the neighbourhood of the castle a place of danger to men unprotected by legal privilege; and in order to invite to its neighbourhood desirable settlers, legal privileges similar to those enjoyed in Norman or English boroughs were guaranteed to those who would build on the plots which were offered to colonists. A low fixed rental, release from the renders required of villeins, release from the jurisdiction of the castle, and the creation of a separate borough jurisdiction, with or without the right to choose their own officers, rules fixing the maximum of fees and fines, or promising assessment of the fines by the burgesses themselves, the cancelling of all the castellan’s rights, especially the right to take a forced levy of food for the castle from all within the area of his jurisdiction, freedom from arbitrary tallage, freedom of movement, the right to alienate property and devise land, these and many other privileges named in the early seignorial charters were what constituted the Normanliber burgusof the seignorial type. Not all these privileges were enjoyed by all boroughs; some very meagre releases of seignorial rights accompanied the lord’s charter which created a borough and made burgesses out of villeins. However liberal the grant, the lord or his reeve still remained in close personal relation with the burgesses of such places, and this character, together with the uniformity of their tenure, continued to hold them apart from the boroughs of the old English type, where all varieties of personal relationship between the lords and their groups of tenants might subsist. The royal charters granting the right to retain old customs prevented the systematic introduction into the old boroughs of some of the incidents of feudalism. Rights of the king took precedence of those of the lord, and devise with the king’s consent was legal. By these means the lords’ position was weakened, and other seignorial claims were later evaded or contested. The rights which the lords failed to keep were divided between the king and the municipality; in London, for instance, the king obtained all escheats, while the borough court secured the right of wardship of burgess orphans.

From Norman times the yearly profit of the royal boroughs was as a rule included in the general “farm” rendered for the county by the sheriff; sometimes it was rendered by a royal farmer apart from the county-farm. The king generally accepted a composition for all the various items due from the borough. The burgesses were united in their efforts to keep that composition unchanged in amount, and to secure the provision of the right amount at the right time for fear that it should be increased by way of punishment. The levy of fines on rent arrear, and the distraints for debt due, which were obtained through the borough court, were a matter of interest to the burgesses of the court, and first taught the burgesses co-operative action. Money was raised, possibly by order of the borough court, to buy a charter from the king giving the right to choose officers who should answer directly to the exchequer and not through the sheriff of the county. The sheriff was in many cases also the constable of the castle, set by the Normans to overawe the English boroughs; his powers were great and dangerous enough to make him an officer specially obnoxious to the boroughs. Henry I. about 1131 gave the London citizens the right to choose their own sheriffs and a justiciar answerable for keeping the pleas of the crown. In 1130 the Lincoln citizens paid to hold their city in chief of the king. By the end of the 12th century many towns paid by the hand of their own reeves, and John’s charters began to make rules as to the freedom of choice to be allowed in the nomination of borough officers and as to the royal power of dismissal. In Richard I.’s reign London imitated the French communes in styling the chief officer a mayor; in 1208 Winchester also had a mayor, and the title soon became no rarity. The chartered right to choose two or more citizens to keep the pleas of the crown gave to many boroughs the control of their coroners, who occupied the position of the London justiciar of earlier days, subject to those considerable modifications which Henry II.’s systematization of the criminal law had introduced. Burgesses who had gone for criminal and civil justice to their own court in disputes between themselves, or between themselves and strangers who were in their town, secured confirmation of this right by charter, not to exclude the justices in eyre, but to exempt themselves from the necessity of pleading in a distant court. The burgess, whether plaintiff or defendant, was a privileged person, and could claim in this respect a “benefit” somewhat similar to the benefit of clergy. In permitting the boroughs to answer through their own officers for his dues, the king handed over to the boroughs the farming of his rents and a large number of rights which would eventually prove to be sources of great profit.

No records exist showing the nature of municipal proceedings at the time of the first purchase of charters. Certain it is that the communities in the 12th century became alive to the possibilities of their new position, that trade received a new impulse, and the vague constitutional powers of the borough court acquired a new need for definition. At first the selection of officers who were to treat with the exchequer and to keep the royal pleas was almost certainly restricted to a few rich persons who could find the necessary securities. Nominated probably in one of the smaller judicial assemblies, the choice was announced at the great Michaelmas assembly of the whole community, and it is not till the next century that we hear of any attempt of the “vulgus” to make a different selection from that of the magnates. The “vulgus” were able to take effective action by means of the several craft organizations, and first found the necessity to do so when taxation was heavy or when questions of trade legislation were mooted (seeGilds). The taxation of the boroughs in the reign of Henry II. was assessed by the king’s justices, who fixed the sums dueper capita; but if the borough made an offer of a gift, the assessment was made by the burgesses. In the first case the taxation fell on the magnates. In the levyper communamthe assessment was made through the wardmoots (in London) and the burden fell on the poorer class. In Henry II.’s reign London was taxed by both methods, thebarones majoresby head, thebarones minoresthrough the wardmoot. The pressure of taxation led in the 13th century to a closer definition of the burghal constitutions; the commons sought to get an audit of accounts, and (in London) not only to hear but to treat of municipal affairs. By the end of the century London had definitely established two councils, that of the mayor and aldermen, representing the old borough court, and a common council, representing the voice of the commonalty, as expressed through the city wards. The choice of councillors in the wards rested probably with the aldermen and the ward jury summoned by them to make the presentments. In some cases juries were summoned not to represent different areas but different classes; thus at Lincoln there were in 1272 juries of the rich, the middling and the poor, chosen presumably by authority from groups divided by means of the tax roll. Elsewhere the several groups of traders and artisans made of their gilds all-powerful agencies for organizing joint action among classes of commons united by a trade interest, and the history of the towns becomes the history of the struggle between the gilds whichcaptured control of the council and the gilds which were excluded therefrom. Many municipal revolutions took place, and a large number of constitutional experiments were tried all over the country from the 13th century onward. Schemes which directed a gradual co-optation, two to choose four, these six to choose more, and so in widening circles from a centre of officialdom, found much favour throughout the middle ages. A plan, like the London plan, of two companies, alderman and council, was widely favoured in the 14th century, perhaps in imitation of the Houses of Lords and Commons. The mayor was sometimes styled the “sovereign” and was given many prerogatives. Great respect was paid to the “ancients,” those, namely, who had already held municipal office. Not till the 15th century were orderly arrangements for counting “voices” arrived at in a few of the most highly developed towns, and these were used only in the small assemblies of the governing body, not in the large electoral assemblies of the people.

InLondonin the 13th century there was a regular system for the admission of new members to the borough “franchise,” which was at first regarded not as conferring any form of suffrage but as a means to secure a privileged position in the borough court and in the trade of the borough. Admission could be obtained by inheritance, by purchase or gift, in some places by marriage, and in London, at least from 1275, by a municipal register of apprenticeship. The new freeman in return for his privileges was bound to share with the other burgesses all the burdens of taxation, control, &c., which fell upon burgesses. Personal service was not always necessary, and in some towns there were many non-resident burgesses. When in later times admission to this freedom came to be used as means to secure the parliamentary franchise, the freedom of the borough was freely sold and given. The elections in which the commons of the boroughs first took interest were those of the borough magistrates. Where the commons succeeded for a time in asserting their right to take part in borough elections they were rarely able to keep it, not in all cases perhaps because their power was feared, but sometimes because of the riotous proceedings which ensued. These led to government interference, which no party in the borough desired. The possibility of a forfeiture of their enfranchised position made the burgesses on the whole fairly submissive. In the 13th century London repeatedly was “taken into the king’s hand,” subjected to heavy fines and put under the constable of the Tower. In the 15th century disturbances in the boroughs led to the issue of new constitutions, some of which were the outcome of royal charters, others the result of parliamentary legislation. The development of the law of corporations also at this time compelled the boroughs to seek new charters which should satisfy the now exacting demands of the law. The charters of incorporation were issued at a time when the state was looking more and more to the borough authorities as part of its executive and judicial staff, and thus the government was closely interested in the manner of their selection. The new charters were drafted in such a way as to narrow the popular control. The corporations were placed under a council and in a number of cases popular control was excluded altogether, the whole system being made one of co-optation. The absence of popular protest may be ascribed in part to the fact that the old popular control had been more nominal than real, and the new charter gave as a rule two councils of considerable size. These councils bore a heavy burden of taxation in meeting royal loans and benevolences, payingper capitalike the magnates of the 12th century, and for a time there is on the whole little evidence of friction between the governors and the governed. Throughout, popular opinion in the closest of corporations had a means of expression, though none of execution, in the presentments of the leet juries and sessions juries. By means of their “verdicts” they could use threats against the governing body, express their resentment against acts of the council which benefited the governing body rather than the town, and call in the aid of the justices of assize where the members of the governing body were suspected of fraud. Elizabeth repeatedly declared her dislike of incorporations “because of the abuses committed by their head rulers,” but in her reign they were fairly easily controlled by the privy council, which directed their choice of members of parliament and secured supporters of the government policy to fill vacancies on the borough bench. The practice in Tudor and Stuart charters of specifying by name the members of the governing body and holders of special offices opened the way to a “purging” of the hostile spirits when new charters were required. There were also rather vaguely worded clauses authorizing the dismissal of officers for misconduct, though as a rule the appointments were for life. When under the Stuarts and under the Commonwealth political and religious feeling ran high in the boroughs, use was made of these clauses both by the majority on the council and by the central government to mould the character of the council by a drastic “purging.” Another means of control first used under the Commonwealth was afforded by the various acts of parliament, which subjected all holders of municipal office to the test of an oath. Under the Commonwealth there was no improvement in the methods used by the central government to control the boroughs. All opponents of the ruling policy were disfranchised and disqualified for office by act of parliament in 1652. Cases arising out of the act were to be tried by commissioners, and the commissions of the major-generals gave them opportunity to control the borough policy. Few Commonwealth charters have been preserved, though several were issued in response to the requests of the corporations.

In some cases the charters used words which appeared to point to an opportunity for popular elections in boroughs where a usage of election by the town council had been established. In 1598 the judges gave an opinion that the town councils could by by-law determine laws for the government of the town regardless of the terms of the charter. In the 18th century the judges decided to the contrary. But even where a usage of popular election was established, there were means of controlling the result of a parliamentary election. The close corporations, though their right to choose a member of parliament might be doubtful, had the sole right to admit new burgesses, and in order to determine parliamentary elections they enfranchised non-residents. Where conflicts arose over the choice of a member, and two selections were made, the matter came before the House of Commons. On various occasions the House decided in favour of the popularly elected candidate against the nominee of the town council, on the general principle that neither the royal charter nor a by-law could curtail this particular franchise. But as each case was separately determined by a body swayed by the dominant political party, no one principle was steadily adhered to in the trial of election petitions. The royal right to create boroughs was freely used by Elizabeth and James I. as a means of securing a submissive parliament. The later Stuarts abandoned this method, and the few new boroughs made by the Georges were not made for political reasons. The object of the later Stuarts was to control the corporations already in existence, not to make new ones. Charles II. from the time of his restoration decided to exercise a strict control of the close corporations in order to secure not only submissive parliaments, but also a pliant executive among the borough justices, and pliant juries, which were impanelled at the selection of the borough officers. In 1660 it was made a rule that all future charters should reserve expressly to the crown the first nomination of the aldermen, recorder and town-clerk, and a proviso should be entered placing with the common council the return of the member of parliament. The Corporation Act of 1661 gave power to royal commissioners to settle the composition of the town councils, and to remove all who refused the sacraments of the Church of England or were suspected of disaffection, even though they offered to take the necessary oaths. Even so the difficulty of securing submissive juries was again so great in 1682 that a general attack on the borough franchises was begun by the crown. A London jury having returned a verdict hostile to the crown, after various attempts to bend the city to his will, Charles II. issued aquo warrantoagainst the mayor and commonalty in order to charge the citizens with illegal encroachments upon their charteredrights. The want of a sound philosophical principle in the laws which were intended to regulate the actions of organized groups of men made it easy for the crown judges to find flaws in the legality of the actions of the boroughs, and also made it possible for the Londoners to argue that no execution could be taken against the mayor, commonalty and citizens, a “body politic invisible”; that the indictment lay only against every particular member of the governing body; and that the corporation as a corporation was incapable of suffering a forfeiture or of making a surrender. The judges gave a judgment for the king, the charters were forfeited and the government placed with a court of aldermen of the king’s own choosing. Until James II. yielded, there was no common council in London. The novelty of the proceedings of Charles II. and James II. lay in using the weapon of thequo warrantosystematically to ensure a general revocation of charters. The new charters which were then granted required the king’s consent for the more important appointments, and gave him power to remove officers without reason given. Under James II. in 1687 six commissioners were appointed to “regulate” the corporations and remove from them all persons who were opposed to the abolition of the penal laws against Catholics. The new appointments were made under a writ which ran, “We will and require you to elect” (a named person). When James II. sought to withdraw from his disastrous policy, he issued a proclamation (October 17, 1688) restoring to the boroughs their ancient charters. The governing charter thenceforth in many boroughs, though not in all, was the charter which had established a close corporation, and from this time on to 1835 the boroughs made no progress in constitutional growth. The tendency for the close corporation to treat the members of the governing body as the only corporators, and to repudiate the idea that the corporation was answerable to the inhabitants of the borough if the corporate property was squandered, became more and more manifest as the history of the past slipped into oblivion. The corporators came to regard themselves as members of a club, legally warranted in dividing the lands and goods of the same among themselves whensoever such a division should seem profitable. Even where the constitution of the corporation was not close by charter, the franchise tended to become restricted to an ever-dwindling electorate, as the old methods for the extension of the municipal franchise by other means than inheritance died out of use. At Ipswich in 1833 the “freemen” numbered only one fifty-fifth of the population. If the electorate was increased, it was increased by the wholesale admission to the freedom of voters willing to vote as directed by the corporation at parliamentary elections. The growth of corruption in the boroughs continued unchecked until the era of the Reform Bill. Several boroughs had by that time become insolvent, and some had recourse to their member of parliament to eke out their revenues. In Buckingham the mayor received the whole town revenue without rendering account; sometimes, however, heavy charges fell upon the officers. Before the Reform era dissatisfaction with the corporations was mainly shown by the number of local acts of parliament which placed under the authority of special commissioners a variety of administrative details, which if the corporation had not been suspected would certainly have been assigned to its care. The trust offered another convenient means of escape from difficulty, and in some towns out of the trust was developed a system of municipal administration where there was no recognized corporation. Thus at Peterborough the feoffees who had succeeded to the control of certain ancient charities constituted a form of town council with very restricted powers. In the 17th century Sheffield was brought under the act “to redress the misemployment of lands given to charitable uses,” and the municipal administration of what had been a borough passed into the hands of the trustees of the Burgery or town trust.

The many special authorities created under act of parliament led to much confusion, conflict and overlapping, and increased the need for a general reform. The reform of the boroughs was treated as part of the question of parliamentary reform. In 1832 the exclusive privileges of the corporations in parliamentary elections having been abolished and male occupiers enfranchised, the question of the municipal franchise was next dealt with. In 1833 a commission inquired into the administration of the municipal corporations. The result of the inquiry was the Municipal Corporations Act 1835, which gave the municipal franchise to the ratepayers. In all the municipal corporations dealt with by the act, the town council was to consist of a mayor, aldermen and councillors, and the councils were given like powers, being divided into those with and those without a commission of the peace. The minutes were to be open to the inspection of any burgess, and an audit of accounts was required. The exclusive rights of retail trading, which in some towns were restricted to freemen of the borough, were abolished. The system of police, which in some places was still medieval in character, was placed under the control of the council. The various privileged areas within the bounds of a borough were with few exceptions made part of the borough. The powers of the council to alienate corporate property were closely restricted. The operations of the act were extended by later legislation, and the divers amendments and enactments which followed were consolidated in the Municipal Corporations Act 1882.

Back to Index Next