In

and fix the rate of tolls. When the time came for the ferryman to pay his rent it mostly happened that he represented his tolls as too light to pay such a sum, and the council was always merciful enough to let him off with paying half. The rate of taxes for borough purposes was fixed by the council. In 1733 the tax levied was two pence per pound on all estates, and six shillings a head for all single men. 1745 at a time of much expense to the town, the legislature fixed the limit of taxation at three pence a pound. Borough finances were not then so important as now. It was in the days before the public schools. The wants of our forefathers were simpler than now, and the old town pump answered in place of costly waterworks. The principal items of expense were for the repair and care of streets which were under the supervision of the burgesses and council. The taxes of the town were assessed by two assessors elected by the people. After their work was done, the council and burgesses set a day for hearing appeals, and they then rectified any errors.

The elections were not always what the citizens desired, for they were obliged to change the place of voting to a private house to avoid disturbances.

The little town had trouble with some of its citizens at other times than on election days. A record of October, 1768, gives a long account of the disorderly conduct of some of the inhabitants. The council ordered that the officers were to disperse any number of persons collected on the streets. If they were children, the parents were to be notified. The record says, "And whereas a number of the said Inhabitants and others make a practice of sitting and tippling in public and some in private houses on the said First day of the week called Sunday to the ruin and prejudice of themselves and families, it is hereby ordained that every person detected thereof, shall for every such offense pay the sum of five shillings or be confined at hard labor in the workhouse five days on an allowance of bread and water only. And the said constables and their successors are hereby enjoined to be

diligent in inspecting every suspicious house within the said borough on every the succeeding first days called Sundays in order to detect and bring to punishment every person guilty of the above mentioned crime." The workhouse, to which the miscreants were sent, was another institution from our Mother England. The legislature had given the borough the power in 1745 to erect a house of correction and workhouse "for the public use of the said Borough, to be employed for the keeping, correcting and setting at work of all rogues, vagabonds, sturdy beggars, and idle and disorderly persons, who by the laws and usage of Great Britain, or by the laws of this province, are to be kept, corrected or set at work." The workhouse had its proper officers, president, treasurer, and assistants appointed by the council and burgesses, and they formed a legal corporation. The same regulations governed the institution as governed the county work house.

Two privileges at that time indispensable to all towns, were granted to Bristol and the other boroughs of the century, namely the markets and the fairs. The markets were allowed every Thursday in Bristol, the fairs twice a year, and two days each. Wherever the fairs were held, they were centres of attraction for the neighborhood. Many things were bought and sold, including general merchandise and often live stock. It was a time of great jollification, and the fairs in Bristol were attended by all classes. Some went to make purchases, but others cared more for a frolic. Horse racing, drinking, gambling and stealing prevailed to an alarming extent." On the last day of the fair the masters allowed their negro slaves to attend, and they went in great numbers to have a jubilee. All this troubled the worthy councillors; they thought it not

'Laws of Penna., vol. I., p. 211.

2 Davis's History of Buck's Co., p. 341.

Towns occasionally had markets and fairs before they became boroughs, as was the case with both Chester and Chichester or Marcus Hook. See Smith's Hist. of Del. Co., p. 203 and note E in the Appendix.

right, and on the tenth of November, 1773, they resolved that the fair was now useless on account of the large number of stores, and that the "debauchery, idleness, and drunkenness, consequent on the meeting of the lowest class of people together is a real evil and calls for redress." They had no authority to abolish them as they were granted in the charter, so they urged the legislature to do it, but it was not done till 1796. Other boroughs had much the same experience with their fairs. At York they degenerated into "wild merriment and riotous confusion," and in 1816 were thenceforth forbidden. In Harrisburg a local chronicler gives a more pleasant picture of the fair at about this period (1798). "On Friday and Saturday last was celebrated in this town the anniversary fair, with all its accustomed singularities. The lasses, as usual, assembled like bees on a summer's day. The swains, too, were very numerous; so that none of the former, it is to be presumed, went home with a heavy heart in consequence of neglect from the latter." The old time borough fairs were generally given up at the close of the last century, and the agricultural and mechanical fairs in the different counties have become their survivals. In England they have held

2

on to these time-honored institutions even later than in the

United States. "Sixty years ago," says Thorold Rogers, in his treatise on Work and Wages, "a visit to an autumn fair, for the sake of laying in winter supplies, was part of the ordinary life of a small country gentleman or a wealthy yeoman," p. 148. Such were the general characteristics of the first boroughs of Pennsylvania. Some other more special characteristics, e. g. the relationship to the county, will be described in the account of the present borough regulations. Their organizations were not complex, and as the elections were in the hands of the main body of freemen, and there were no privileged corporations to perpetuate authority and

'Laws of Penna., vol. 4, p. 74. 2 Annals of Harrisburg, p. 369.

shield abuse, no large outlays of money for improvements, to tempt the cupidity of men, and as the towns were small, and every officer known to all his neighbors, it was not possible for the boroughs to be otherwise than successful in govern

ment.

THE PRESENT BOROUGH.

There was considerable similarity among the boroughs, for one charter often served as a model for some other, the two being in some instances almost identical.1

There was, however, no general legislation concerning them beyond an occasional act; every borough had to apply to the legislature for any special privilege, and the charter was always given by special act.

This did fairly well while there were not many boroughs, but in the present century, when the number began to increase rapidly, the amount of borough legislation increased correspondingly.

The act of 1834 was the first important general borough law. It gave the county courts of Quarter Sessions the power to incorporate boroughs, and change their boundaries. The most important borough act that the State ever passed was that of 1851, which was to serve as a general law regulating all the boroughs that were to be incorporated in the future, and as many of the existing boroughs as chose to accept its provisions. What the famous acts of 1835 and 1882 have been to the municipal boroughs of England, the acts of 1834 and 1851 have been in a measure to those of Pennsylvania. Though these two acts gave the courts much authority in regulating boroughs, the boroughs were not forbidden to apply to the legislature for special privileges, as

'Carlisle and Reading, then Reading and Harrisburg, till the charter of the latter was changed. Cf. Dr. Charles Gross, on "The Affiliation of Mediæval Boroughs," reprinted from "The Antiquary," and showing the same phenomenon of charter repetition in England.

their wants multiplied; special legislation continued, and requests of all sorts went up to the legislature from different towns. One borough wanted authority to organize fire companies; another to elect auditors, or change the time or place of holding its elections; another wished to become a separate school district, or to have its tax rate limited within certain bounds; and still another wished to change its boundaries, discontinue a street, or elect constables; to establish public pumps, or provide wardens and watchmen.

Some idea of the quantity of borough legislation performed at Harrisburg in times past, may be gained from looking into Beitel's Digest of the Titles of Corporations, which contains fifty-eight pages of mere references to acts of legislature relating to the boroughs between 1769 and 1873, most of which were passed since 1800. In 1873, the last year of the old Constitution, there were 105 borough acts passed by the legislature. Under the new State Constitution the legislature cannot incorporate cities, towns, or villages, or change their charters, or pass any special laws regulating the affairs of municipal corporations; its legislation must be general. The borough law as it now stands, consists mainly of the acts of 1834, 1851, and several subsequent acts. No borough has been obliged to forfeit its old charter, but the acts of more recent date have caused many modifications to be made in them, for sake of conformity with the new law. While some few of the oldest boroughs differ in the details of their constitutions, the boroughs incorporated since 1851 are very uniform. Without mentioning in particular the separate borough acts, we proceed to describe the borough system as it at present exists. There is no required area or population that a village must include to be a borough. The boundary lines are drawn close to the built-up portions of the town, encroaching as little as possible upon the township from which it is generally entirely distinct, each being a separate division of the county to which they bear the same relations, and pay the same rate of tax. Occasionally a small borough