MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT IN THE OLDEN TIME. . .
A PAPER in the last volume Of the Anheedogia, which was com- municated to the Society of Antiquaries by that amiable Anti-Re- former Mr. HUDSON GURNEY, M.P., affords some valuable infor- mation on the duties and responsibility of Representatives in Par- liament hi the reign of HENRY the Sixth; and if it doss not esta_. blish a precedent for exacting pledges from candidates, it at least proves that our ancestors inquired narrowly into the manner in which those whom they selected to protect their interests, and to state their opinions in the House of Commons, performed the duties intrusted to them. The paper in question consists of ex- tracts from the proceedings of the Corporation of Lynn Regis in Norfolk, taken from the Hall Books. The manner • in which the members were elected is not a little curious. Out of the twenty- four Burgesses, two were chosen, and the same number was se- lected from the Common Council : these four individuals then chose two more, and the eight fixed upon four others ; and by the twelve, the Burgesses to serve in Parliament were elected. This practice is thus described— "14136-7. January 7. John Ashden and John Syff, of the twenty-four, John Adams and Bartholomew Colles, of the Common Council, were called by the . Mayor, by the assent of the whole congregation, who called Edward Mayne and John Spryngewell; and they called Galfrid Gatele and John Mariat ; and the forsaid eight called William Kvrketon and Thomas Lok ; and the forsaid ten called Thomas Talbot and Martin Wright ; which twelve were charged (being sworn according to custom to preserve the liberty of the town) to choose two Burgesses for the borough of Lynn to go to Parliament, on the 21st day of Ja- nuary next ensuing, to be held at Cambridge or Loudon, according to the form of the writ lately delivered to the Mayor aforesaid. They chose Burgesses for the said Parliament Thomas Burgh, John Warryn."
Upon so Tory-loving a mode of electing members of Parlia- ment, Mr. HUDSON GURNEY enlarges learnedly in his prefatory observations. " I am," he says, " myself greatly inclined to sus- pect that the jury principle of real or supposed unanimity, the agreement of bodies which were to decide, is to be found in all'our ancient institutions, anti that voting by the poll was of later in- troduction both in and out of Parliament ;" and he quotes the Modus Tenendi Parliamentum in support of his theory,—though he is aware that that treatise has been pronounced by the best judges a forgery.
The amiable Tory is, however, wholly silent upon the facts which it is our main object to submit to our readers. The Devil only quotes Scripture for his pulpose. It appears, that whenever the Corporation of Lynn were par- ticularly interested in a measure about to be discussed in Parlia- ment, the members for the town applied to their constituents for instructions- " 14:36-7. February 20. The same day, was read a letter, sent to the I% layor by the Burgesses of Lynn remaining in Parliament for the said town ; which. letter being fully understood, it was appointed by the assent of the whole emigre- gation, that an answer should be returned to the said letter by the Mayor afore- said, under the seal of the office of Mayoralty of Lynn."
In April following, the Burgesses returned to Lynn on the dis- solution of the Parliament ; and
"Did well and discreetly declare those things which were substantially done and acted for the Mayor aforesaid, in the Parliament aforesaid."
To the next Parliament, in November 1439, two Burgesses were returned, to whom the charter of the liberty of the town, granted in the reign of HENRY the Fourth, was intrusted, with the view of obtaining a confirmation of it. The entry relative to the Burgesses elected in 1441, contains the amount of -wages to be allowed them during their attendance in Parliament, and the date of their respective departures from Lynn on their journies to it. They returned shortly afterwards, and then " discreetly and seriously declared several transactions of the said Parliament" to their constituents, who seem to have assembled for the purpose of learning what their representatives had done. Among the acts of one of them, was obtaining a confirmation of the charter of the town; and though his "labour and industry" on the occasion are alluded to, no notice occurs of a vote of thanks being proposed for his servicse, it being probably considered that he did no more than his duty.
In every instance, to the year 14-is, when the Burgesses re- turned from attending Parliament, they gave an account of their conduct. After that year, there are only two extracts until 1551; so that it is impossible to state what was the usage on the subject between 1450 and 1550.
These extracts supply irrefragable evidence of the intimate con- nexion between electors and the elected in the reign of HENRY the Sixth ; and tend to establish, that the representatives in Par- liament were in fact little more than attornies or agents for those whom they represented ; and were held not only responsible to their constituents or employers, by whom they were paid, but that it was their primary duty to obey, and in cases of doubt or difficulty to apply for, their instructions.
The daily reports of what occurs in Parliament, now render such explanations as were formerly given by members to their constituents unnecessary ; but the facts that they were compelled to render an account of their behaviour—that they received and even applied for instructions, and were paid wages for their .ser- vices—show that the doctrine of comparative independence of con- stituents, which the High Tories advocate, is of modern invention, and is as opposed by ancient precedents and usage as by common sense.
Previous page
