422 Constitutimal History. [chap.
these some inferences more or less conclusive may be drawn.
We must take it for granted that the persons who sealed the
indenture were those who were specially cited by the sheriff, or
drawn from the same class of society; and that the ordinary
suitors or the persons who attended in consequence of any
general proclamation must be regarded as included in the term
‘ phιres alios ’ or ‘ cum multis aliis,’ or , in pleno comitatu,’ in
which the indenture embraces the residue of the electors1.
Number of
the persons
sealing the
indentures.
The number of persons who seal the indenture is in every
case comparatively small: in 1407 the indenture for Cambridge
was sealed by twelve persons, for Huntingdon by eight ; in 1411
twelve join in the return for Kent, six ‘ cum multis aliis de
communitate’ for Derbyshire; in 1413 twenty-six personselect
for Wiltshire, thirty-four for Cornwall, twenty-four for Somer-
set; in 1414 fourteen elect for Cumberland, sixteen ‘exassensu
totius Communitatis' for Somerset, twelve for Kent, nineteen
for Surrey, twenty-four for Sussex, eleven and many others for
Warwickshire; in 1424, eighteen for Lancashire; in 1447,
thirty-one for Gloucestershire, thirty for Surrey ; the number
of names rarely if ever exceeds forty.
Quality of
the sealers.
The quality of the persons who seal the indenture is less
easily tested. A comparison however of the names given in
the indentures with the lists of sheriffs and knights of the
slɪire for the respective counties seems to show that whilst
a fair proportion of the electors belonged to the families that
furnished sheriffs and knights, the majority of the names are of
a less distinguished class ; either ordinary squires who would not
aspire to the office of sheriff, or, as possibly may be inferred from
the character of the surnames, simple yeomen. Unfortunately
the smallness of the number of indentures copied by Prynne
makes it impossible to argue very confidently on this point.
Questions
as to the
character in
which they
acted.
As for the character in which the persons who thus represent
themselves as electors acted, opinions may differ. It is most
probable that they acted primarily as certifying the return, and
1 ‘ Plures alios ; ’ see the indenture for Cornwall, Prynnej Keg. ii. p.
128 ; ‘ per assensuɪn et consensum . . . . et Oinniuin aliorum fideliuɪn ibidem
existentium ;, ibid. j>p. 129, ɪʒo.
XX.]
Election Indenture.
423
making themselves responsible for its correctness, and not as
the only electors or as a body deputed by the county court to
make the election for the whole constituency. Notwithstanding
the terms of the act, directing that the indenture shall be
sealed by all who have taken part in the election, it is certain
that others who did not seal, and who probably had no seals,
joined in it. One remarkable instance proves that such was
occasionally the case, and suggests that it was also the rule.
In 1450 the electors for Huntingdonshire suspected that the Election for
sheriff was going to make a false return, and accordingly sent denshire in
in a letter to the king which is found in company with the °’
return. The indenture contains the names of three squires and
two other persons who with ‘ alii notabiles armigeri, generosi et
homines Iibere tenentes qui expendere possunt quadraginta
solidos per annum ’ had made the election. The letter to the
king is sealed by 124 who declare that they, with 300 more
good commoners of the same shire, had elected two knights ;
l70 others had voted for a person whom they regarded as dis-
qualified by his birth1. Besides the interest of this document,
which is an important illustration of a contested election, it
proves that whilst five names were sufficient for the indenture,
г г 9 more were included in the general clause ‘ alii notabiles,’
and that 300 more freeholders had voted in the majority against
70 in the minority. In the election then for this small county,
which had in 1741 about 1600 voters, and in r852 contained
only 2892 registered electors, in 1450, 494 freeholders voted.
But although this case conclusively proves that the right in some
of election was not exercised by those only who sealed the sθ.iims may
. n ... , ∙ liaʌebeen
indenture, it is quite possible that in some instances they were a committee
delegated representatives of the whole body of suitors. In
r414 the indenture for Somersetshire states that the sealers
made the election ‘ ex assensu totius Communitatis2/ a form
borrowed no doubt from the ancient return by the sheriff; but
possibly implying that the election, like the ecclesiastical elec-
tion ‘ per Compromissionem,’ passed through two stages. And
although there are no words in the returns that imply such to
* Prynne, Reg∙. iii. pj>. 156-159.
2 Ibid. p. 171.