Claimed by
the house of
commons.
The persons
elected to
be resident.
The mem-
bers give
account of
their work
to their con-
stituents.
438 Constitutional History. [chap.
the king, in or out of parliament, took direct cognisance of
complaints’. After that Act the writ was returnable in
Chancery, and by the Statute of 14ɪo the judges of assize were
authorised to inquire into the undue returns. But the validity
of the return was still, it would seem, a question for the king
to consider, with the help of the lords, as in the Rutland case,
or with the help of the judges. The right of the commons was
first distinctly asserted in 1586 2 : in 1604, in reference to the
election for Buckinghamshire, the commons, in the apology
addressed to James I, represented the question as one in dispute
between their house and the chancery3 : from the time of the
Restoration to the Grenville Act in 1770 election petitions were
determined by the whole house ; that act provided for the for-
mation and regulation of election committees ; and very recent
legislation has returned to something like the ancient practice by
placing the determination of these disputes, and the infliction of
penalties resulting from them, in the hands of select judges.
Scarcely any point more forcibly illustrates the intention of
the crown and of the legislature, to make the house of commons
a really representative body, than the measures taken both in
the writs and by statute to secure the election of persons bona
fide resident among their constituents. From very early days
the writ had ordered that the knights of the shire should be
men of the county that elected them. The statutes of Henry IV
and V enforced residence as a requisite for electors and elected
alike, and that of Henry VI prescribed that the qualification of
both must lie within the shire. The same rule applied to the
boroughs. And it was for the most part strictly observed ;
the members were generally ‘ со-citizens ’ or ‘ com-burgesses ; ’
for although the more strictly senatorial theory of modern times
declared the statute of 1413 unfit to be observedi, the medieval
communities were justly jealous of their relation to their paid
representatives. At Lynn, and probably in other places, the
members, after the session of Parliament was over, brought
1 Prynne, Reg. ii. ɪɪf), 122.
2 Hallam, Constitutional History, i. 274 sq.
3 Hatsell, Precedents, i. 233. 4 See Hallam, Middle Ages, iiɪ. 119.
XX.] Vull powers of Members.
439
down a full account of its proceedings and reported them
publicly. It was after the rise of the political jealousies of the
Tudor times that strangers began to covet and canvass for the
borough membership : and the statute of Henry V was then
evaded by admitting them to the free burghership. Thus at
Ljnn, in 1603, Kobert Hitcham, Esquire, elected burgess for
parliament is required to attend to be made a free burgess of
the town. In 1613, Hitcham and Sir Henry Spelman, two per-
sons foreign to the town, prayed to be elected burgesses1. The
corporation replied that they intended to act upon the statute
of Henry V, and elected two of their neighbours. At Cam- strangers
bridge, in 1460, the magistrates, probably with the intention offromeɪee-
warning off political candidates, published an ordinance directing t'°n,
that for the future no non-resident should be elected burgess2.
Other measures of exclusion or restriction, the prohibition other re-
. . . x strictions,
of the sheriffs, of lawyers, of maintainers, of ignoble persons,
and the like, have been already noticed in our account of the
writs; the points of social importance which are connected
with them belong to another chapter.
424. When the process of election had been completed, pro- Secnrityfor
. . -, p , , , . the attend-
Vision was made tor securing the attendance and competence a∏ce of the
-τ-ι _ members
of the newly-chosen representatives, г or each of them manu- elected.
captors or bailsmen were provided, who were bound for their
obedience to the writ, and the names of the manucaptors were
entered in the return. This manucaption was intended to
secure the attendance of the members. To assure their full
powers, they had letters of commission or of ‘ ratihabition,' or
powers of attorney, such as were usually furnished to proctors
or representative officers3. After the Act of 1406 the import-
1 Archaeol. xxiv. 372 ; Hist. MSS. Report xi. App. iii. p. 151.
2 Cooper, Annal⅛, i. 211.
3 The form in which the full powers were given was not always the
same: in 1290 the sheriffs of Devon, Lincoln, and Northumberland
mentioned in their returns the bestowal of the ‘plena potestas;’ Parl.
Writs, i. 21-23. See also pp. 39, 41, 59, 60, 66 sq. The mayor and
Sheriffs of London gave their members a separate commission over and
above the return endorsed on the writ, in 1304 ; Parl. Writs, i. 146 ; and
afterwards ; ib. II. i. 7, 30, &c. At Lynn in 1433 the election took place on
Jan. 7 : the letters of authority were sealed with the common seal, Jan.
16 ; and generally a few days after the election; Archaeol. xxiv. 321.