s was almost supreme, and they were firmly
entrenched in the nomination boroughs, where there was scarcely a
pretence of free election. The crown had originally a discretion in
summoning members from boroughs, and used it by issuing writs to all the
wealthiest as better able to bear taxation and more competent to
sanction it. The poorer boroughs, too, were also glad to escape
representation in order to save the expense of their members' wages. The
discretionary power of the crown was afterwards used in creating petty
boroughs such as "the Cornish group," for the purpose of packing the
house of commons with crown nominees. This practice, however, ceased in
the reign of Charles II., and these petty boroughs fell by degrees into
the hands of great landowners, who dictated the choice of
representatives.

The result has been concisely stated as follows: "The majority of the
house of commons was elected by less than fifteen thousand persons.
Seventy members were returned by thirty-five places with scarcely any
voters at all; ninety members were returned by forty-six places with no
more than fifty voters; thirty-seven members by nineteen places with no
more than one hundred voters; fifty-two members by twenty-six places
with no more than two hundred voters. The local distribution of the
representation was flagrantly unfair.... Cornwall was a corrupt nest of
little boroughs whose vote outweighed that of great and populous
districts. At Old Sarum a deserted site, at Gatton an ancient wall sent
two representatives to the house of commons. Eighty-four men actually
nominated one hundred and fifty-seven members for parliament. In
addition to these, one hundred and fifty members were returned on the
recommendation of seventy patrons, and thus one hundred and fifty-four
patrons returned three hundred and seven members."[103] Household
suffrage prevailed in a few boroughs, and here barefaced corruption was
common. Seats for boroughs, appropriately called "rotten," were
frequently put up to sale; otherwise, they were reserved for young
favourites of the proprietor. Neither yearly tenants, nor leaseholders,
nor even copyholders, had votes for counties. Of Scotland it is enough
to say that free voting had practically ceased to exist both in counties
and in boroughs, as the borough franchise was the monopoly of
self-elected town councils, and the county franchise of persons, often
non-resident, who happened to own "superiorities".

[Page