A book of the west. Volume 2, Cornwall : $b being an introduction to Devon and CornwallBaring-Gould, S. (Sabine)
History
A book of the west. Volume 2, Cornwall : $b being an introduction to Devon and Cornwall
Baring-Gould, S. (Sabine)
Cornwall (England : County)
Queen Mary followed by raising S. Ives to the position of a borough;
Elizabeth proceeded to confer the same privileges on S. Germans, S.
Mawes, Tregony, East Looe, Fowey, and Callington. Those called into
existence by Edward were all under Duchy influence with the exception
of Mitchell, “the meanest hamlet within or without Cornwall,” which was
under the control of the Arundels of Lanherne.
Four of the new boroughs had been places belonging to monastic
establishments, but since the suppression of the religious houses they
had passed under the domination of the Crown. S. Ives, which had been
constituted a borough by Philip and Mary, was in the hands of Paulet,
Marquis of Winchester, who could be relied upon. For the same reason
Callington was given two members in 1584, as this also was held by
the Paulets. The fear of ecclesiastical influence is conspicuous in
numerous instances. Camelford is two miles distant from a church, and
the only chapel in it was confiscated and demolished. Saltash was
another churchless place; it belonged to the parish of S. Stephen’s,
two miles distant, and had in it no other place of worship than a
municipal chapel. Grampound was at a like distance from its parish
church, S. Creed; Tregony was planted at the junction of several
parishes; Mitchell divided between two equidistant churches two miles
away. Another remarkable feature in these boroughs is that they rapidly
slipped away from the influence of the Crown, and fell under the
control of great landlords. Founded for the servile support of the
Throne, they became a prey, not even to Duchy tenants, but to private
owners, and resolved into saleable commodities, that passed rapidly
from hand to hand. In 1783 it was noticed that seven peers directed or
influenced the return of twenty members; eleven commoners controlled
the election of twenty-one; and the people one only, that of S. Ives.
It was a recognised thing that the man who held six boroughs in his
hand, that is to say, who could return twelve members to support the
Ministry, could demand and obtain a peerage. Even a foreign Jew who,
at a pinch, could assist the Ministry by means of three boroughs which
he had bought, could exact a baronetage in part payment.
Cornwall returned forty members, as many, excepting one, as the entire
kingdom of Scotland; more by two than Durham, Northumberland, and
Yorkshire together; and along with Wiltshire, where was another nest of
pocket boroughs, more than Yorkshire, Lancashire, Middlesex, Warwick,
Worcester, and Somersetshire.
Another interesting feature in the pocket boroughs was the various
methods of voting. In some it was close and secret; in others open
and democratic. In some the electors were nominated by the patron; in
others they maintained a measure of independence, and disposed of their
votes to the highest bidder.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account