622 
PARLIAMENT, 
Counties. 
Boroughs. 
Summoned 
Difcontinued. 
Worcefterfti. 
Bromfgrove 
23 Edvv. I. 
24 Edw. I. 
Dudley 
23 Edvv. I. 
24Edw. I. 
Kiddefminfter 
23 Edw. I. 
24 Edw. I. 
Perlhore 
23 Edw. I. 
24 Edw. I. 
Yorkfhire 
Doncafter 
23 Edw. I. 
24Edw. I. 
Jervale 
23 Edw. I. 
24 Edw. I. 
Pickering 
23 Edvv. I. 
24 Edw. I. 
Ravenfer 
33 Edvv. I 
12 Edvv, III. 
Tykhull 
Halifax 
23 Edw. I. 
Com.-wea. " 
24 Edw. I. 
) 
Whitby 
Leeds 
Cotn.-vvea. 
Com.-wea. . 
5- Reftoration. 
Calais in France 27 Hen. VIII. 3 Pb. & M. 
In all fixty-eight boroughs which lent members to par¬ 
liament in different reigns, and are now deprived of that 
(right; befides which, we find ninety-feven other boroughs 
which have charters, and have molt probably fent mem¬ 
bers at fome former period fince the reign of Edward I. 
but for which no fummonfes are to be found, though 
they were unqueftionably parliamentary boroughs in the 
time of the Saxon monarchy, when every borough in 
England was reprefented, as well as the rural tythings, 
who chofe their reprefentatives in the county-courts. 
In Berkfnire.—Thatcham.. 
Cambridgefhire.—Wifbeach. 
Chelter.—Altringham, Congleton, Macclesfield, and 
Middlewich. 
Cornwall.—Botreaux Caltle, Crofthole, Kilkhampton, 
Milbrook, and Padftow. 
Derby.—Bakewell, and Chelterfield. 
Devonfhire.—Biddiford, Bampton, Chadlington, Chal- 
veley, Cholmley, Cornworthy, Denbery, Hartland, Il¬ 
ford Combe, Keneford, Kingfbridge, Milverton, Newton- 
Abbas, Pepelford, Sampford Peverel, Seal, Twikebere, 
and Thalatnpton. 
Dorfetlhire.—Bere, Wimburnminlter, and Milton. 
Durham.—Barnard Caltle, Hartlepool, Stockton, and 
Sunderland. 
Effex.—-Bradfield, Rawleigh, and Thaxted. 
Gloucefterlhire.—Avening, Eerkely, St. Berwald’s, 
Chipping Campden, Cheltenham, Frampton, Letchlade, 
Newnham, Cliipping Sodbury, Tetbury, Thornbury, 
and Wotton Under edge. 
Hamplhire.—Porchelter, Rumfey, and Weftover. 
Herefordlhire.—Ewias Lacy, Pembridge, and Wigmore. 
•Huntingdon.—Godmanchelier. 
Kent.—Deal. 
Monmoutblhire.—Abergavenny, Caerleon, Chepftow, 
Newport, and Ulke. 
Northamptonshire.—Daventry, and Rothwell. 
Norfolk.—Bern ay. 
Northumberland.— Alnmouth, Alnwick, Harbottle, 
and Warnmouth. 
Salop.— Clebury, Lidham, Ofweltry, Wortham, and 
Worthing. 
Somerfetlhire.—Somerton, Wellington, Wincanton, 
and Yeovill. 
Stafford lit ire.—Betely, Burton-upon-Trcnt, Tut bury, 
and Walfali. 
Suffolk.— Bungay, Budefdale, Clare, and Mendlefliam. 
Surrey.—L a n g h u r ft: 
Stiff ex.—Pe ven fey. 
Warwick.—Birmingham, and Stratford-upon-Avon. 
Weft morela 11 d.—Kendall. 
York.—Leeds, and Skelton. 
Lambert, in his Perambulations of Kent, reckons near 
forty places in the Lath of St. Auguftine, under the de¬ 
nomination of boroughs, which, being now villages, we 
omit, as Brown Willis does feveral corporations in that 
and other counties, becaufe he does not meet with them 
vtnder the ffyle of ancient boroughs. It may be concluded 
that all corporations or boroughs had an inherent right 
to reprefentation, if they had been defirous to have ex¬ 
erted it; but, as that franchife was formerly expenffve 
they no doubt induftrioufly declined it. 
As Agrnondefliam, Marlow, and Wendover, in the 
county of Buckingham, were reftored upon petition to 
parliament, on the 4th May, 1624, to the privilege of 
fending reprefentatives, after having loft that right from 
the 2d of Edward II. until the 21ft of James I. a period of 
four hundred years ; we conceive the above boroughs to 
have an equal claim to the fame juftice. 
By the above tables it appears, that a hundred and 
fixty-four boroughs, exclufive of Calais in France, are 
now disfranchifed; and that boroughs have been created 
and annihilated from the reign of Edward I. to that of 
Charles II. inclufive, at the caprice of each fucceffive 
monarch. We may here be allowed to afk the enemies 
of reform, whether the conftitution would receive a 
greater injury from the disfranchifement of Old Sarum, 
Gatton, Caftle Rifing, or Midhurft, than it has at pre- 
fent fuftained from the difqualification of Leeds or Man- 
chefter ? It furely becomes neceflary to abolifti the ex- 
ifting rotten boroughs; or, according to the argument 
of our opponents, to make the conftitution complete, by 
reftoring the hundred and ffxty-four which have been 
difcontinued. In the commonwealth-parliament, Sept. 
3, 1654, ail the rotten boroughs were omitted. 
Parliament of Ireland. —It appears that, for the 
fpace of almoft a century and a half after Henry II. had 
taken pofteftion of Ireland, there was but one parliament 
for both kingdoms, the laws made in the parliament of 
England being tranfmitted to Ireland, under the great 
feal, to be proclaimed, enrolled, and executed, as the 
laws of Ireland. The firft regular eftablifhment of a par¬ 
liament in Ireland feems to have been about the end of 
the reign of Edward II. for the meetings and confulta- 
tions of the great lords before that period, although in 
old annals called parliaments, are not, in the proper 
fenfe of the word, entitled to that appellation. When. 
Ireland was invaded by the Scots under Bruce, the Engliffi 
government found itfelf fo much embarraffed, that, 
not being able to afford eft'eftual affiftance to its Irifh fub- 
jefts, they were authorized to hold a general council of 
the kingdom among themfelves, in order that they might 
purfue fpeedier and more tiecifive meafures for allaying 
the commotions with which the whole country was then 
agitated. 
In the reign of Henry VII. the parliament of Ireland 
became, in fome meafure, dependent on that of England, 
by an aft pafi’ed tinder the direftion of fir Edward 
Poynings, the lord deputy, by which it was provided that 
“ all the ftatutes lately made in England, of a public na¬ 
ture, fhould be held effeftual and valid in Ireland.” It 
has been erroneoufly fuppofed, that this aft extended to 
the whole code of Englifh ftatutes ; for, in reality, it re¬ 
fers only to a certain number, which, however inaccu¬ 
rately ftated, were under the eye of the Irifh legiflature. 
“From this regulation,” fays Profeffor Millar, it may be 
fairly inferred, that the Irifh parliament was at this time 
underftood to pofi’efs an independent legifiative autho¬ 
rity; for, if that affembly was capable of adopting the 
Englifh laws, it mult have pofiefied the power alfo of re¬ 
jecting them : and, as this aft of legiflature fufftcientiy 
teftifies the exertiorf^of independence on the part of Ire¬ 
land, the affent of the governor on the part of the king, 
leaves no doubt of his majefty’s approbation and con¬ 
currence.” 
But to fecure the dependence of the Irifh parliament, 
Henry endeavoured to prevent debate, by putting a ne¬ 
gative upon all their proceedings. With this intention, 
he caufed another aft to be palled, commonly .known by 
the name of Poynings’ Law, which declares, “ that no 
parliament ftiould be held in Ireland until the lord de¬ 
puty and his council fhould make known to the king and 
council in England the caufes lor which the meeting was 
to be called, and the bills which were to be pafled ; and 
4 that, 
