parliamentary and royalist forces, when the Oracle was despoiled of its property, and the building converted into a depôt for military stores; from this disaster the woollen manufacture never recovered. Sailcloth and other fabrics of coarse linen, and various manufactures were afterwards partially carried on, and there are still a few looms employed in the weaving of silk, ribands, &c. The town however is not now entitled to consideration for its manufactures. Its present importance consists in its being the centre of a very extensive traffic in flour-above 20,000 sacks being annually sent to London-timber, bark, hops, wool, cheese, malt, beer, and all the agricultural products of a very fertile district, which are forwarded by barge and railway to the metropolis. This traffic is materially facilitated by the canal which unites the Severn and the Thames, through the intermediate streams of the Avon and the Kennet.

The total annual value of real property, in the division of Reading, assessed in 1842, to the income and property tax, amounted to £188,200, of this £101,903 was on lands, £79,874: 14s. on houses, and £4,874 on tithes. The Reading poor law union comprehends the three parishes of St. Lawrence, St. Mary, and St. Giles, embracing an area of eight square miles. The poor rates in 1838, amounted to £7,320: 7s. The expenditure on the poor, in 1840, to £4,941; 16s.

Reading has regularly returned two members to parliament, from 23 Edward I.* Previously to the reign of Elizabeth, the guild-merchant at Reading was divided into five companies, which were composed of freemen, and under a variety of grants and charters had an exclusive right to trade with the borough; at this period therefore, the privileges of the guild-merchant were an inducement to tradesmen to become free burgesses; but these charters were dissolved before the date of the governing charter. It was formerly a matter of controversy, whether the right of electing representatives in parliament, was not confined to the free burgesses; but in 1714, the elective franchise, which, by entries in the corporation diary, appears to have been long before exercised by the inhabitants at large, was formally determined by a committee of the House of Commons, to be in the inhabitants of the borough, paying scot and lot. Since the dissolution of the guild* In the 25 Henry III. a Parliament was held here, and in the 41st of the same reign, a council. Another Parliament was held in the 31 Henry VI.

This right was vested in temp. Edward I., Edward II., Edward III., Richard II., Henry V., and Henry VI., in the commonalty of the town; in temp. Edward IV., "in the bailiffs and com burgesses of their unanimous consent and assent." In the reign of Henry VII, the burgesses claimed to be a body corporate; re-asserted this usage to return members to Parliament, who were elected by the com-burgesses. In the reign of Henry VIII. the members were elected by the mayor, burgesses and commonalty. An entry occurs in the reign of Queen Mary, in the corporation diary, of a compromise made between the burgesses and the mayor, who had been their representative in Parliament, with respect to his wages, for which he was entitled to £5. being 2s. a day for 50 days, but he was contented to take the sum of 20s. to be paid by the burgesses of the hall; although the charge ought to have been borne by the inhabitants of the borough. From which it appears, that the inhabitants were even at that time, considered as the persons subject to the burdens of the place, and there can be no doubt that they were also entitled to its privileges. In the reign of Queen Elizabeth, a striking usurpation seems to have occurred, in which the high steward, for the first time, exercised the power of nominating one of the burgesses to the then next parliament-said to be intended only as a personal compliment to Queen Elizabeth. But the succeeding high steward exercised the right, on condition of exonerating the town from the payment of the members' wages, which usage was continued for a considerable time afterwards, for in the 20 James I., the Earl of Wallingford, being high steward, nominated Sir Francis Knowles, who was returned as member. He also nominated Sir Robert Knowles, who was a candidate; but the recorder, Sir John Saunders, was elected by a larger number of votes. The following agreement was entered in the Diary:-"Seeing that the mayor

merchant, and the last determination as to the right of voting, there has been no motive for taking up the freedom of the borough, except for the purpose of becoming a member of the corporation, a member of parliament for the borough, or a percipient of certain local charities. For more than a century therefore, the only mode of obtaining the freedom has been by the appointment of the mayor, aldermen and assistants, and their practice has been to confer the freedom on the party about to be elected to any of the situations above specified; and occasionally, on certain distinguished individuals as honorary freemen.

The present constituency of the borough, comprehends the inhabitants paying scot and lot, including the renters of 1154 houses of £10. The greatest number of electors polled for thirty years prior to the Reform Act, was 1010. The mayor is the returning officer.

The boundaries of the parliamentary borough coincide with those of the municipal, comprehending the entire parish of St. Lawrence, and parts of the parishes of St. Mary and St. Giles.

CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF MEMBERS FROM 1 EDWARD VI. TO 10 VICTORIA.

and burgesses have chosen me to be one of their burgesses at the next parliament, I do hereby promise to bear my own charges in this service, and that they shall be quitted from the payment of any wages." But in 1627, the 3 Charles I., the Earl of Banbury, the then high steward, nominating a stranger, the burgesses refused to elect him, and wrote letters to the earl, requesting that they might be allowed to continue neighbours; and after waiting fourteen days without receiving an answer, they returned their own member, which so offended the earl, that he sent in his resignation. In 1659, before the Restoration, an unconstitutional latitude was given to the right of election in this borough, lodgers and inmates being then allowed to vote.

Fras. Knollys, §

tt On Petition, C. Cadogan, & Owen Buckingham, v. Calvert, & Clarges, (election void.)

1717 O. Buckingham, v. The same, (accepted office).

1720 Richard Thompson, v. Buckingham (deceased) Clement

1701 Tanfield Vachell. Anthony 1722 Rich. Blagrave.

++

1734

Harry Grey.

Sir Owen

Owen

same (accepted office).

1739 J. Blagrave, v. Pottenger, (deceased.)

* 1685, May 23. The return of these two members, was petitioned against by Sir William Rich, and Sir Henry Fane, and Samuel House, and other freemen and inhabitants of this borough, whereupon those gentlemen were declared to be not duly elected. -Journ. of H. of C., Vol. 9.

Thomas Petit, Esq. who was the unsuccessful candidate at this election, petitioned the house to amend the return in his favour. No proceedings however appear to have been entered upon in this matter.-Journ. of H of C., Vol. 11.

Sir Thomas Stamp, Kt. petitioned against the return of these members, on the 12th Dec., 1698, which he renewed 24th Nov.1799, on which occasion, having altered the substance of his petition, the house dismissed his application.-J. of H. of C., Vol. 12 & 13. § Mr. Tanfield Vachell, a candidate at this election, petitioned, with several freemen and others of this borough, against the return of Francis Knollys, Esq. No determination appears on the Journals.-Journ. of H. of C., Vol. 13.

On the petition against the return of these members, promoted by Sir Wm. Rich, Bart., a candidate, and the inhabitants paying scot and lot, claiming the right of election in themselves, exclusive of the freemen of the said borough, it was determined—" that the right of electing burgesses for this borough, is in the freemen and inhabitants; such freemen not receiving alms, and such inhabitants paying scot and lot,"—consequently, Anthony Blagrave was declared duly elected.-Journ. of H. of C., Vol. 16.

The return of this member, was petitioned against by Owen Buckingham, Esq.,on the score of Mr. Clarges being a minor. Petition withdrawn-Journ. of H. of C., Vol. 17. ** 1715, March 30, a petition of divers inhabitants paying scot and lot, denying the right of the freemen to vote in elections for the said borough, and against the return of Robert Clarges, and Felix Calvert, Esqrs., shewing that William Cadogan was duly elected. The committee differing from the decision made in 1708, came to the following conclusion, which the house subsequently recognised-"That the right of election of burgesses for this borough, is only in the inhabitants paying scot and lot."-Upon hearing the further merits of this petition, several acts of bribery were proved against the sitting members, and William Cadogan, Esq. the petitioner, not having a majority of votes the committee resolved that Clarges, Calvert and Cadogan, were not duly elected-agreed to by the house. From the evidence it appeared that Mr. Cadogan was not at Reading at the time of the election, and that most of the bribed voters on each side were only freemen, and not inhabitants paying scot and lot.-Journ. of H. of C., Vol. 18.

++ Mr. Calvert petitioned against the return of these members. No determination on the Journals.-Journ. of H. of C., Vol. 18.

This election was unsuccessfully contested by the Hon. Charles Cadogan, and Richard Thompson, Esq., both of whom petitioned against the return of the above members. No determination on the Journals.-Journ. of H. of C., Vol. 20.

* John Dodd, Esq. who unsuccessfully contested this election, (Poll, Strode, 324; Fane, 296; Dodd, 295,) petitioned the House to have the return amended in his favour, which petition was discharged.--Journ. of H. of C., Vol. 27.

John Bindley, Esq. lost his election. Poll, Vansittart, 400; Dodd, 398; Bindley, 193. He subsequently petitioned to have the return amended in his favour. Petition withdrawn.-Journ. of H. of C., Vol. 32.

This election was unsuccessfully contested by John Waller, Esq. Poll, Dodd, 327; Annesley, 302; Waller, 251.

§ The Hon. Temple Luttrell, unsuccesfully contested the borough. Poll, Annesley, 350; Dodd, 317; Luttrell, 199, and petitioned to have the return amended in his faPetition withdrawn.-Journal of H. of C., Vol. 38.

vour.

**

A contested election; Annesley, 386; Lefevre, 344; John Simeon, 234.

A contested election; Lefevre, 439; Simeon, 397; John Berkeley Monck, 286. A contested election; Lefevre, 528; Palmer, 379 John Weyland, Junr., 303. On this occasion, several electors of the borough, petitioned against the return of Mr. Palmer, and in favour of Mr. Weyland, on the ground that Mr. Palmer had a pension from the crown, and that Mr. Weyland had obtained a legal majority of votes. The house determined in favour of the sitting member.-Journ. of H. of C., Vol. 74. ++ A contested election; Monck, 418; Palmer, 399; Weyland, 394.

A contested election; Monck, 580; Spence, 492; C. F. Palmer, 488; Edward Wakefield, 336. Mr. Spence was subsequently unseated, on the petition of several of the electors of the borough, which set forth that that gentleman had obtained his return through bribery, and other corrupt practices, and that several electors who had tendered their votes for Mr. Palmer, had been illegally objected to.-Journ. of H. of C., Vol. 82. §§ A contested election; Palmer, 522; Russell, 471; Dr. Stephen Lushington, 452. Number of registered electors, 1001.

¶¶ A contested election; Talfourd, 643; Russell, 441; Benj. Oliveira, 384. Number of registered electors 1025. Number voted, 960.

*** A contested election; Talfourd, 468; Palmer, 457; Charles Russell, 448. Number of registered electors, 940. Number voted, 875. On this occasion, Mr. Palmer's return was petitioned against, in favour of Mr. Russell, by a body of electors of the borough, on the ground that Mr. Palmer had obtained his majority at the poll, by receiving illegal votes. Petition rejected.-Journ. of H. of C., Vol. 93.

+++ A contested election; Russell, 570; Chelsea, 564; Thomas Mills, 410; William Tooke, 397. Number of registered electors. 1141. Number voted, 984. This return was petitioned against by Mr. Mills, on the ground of" gross and systematic bribery

WALLINGFORD BOROUGH, 23 EDWARD I.

THE borough and market town of Wallingford, situated on the banks of the Thames is 15 miles S.W. of Reading, 13 N.E. of Oxford, 3 from the Wallingford station on the Great Western Railway, and 46 from London, in the hundred of Moreton. The area of the borough amounts to 370 acres, and the population is 2,780, of whom 1333 are males, and 1447 females. The parliamentary borough comprehends a population of 7780. There are, according to the last census, 513 houses inhabited, 19 uninhabited, and 2 building.

Wallingford is a borough by prescription, and is said to have received charters from various sovereigns; but the corporation possesses only a copy of an inspeximus charter of 1 Henry I.; a charter of 4 & 5 Philip & Mary, containing an inspeximus of several charters from Henry I. downwards; the governing charter of 15 Charles II. and a charter of 36 Charles II., which was abandoned almost as soon as accepted. Under the former of these two charters, and previous to the changes introduced by the Municipal Reform Act, the government was vested in a mayor, recorder, town-clerk, six aldermen, eighteen assistants, two bailiffs, and a chamberlain. The mayor was annually elected by the assistants out of the six aldermen, and had a salary of eighty guineas. The mayor, aldermen, and recorder, were justices of the peace in the borough. The mayor was also coroner.

Under the Municipal Reform Act, the borough is governed by a mayor, four aldermen, and twelve councillors. Courts for small debts and courts for quarter sessions are held by the corporation. The magistrates of the county hold petty sessions for the division every alternate Friday. A county court for the recovery of debts under £20, &c., under the late Act is held here.

Having no manufactures and little thoroughfare, with a business confined to that of malting, Wallingford may be described in the general terms of a neat county town respectably inhabited, and a place of no other importance than as the market town for the surrounding country. Being situated in a rich agricultural district, there is a good pitched market on Friday in every week. It is not exempt from the county rates. In 1842, the total annual value of real property assessed to the income and property tax was £8,541; of this, £216 was on lands, £7,427 on houses, and £205 on tithes. The poor law union contains 17 parishes and townships in Berkshire, and 11 in. Oxfordshire; total superficies 68 square miles. The total amount of poor rates in 1838, was £7,177; on an average of the three preceding years, £13,614.

and corruption," a counter-charge of a similar nature, was put forth by the sitting members the result of which terminated in a compromise, in which the latter gentlemen agreed, provided the petitioner withdrew his prosecution, that one of them in the course of the ensuing session, should vacate his seat, and that both should endeavour to effect the return of Mr. Mills, or in default of so doing, should forthwith pay £2000 to the petitioner.

‡‡‡ A contested election; Pigott, 614; Talfourd, 596; Charles Russell, 521; Viscount Chelsea, 376. Number of registered electors, 1220.