Three Electoral Periods

I. THREE PERIODS. 

The representation of Dover in Parliament appears to date from January, 1265, when Simon de Montford, to gain popular sympathy, convoked a Parliament, and, hoping to win the support of the Cinque Ports, invited Dover and the other Ports to each send four of their Burgesses to sit in that assembly. The writs on that occasion, and for about a century later, were sent direct to the Mayors or Bailiffs of the several Ports, but all the returns to those early writs are lost. In 1366 Edward III. adopted the plan of sending the Parliamentary writs for all the Cinque Ports towns en bloc to the Lord Warden at Dover Castle, and from that date, with some exceptions, the returns to the writs are preserved. When regular Parliamentary representation began, the Bur gesses of Parliament from Dover — two in number — were invariably local men, usually the Mayor for the time being and one of the Jurats. 

The mode of election at Dover was for the whole of the Freemen to be assembled, by the blowing of the Town Horn, in one of the Churches (originally in St. Peter's, and later in St. Mary's), and every Freeman on the roll had a vote. There does not appear to have been much anxiety to be returned as a Member of Parliament in those days, and it is probable that the Corporation quietly arranged the selection, for there are no early records of contested elections. In the Reign of Queen Elizabeth, however, a select body, called the Common Council, then recently formed, sometimes assumed the right of choosing the two Burgesses of Parliament, without consulting the general body of the Freemen. At other times attempts were made to restrict the Parliamentary franchise to Freemen resident within the Borough ; but the House of Commons, whenever appealed to, required all Freemen to be given the oppor tunity of voting, whether resident in the Borough or not. From the year 1366 the representation of Dover in Parhament has been continuous, but the roll of Members returned is not complete, many of the returns to writs having been lost, but the names of Members on record from 1366 to 1916 number 137. 

The whole term of Dover's Parliamentary representa tion from 1366 to the present time may be divided into three periods, the first dating from the fortieth year of Edward III. to the end of the Reign of Queen Elizabeth, which was a time when no great local interest was taken in Parliamentary representation. From time to time, two members of the Corporation were deputed to be " the Burgesses of Parlia ment," as they were termed; but there was no fuss about it. In those early days Parliaments were supposed to be called annually, hence, there were usually elections every year, and sometimes twice a year. The chosen Burgesses were paid three shillings a day for their " wages," in addition to the expenses of riding there and back. The guinea a week was well earned, for it was a tiresome and often a perilous journey to and from Westminster; and as the Parliament was usually convened during the short days of early Spring and sometimes during the late Autumn, in the same year, there was a good deal of coming and going. In addition to the perils of the road, there were sometimes perils in Parliament, or after the return home, if the Members did not speak and vote as the King and his Ministers desired. That, no doubt, accounted for the absence of contested elections. 

The second electoral period, beginning with the Stuart Kings and extending to the enactment of the Parliamentary Reform Act of 1832, was marked by fiercely contested elections. The payment of the Dover Burgesses of Parlia ment then ceased, not owing to any change in the law, but because of the keen competition for seats in the House of Commons, which induced the candidates not only to render gratuitous service, but to bribe the Freemen to elect them. During the time of the Stuart Kings the Court backed the candidates, and openly did the bribery when necessary, but, later, in the Georgian times, the contested elections were fought by rival men of wealth, who were prepared, first of all, to purchase the Freedom of the Borough for themselves and then to buy the votes of the Freemen also. Dover during this second period was represented by a succession of men who were in various ways notable. Some made the Borough a stepping-stone to fortune, while others squandered fortunes in securing the use of that step, which, in most cases, was to them of no ultimate advantage. As to the constituency itself, there was no change in this second period, except that for a short time during the Commonwealth it was deprived of one of its Members, but the Restoration restored the representation to the status quo ante bellum. 

The third period, which commenced in 1832, with the creation of a new representation law, has seen the Parlia mentary franchise extended again and again; and if the great European War had not for a time, at least, blocked domestic legislation, there might have been more to record in that direction. The other Parliamentary changes of the third period are not entirely novel. Dover is again, and now permanently, reduced to a one-Member constituency, and the Member for Dover is once again paid " wages," with these differences, that the wage, instead of being for the days worked, is for work or play all the year round, and the money comes out of the National Exchequer instead of the Dover Muniment Box. 

While rapidly reviewing the Dover Parliamentary elections of these three periods, it is obvious that there is some danger of the narrative becoming a mere dry list of names and dates. The patriotism, pathos, zeal and humour, together with the local colour of the times and circumstances, cannot be pictured in the few lines devoted to each election. The old battle-cries cannot be revived, nor the music of the hired bands re-echoed ; the processions, the banners, the speeches and the squibs must be all cut out of the story ; and then — what will be left ? There will be just as much left as the imaginations of those who follow the narrative can read into it. If that should amount to very little, there will be, at least, a plain, unvarnished tale of a long period of representative government, affording a fair sample of what the electors of the various constituencies of England were doing during the dynastic changes and hard times of six centuries. As already hinted, no attempt can be made to follow the elections in detail, yet to keep the record of the local elections in touch with the Parliamentary history of the times, a few facts as to the successive reigns will be thrown in and very brief biographic jottings respecting the men whom the electors of Dover from time to time delighted to honour.