How FAR IS THE PRESENT HOUSE OF COMMONS REPRE

IN

SENTED IN THE ROLL OF THE LONG PARLIAMENT ?

N these days of never-ending reform, when the state of society and the very face of the country are undergoing the most rapid and fundamental transformations, and our ancient landmarks, both real and personal-so to speak-are being gradually obliterated, the old order changing and giving place to the new,' it is of some small interest, from an old-world point of view, to try and discover to what extent the families which supplied members to the Parliament of 1640, the most remarkable Parliament that ever sat,' are represented in our present House.

The subjoined list does not pretend to be exhaustive. Many of our present legislators who do not find place here may claim lineal descent from the members of the father of Parliaments, which first rendered Parliaments supreme, and has since get the whole world upon chase of Parliaments' (to quote Carlyle's words); but the inquiry from this point of view would be possibly impracticable, and the writer has limited himself to ascertaining as far as in his power lies the cases in which the names are identical, and the owners are beyond all reasonable doubt the present representatives of those who constituted that memorable House. The list, ever decreasing, has of course diminished rapidly since the Reform Act of 1832, and is becoming more and more contracted with every successive Parliament; and to this end the disappearance of pocket boroughs, the curtailment of territorial influence, the redistribution of seats, the extension of the franchise, and, perhaps above all, the increase of wealth, and the growth of the power of the middle and lower classes, have mainly contributed. East and West Looe, Weobley, Camelford, Bossiney, Hedon, Gatton, Beeralston, and such like boroughs, which then each had a specific share in shaping our destinies, are now mere 'nominis umbræ,' while we look in vain through the list for Birmingham, Manchester, Leeds, Sheffield, &c., centres of our greatness which even yet (by their own showing at least) are inadequately represented. Yet, with respect to pocket-boroughs, if we refer to the list of the House of Commons which met in June 1831, and dissolved in December 1832, the Parliament which passed the Reform Bill, it is worthy of notice that even at that time (although the old names appear in considerable numbers, and although the counties are in several cases represented by the same families, and many of the descendants of the borough members of the Long Parliament still sit for other places in the same counties)

bear an identical name, is surprisingly small. In both Houses two Russells sit for Tavistock, a Legh for Newton in Lancashire, a Whitmore for Bridgnorth, a Howard for Carlisle, and a Luttrell for Minehead, and that is about all!

Our lists of the Long Parliament are probably still imperfect, for after the secession of the Royalists it became necessary to fill up their places, and in 1645 new writs were issued, and about 230 members were added to the House. In addition to this, the troublous times, the rapid fluctuations in the affairs of men, and the numerous vicissitudes of the House from its birth to the days of its extreme dotage, when it sat hopelessly drivelling month after month over the meaning of the word 'incumbrance' as applied to landed property, combine to render it extremely unlikely that we are yet in possession of a complete roll.

6

It will be noticed that the list of descendants' which is furnished in the following pages is composed almost entirely of members of the aristocracy. The five members have dropped out, the grim patriots, the stern defenders of the liberties of the people, the Levellers and Fifth Monarchy men are conspicuous by their absence. Whether they sank under the mighty wave of reaction, or whether, having done their work, they relapsed into their primitive obscurity, it is hard to say; but their place knows them no more.' In like manner but few of the leaders of men of the present century can boast of an ancestor bearing their name in the Parliament of 1640. Pitt, Fox, Canning, Wellesley, Peel, Gladstone (and of couse Disraeli) are names as unknown to the Long Parliament as are those of Pym, Hampden, Cromwell, and Selden to the present House. Each hour' requires its own man,' who, when he has completed his allotted task, disappears into the limbo of history, leaving his work alone to testify to his greatness.

It is a notable sign of those iconoclastic times that we find here and there in the Roll of Parliament the names of peers of the realm who, after the abolition of their House in 1649, were minded to sink their dignity and to rank with Commoners. Thus we have Lord Pembroke sitting for Berkshire, and (proh pudor!) Lord Salisbury representing Lynn. This Lord Pembroke appears to have been a zealous Republican; he was one of the Commissioners sent by the Parliament to meet the King at Newcastle in 1646, and again, on June 7, 1649, the day of thanksgiving appointed for London, we find him at a dinner at Grocers' Hall, speaking very loud,' and insisting that Sir Bulstrode Whitlocke, as keeper of the Commonwealth Great Seal, should take precedence of him. I have given place to Bishop Williams when he was keeper, and the Commonwealth Great Seal is as good as any King's ever was.'

Lord Salisbury, on the other hand, was seemingly of a somewhat vacillating turn of mind, and must have lacked the thoroughness' of the present leader of her Majesty's Opposition, for he joined the King

repented, and leaving York secretly tendered his allegiance to the Parliament. He sat again in the Parliament of 1656, this time for Hertford, and his name appears in the Catalogue of Kinglings,' which contains the names of those who voted for a King in 1657.

There were other scions of the noble houses of Herbert and Cecil then as now in the House of Commons. Lord Philip Herbert, member for Glamorganshire, who succeeded his father in the title, and his brother James, who was elected during the session as member for Wiltshire, Lord Cranbourne, who sat for Hertford, and Robert Cecil, second son of Lord Salisbury, and M.P. for Old Sarum.

The house of Bedford, which still holds its own in the great assembly, supplied at least three members to the Long ParliamentLord William Russell, member for Tavistock; Francis, member for Cambridgeshire; and John, also member for Tavistock. Of these, the first (father of the ill-fated Lord William Russell) succeeded his father in 1641 as fifth Earl, and was subsequently created Duke of Bedford. He commanded the Parliamentary horse in 1642.

John Russell, untrue to the popular instincts of the family, was declared incapable of sitting in 1644, served under the King during the war, and after the Restoration was made Colonel of the 1st Regiment of Foot Guards.

Francis Russell sat in the Parliament of 1656. His name appears in the Catalogue of Kinglings,' and he was called in 1657 to the ' other House,' that nameless and abortive apology for a House of Lords which Cromwell attempted to institute. A description of this gentleman still remains to us in a tract to be found in the 'Harleian Miscellany,'' printed in the fifth year of England's slavery under its new monarchy,' from which we learn that in the beginning of the war he was first for the King, then for the Parliament, and colonel of foot under the Earl of Manchester: A man high flown, but not serious or substantial in his principles, no great zealot for the cause, therefore not judged honest, serious, or wise enough to be of the Little Parliament. Yet he was of the latter Parliaments.' He was Chamberlain of Chester, and married his eldest daughter to Henry Cromwell.

6

The Northumberland interest found a representative in Henry Percy, brother of the Earl of Northumberland, who was returned for Portsmouth, but elected to sit for his native county. He was, if not the originator, one of the chief contrivers of the Army Plot, the object of which was to maintain the status quo by landing a French army to unite with the English and Irish Royal forces. On a warrant being issued for his apprehension, May 5, 1641, he fled, but subsequently communicated by letter his designs to the Parliament, and designated his fellow-plotters.

Our present Conservative chief in the Commons can trace an ancestor in Sir John Northcote ('Barronet Norcot,' as he is called in a local record), member for Ashburton, who took the Solemn Protestation in 1641, and was made a baronet in the same year. During

and was taken prisoner at Exeter. In the Commons Journal' of October 16, 1644, we find a resolution that he be exchanged for Sir Alexander Denton, a prisoner in the Tower. From June 1645 to August 1646, he, in common with many other members, received an allowance of four pounds a week for present maintenance,' probably by reason of his estates being in the hands of the Royalists. Sir John seems to have persistently opposed Cromwell's military despotism, and probably on that account he was excluded from the Rump. In 1651 his name was omitted from the Commission of the Peace, and in spite of being returned to the Parliament of 1656 he, together with a considerable number of members, was refused a certificate of approval by his Highness's Council, and was thereby prevented from taking his seat. On this occasion he joined in signing a remonstrance reflecting on the Protector's tyranny. He appears to have been imprisoned when Lambert expelled the remnant of Parliament in the expiring days of the Commonwealth, for we find that he and others were released in February 1659-60, after which he was a strong promoter of the Restoration, but took no active part in public affairs under Charles II. He died in 1676. Sir John has left behind him a small volume about eight inches by four bound in calf,' which is still in the possession of the family, and contains MS. notes taken by him of the proceedings of Parliament in 1640, from the time of Strafford's attainder to the end of the year. This work has lately been transcribed and edited, with an interesting memorial of the author, by Mr. A. H. Hamilton. Those curious in such matters will find a facsimile of Sir John's autograph in vol. iii. of Burton's Diary (Rutt's edition, 1828).

Perhaps the most celebrated of the members of that bygone House who has a descendant (Lord Hinchingbrook) still sitting in our second chamber, is Master Edward Montague,' who succeeded his father, Sir Sidney, as M.P. for Huntingdonshire. We find him in 1643 as captain of the St. Neot's troop, hesitating to carry out the wholesale destruction of churches and cathedrals enjoined by his rulers, which conduct surprised Cromwell much, as we learn from the Squire Papers. Probably it was on account of such unintelligible scruples as these that he was excluded by Pride's Purge, or subsequently, from Parliament. He regained favour, however, as he sat in the Little or Praise God Barebones Parliament (the only representative of the present House in that august assembly, so far as we can learn), in the First Protectorate Parliament, as we gather from Guibon Goddard's Journal;' and again in the Parliament of 1656 he was one of the committee who waited on Cromwell to offer him the title of king. April 9, 1657, his name appears in the Catalogue of Kinglings,' and he was summoned to the other House.' It appears from the tract from which we have already quoted that he did not greatly approve of beheading the king, or of the change of government, yet was taken into the Little Parliament, which he helped to break, and to set up monarchy anew in the Protector, for which worthy

6

repented, and leaving York secretly tendered his allegiance to the Parliament. He sat again in the Parliament of 1656, this time for Hertford, and his name appears in the Catalogue of Kinglings,' which contains the names of those who voted for a King in 1657.

There were other scions of the noble houses of Herbert and Cecil then as now in the House of Commons. Lord Philip Herbert, member for Glamorganshire, who succeeded his father in the title, and his brother James, who was elected during the session as member for Wiltshire, Lord Cranbourne, who sat for Hertford, and Robert Cecil, second son of Lord Salisbury, and M.P. for Old Sarum.

The house of Bedford, which still holds its own in the great assembly, supplied at least three members to the Long ParliamentLord William Russell, member for Tavistock; Francis, member for Cambridgeshire; and John, also member for Tavistock. Of these, the first (father of the ill-fated Lord William Russell) succeeded his father in 1641 as fifth Earl, and was subsequently created Duke of Bedford. He commanded the Parliamentary horse in 1642.

John Russell, untrue to the popular instincts of the family, was declared incapable of sitting in 1644, served under the King during the war, and after the Restoration was made Colonel of the 1st Regiment of Foot Guards.

Francis Russell sat in the Parliament of 1656. His name appears in the Catalogue of Kinglings,' and he was called in 1657 to the 'other House,' that nameless and abortive apology for a House of Lords which Cromwell attempted to institute. A description of this gentleman still remains to us in a tract to be found in the 'Harleian Miscellany,'' printed in the fifth year of England's slavery under its new monarchy,' from which we learn that in the beginning of the war he was first for the King, then for the Parliament, and colonel of foot under the Earl of Manchester: A man high flown, but not serious or substantial in his principles, no great zealot for the cause, therefore not judged honest, serious, or wise enough to be of the Little Parliament. Yet he was of the latter Parliaments.' He was Chamberlain of Chester, and married his eldest daughter to Henry Cromwell.

The Northumberland interest found a representative in Henry Percy, brother of the Earl of Northumberland, who was returned for Portsmouth, but elected to sit for his native county. He was, if not the originator, one of the chief contrivers of the Army Plot, the object of which was to maintain the status quo by landing a French army to unite with the English and Irish Royal forces. On a warrant being issued for his apprehension, May 5, 1641, he fled, but subsequently communicated by letter his designs to the Parliament, and designated his fellow-plotters.

Our present Conservative chief in the Commons can trace an ancestor in Sir John Northcote ('Barronet Norcot,' as he is called in a local record), member for Ashburton, who took the 'Solemn Protestation' in 1641, and was made a baronet in the same year. During