A biographical history of Guy's Hospital / by Samuel Wilks and G.T. Bettany.

  • Wilks, Samuel, Sir, 1824-1911.
Date:
1892
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: A biographical history of Guy's Hospital / by Samuel Wilks and G.T. Bettany. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by the Gerstein Science Information Centre at the University of Toronto, through the Medical Heritage Library. The original may be consulted at the Gerstein Science Information Centre, University of Toronto.

    37/538 (page 21)
    The narrative of the proceediiio:s on this petition is exceedingly interesting reading (Journals of the Commons, vol. xii., p. 584«), and supplies one or two particulars specially relating to Guy, who was un- doubtedly present at the election, and who defended his seat vigorously and successfully. It was alleged before the Committee (Sir Rowland Gwynn, chairman) that the bailiffs, as returning officers, had unduly favoured the sitting members. On the preliminary question, as to the right to vote, it was decided that not only the bailiffs and capital burgesses were entitled to vote, but also all freeholders, whether resident or not, and all inhabitants wdio paid scot and lot. In relation to this matter it appeared that Mr. Chetwynd and Mr Guy desired that the poll of out-freeholders might be separately taken, which accordingly was done. Then Guy's own vote was objected to, as he did not pay scot and lot, nor was he in any levy (of rates or taxes). The franchise w^as pretty wide, for many whose votes were examined paid only \(l. or id. to the levies, and were very poor, and many were ]:>ractically lodgers, several living in houses conjointly. The putting people into the levies for only \d. or '2d. was objected to as an abuse, to gi\e a pretence for voting. Many who voted were disqualified as recipients of charity. One Richard Blyth was an inmate of Guy's almshouse, but was polled because he was in the constable's levy. An illegal adjournment of the poll took place, various votes being received on a second day. Before the adjournment the bailiff's son broke the peace, and would shove and hinder those that came for the petitioner; and what the bailiff's son did we may expect found imitators. Various instances of ])artiality in the reception and rejection of votes were brought forward. As to the adjournment, we read that the bailiff and the recorder were both ancient men, and the bailiff