Some remarks upon a paper which Sir George Hungerford, by a very unusual and unfair practice, delivered at the door of the House of Commons, after a full hearing of his cause before the committee. 1691 Approx. 4 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 1 1-bit group-IV TIFF page image. Text Creation Partnership, Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) : 2008-09 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1). A93528 Wing S4604A ESTC R184453 43077637 ocm 43077637 151738

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.

 Early English books online. (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A93528) Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 151738) Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English Books, 1641-1700 ; 2274:17) Some remarks upon a paper which Sir George Hungerford, by a very unusual and unfair practice, delivered at the door of the House of Commons, after a full hearing of his cause before the committee. Hungerford, George, Sir. 1 sheet ([1] p.) s.n., [London : 1691] Publication information suggested by the Bodleian Library. Reproduction of original in: Newberry Library, Chicago, Illinois.

Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.

EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.

EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org).

The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.

Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.

Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.

Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.

The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.

Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).

Keying and markup guidelines are available at the Text Creation Partnership web site.

 eng England and Wales. -- Parliament. -- House of Commons -- Election districts -- Early works to 1800. Great Britain -- Politics and government -- 1689-1702. Broadsides -- London (England) -- 17th century. 2007-07 Assigned for keying and markup 2007-07 Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images 2007-09 Sampled and proofread 2007-09 Text and markup reviewed and edited 2008-02 Batch review (QC) and XML conversion
SOME REMARKS Ʋpon a Paper which Sir George Hungerford, by a very unuſual and unfair Practice, delivered at the Door of the Houſe of Commons, after a full hearing of his Cauſe before the Committee.

THE chief Objection which Sir George Hungerford makes, is againſt the Power of Disfranchiſing, wherein it is evident how much he is miſtaken both by Law, Practice, and his own Judgment. For,

1ſt. The Burgeſſes do not Vote, by reaſon of any Inhabitancy or Burgage Tenure, but by being Elected and Sworn into the Office and Truſt of a Burgeſs; for breach of which Truſt, They may be removed from the Office of a Burgeſs, there being a Condition in Law tacitely annexed to ſuch Office, the Breach whereof is a good Cauſe of Disfranchiſement, and the Words of theſe very Disfranchiſements, are expresſly from the Office and Dignity of a Burgeſs, ſo that ceaſing thereby to be Burgeſſes, they conſequently ceaſe to have a Right of voting as Burgeſſes.

2ly. This hath been the conſtant Practice as appeared at the Committee by their Books for near an Hundred Years paſt, and Robert Hungerford Eſq Sir George's own Brother, who was formerly a Burgeſs of this Borough, hath ſet his Hand to, and allowed of ſeveral the like Disfranchiſements, as appears by the Borough Books.

3ly. The Disfranchiſement of one of the Perſons whom Sir George hath put into his Pole (though his Voice was diſallowed at the Election by the Stewards and Burgeſſes) was done by the Advice of Counſellor Blake, Sir George's Son-in-Law, and beſides Sir George Hungerford himſelf was the firſt Perſon at the taking of the Pole, who made an Exception to Disfranchiſed Perſons.

Whereas Sir George Objects, That Dyers Disfranchiſement was not fully proved.

Mr. Windham's Witneſſes proved that he had ſeen his Disfranchiſement written in the Book, and could turn to the Place where it was torn out, and ſaid that Dyer gave Ten Shillings to have the Book in his Cuſtody, in which time 'tis ſuppoſed he tore it out himſelf.

Swaddon who was convicted of Forgery, and ſtood in the Pillory, was one of the disfranchiſed Perſons who voted for Sir George.

Sir George Hungerford's Objection againſt Oliver Harman, one of Mr. Wyndham's Voices (who never at any time lived more than One Hundred Yards from Calne, and his Houſe contiguous to the Borough) is very frivolous, for it was proved, that he lived in the Borough before the Teſt of the Writ, and ever ſince, and beſides during his living out of the Borough, he was always eſteemed as a Burgeſs, was ſummoned to their Halls, acted as a Burgeſs, and had at that time, and now near 100 l. of the Borough Stock in his Hands, being intruſted therewith as a Burgeſs.

So that the majority of Voices, plainly appeared to the Committee, to be for Mr. Wyndham.