V. RETROSPECT OF REPRESENTATION.
Looking back through this narrative of the repre sentation of Dover in ParUament, one regrets the gaps that are left in the early parts of the record; yet, there is cause for congratulation that so much has been preserved, seeing how liable such information was to be left incomplete or to be carelessly stored during the disturbed times of the Wars of the Barons and the Roses. It will have been observed that there are no Dover returns earlier than the year 1366, yet there is no doubt but that Dover was continuously represented from January, 1265, when Simon de Montford convened the first regular assembly of Burgesses and Com moners. It is said that on that occasion, owing to the special services which the Cinque Ports had rendered to the cause of the Barons, each of the Five Ports were asked to send four of their burgesses to represent them. All those early Cinque Ports returns are lost; therefore, there is lack of conclusive evidence as to how many Burgesses of Parliament were sent up from Dover in the Thirteenth Cen tury. In 1366, when Dover's regular records of representation begin, it was the custom for the writs for all the Cinque Ports to be sent, en bloc, to the Lord Warden at Dover Castle, and it was supposed to be owing to that arrangement that the returns are available from that year. That, however, is doubtful. In fact, there is a record that the King's writs were sent to Robert Kendall, Lord Warden at Dover Castle, as early as the i8th November, 1325, directing him to issue mandates for the election of two Barons of discretion to represent each of the Cinque Ports at Westminster. This fact is avouched by Sir Francis Palgrave's Collection of Parliamentary Writs, and from similar previous records there is reliable evidence that Dover was regularly represented in Parliament from 1265 to 1366, but the returns for that period are lost.
The ParUamentary writs in Sir Francis Palgrave's collec tion, for the same period, afford interesting evidence of the representation of the rural parishes round Dover, in the persons of the Abbots of St. Radigund's Abbey and Langdon Abbey. Those Abbots received writs, not only for personal attendance in ParUament, but also calling upon them to lend money and raise armed forces. For instance, Sir Francis Palgrave's collection mentions: "The Abbot of St. Radigund's summoned to Parliament at Northampton, August 26th, 1307." "The Abbot of St. Radigund's summoned to a Par liament at Westminster at Easter, 1309." The same Abbot was summoned to Parliaments at London in 131 1, and at Lincoln in 1312. This Abbot, in March, 1315, was summoned to attend Parliament at Westminster, and was asked to furnish from the Abbey chest forty marks, to aid the King in the war against the Scots. In February, 1322, the same Abbot was summoned by writ to raise as many men-at-arms and foot soldiers as he could to march against the rebels, adherents of the Earl of Lancaster, and to muster at Coventry. In the year 1315, the Abbot of Langdon Abbey was summoned by writ to attend the Parliament at West minster, and to lend from the Abbey funds fifty marks, to aid the war against the Scots.
This sort of representation of this locality, by Bishops, Abbots, and Barons, in the great Council of the Realm, which had existed from Saxton times, was continued alongside Simon de Montford's Parliament of Citizens, Burgesses, and Commoners.
The actual list of 137 Members for Dover, given in the foregoing narrative, would have been swollen to quite double the number if we had been able to fill in the blanks left in the Reigns of the rrst three Tudor Icings, and the Wars of the Barons and the Roses. The 137, however, may be taken as an important example of ihe representation of an ancient English Town and Port in the great Council of the Realm.