THE CASE Of the Sitting Members that Serve for The Burrow of Southwark.  
THe Election began the Twelfth day of January, 1688/9. and upon the View it did appear the Sitting Members, had much the greater Number; but in regard a Poll was demanded, the Bailiff immediately complied with it: and was prosecuted, persuant to the Articles hereunto annexed.  
The Petition is in the Name of the Inhabitants of Southwark, who do pay Scot and Lot, and have the only right to Elect, etc. It does allow that the Bailiffs has the right of Inspection and Ordering the Election; But complains that the Bailiff suffered persons to Poll who had no right, and hindering the Petitioners to discover them.  
By removing the Poll from a convenient place, and continued it Three days at St. George's near the King's Bench and Marshalsea Prisons.  
That those which came to Poll for the persons Nominated by the Petitioners were forcibly kept out, Beaten and Wounded. And returned Sir Peter Rich and John Arnold Esq when as (say the Petitioners) Anthony Bowyer and Edward Smith Esquires were duly Elected by the Major part, who had right to Elect, etc.  
I answer to this disingenuous Petition, The Sitting Members, doubt not to make it appear, That all the matters therein contained, are false and untruly suggested. For they will prove  
That at all times whensoever a Poll was taken, the Burgesses were chosen by the Inhabitants, Housekeepers of this Burrow, who did not receive Alms of the respective Parishes.  
That in Five succeeding Elections these very Petitioners did give their Votes, as the Ancient Usage of this Burrow, according to the Articles Signed by the Candidates.  
That divers of these Petitioners in former Elections did Poll for Sir Richard How and Sir Peter Rich, according to the Usage now practised, as being the Custom of the Burrow.  
That all persons who had right to Poll, had free access in his Turn to the Poll-Table, where all necessary Questions were put by the Bailiff or his Deputy; That is to say, The persons Abode, his Trade, and what sort of Habitation he had, Before he declared for whom he gave his Poll.  
That to avoid all Contests and Disturbance, in so great an Election; This Article was assented and agreed unto. That any Candidate might make his Queries upon any person, he suspected to be a false Poller, and every night successively, before the Books were closed; Copies of the same were either given or sent to the Candidates on each side, to inquire after such suspected Pollers, to the end, they might be detected, and disallowed before the Close of the Poll.  
That in all former Elections where a Poll was demanded and taken, the Bailiff for Accommodation of the Inhabitants who are distant from each other, did take the Poll in the same places, they now were taken at.  
That no Force was used by the Sitting Members or their Agents, the Constables who usually attended the Poll, being generally inclined to favour the Petitioners side. Did use indirect means to feed the Poll with their party, thereby disencouraging several that would have given their Poll for Arnold and Rich to decline it.  
That neither the Petitioners or the Candidates ever complained of any irregular or undue practice of the Bailiff, during the taking of this Poll (which held six days) until the Books were cast up, and the disproportion appeared so great.  
For John Arnold Esq Polled— 2130 For Anthony Bowyer Esq— 1360 For Sir Peter Richardo— 1677 For Edward Smith Esq— 1526 So Mr. Arnold had more Votes than Mr. Bowyer— 770 More than Mr. Smith— 604 Sir. Peter Richardo had more than Mr. Bowyer— 317 More than Mr. Smith— 151  
And whereas the Petition is said to be in behalf of themselves and others that have right to Elect. The Sitting Members believe they shall be able to prove, that some of the Petitioners went from House to House to get Hands, and collect moneys to carry on this Petition; but were refused by some persons that Polled for Smith and Bower, declaring to this effect. They were satisfied with the fairness of the Poll.