in burgage holders
Number of voters: about 90
Date | Candidate | Votes |
---|---|---|
17 Apr. 1754 | SIR KENRICK CLAYTON | |
WILLIAM CLAYTON | ||
28 Mar. 1761 | SIR KENRICK CLAYTON | |
CHARLES WHITWORTH | ||
9 Mar. 1768 | SIR KENRICK CLAYTON | |
ROBERT CLAYTON | ||
3 Apr. 1769 | FREDERICK STANDERT vice Sir Kenrick Clayton, deceased | |
10 Oct. 1774 | SIR ROBERT CLAYTON | |
FREDERICK STANDERT | ||
11 Sept. 1780 | SIR ROBERT CLAYTON | |
JOHN KENRICK | ||
23 Nov. 1783 | JOHN NICHOLLS vice Clayton, vacated his seat | |
3 Apr. 1784 | JOHN KENRICK | |
JOHN NICHOLLS | ||
20 Dec. 1787 | SIR ROBERT CLAYTON vice Nicholls, vacated his seat |
Bletchingley was a complete pocket borough of the Clayton family, who owned, according to Oldfield, all the burgages. In 1779 Sir Robert Clayton, financially embarrassed and apprehensive of parliamentary reform, sold the reversion of his property at Bletchingley (of which the intrinsic value was about £100 per annum) to his cousin John Kenrick, for £10,000. In June 1785 Clayton filed a bill in Chancery against Kenrick alleging that he had been ‘grossly imposed upon’ in the purchase and that the price was an ‘inadequate consideration’ for the parliamentary interest. Kenrick replied that Clayton had never complained of the transaction until after the defeat of parliamentary reform and in May 1788 Clayton’s bill was dismissed with costs.1State of the dispute between Sir Robert Clayton ... and John Kenrick relative to ... Bletchingley.
- 1. State of the dispute between Sir Robert Clayton ... and John Kenrick relative to ... Bletchingley.