Seaford

In practice the right of election at Seaford, a decayed port, was confined to inhabitants paying scot and lot,1T. Hurdis to Newcastle, 24 June 1747, Add. 32711, f. 499. though this was not confirmed by the House of Commons till 1761. From 1715 Members were returned on the recommendation of the Duke of Newcastle, whose estate of Bishopstone adjoined the town and who controlled the local Treasury patronage. In 1722 the voters, numbering 51, signed a letter to Sir William Gage and Sir Philip Yorke, stating that:

We, the bailiff, jurats, freemen, and inhabitants of the corporation and borough of Seaford, at the request of the Duke of Newcastle, do assure you that we do unanimously agree to choose you for our representatives at the ensuing Parliament in case you offer your services.210 Mar. 1722, Add. 35584, f. 249.

From 1722 to 1747 one of the seats was filled by members of the Gage family, who had a natural interest in Seaford from their neighbouring estate of Firle. But in 1747 Newcastle refused to recommend William Gage,3A. Stone to T. Hurdis, 16 June 1747, Add. 32711, f. 287. who since his election in 1744 had followed the Prince of Wales into opposition. At the only contested election of the period Gage and Lord Middlesex, standing jointly with the Prince’s support, were defeated by Newcastle’s candidates, William Pitt and William Hay, on whose behalf Newcastle personally intervened, canvassing the voters and sitting next to the returning officer at the poll. A petition, based on Newcastle’s contravention of the standing House of Commons resolution against interference by peers in elections, was rejected by 247 to 96.