Winchelsea

Crewe’s Act broke the government interest at Winchelsea and placed the borough securely in the control of local patrons. Jackman, the Whig agent sent down to investigate the Cinque Ports in 1790, reported that there were only six qualified voters and Oldfield claimed in 1794 that there were only three, and in 1816, seven.1Ginter, Whig Organization, 169; Oldfield, Boroughs, ii. 347; Rep. Hist. v. 411. In 1789 the controlling patron was John Nesbitt, who had inherited his interest from his uncle in 1774; but his estate was heavily encumbered with debts, largely to the crown, and he was looking for a purchaser. Fox was a prospective buyer on behalf of Lord Robert Spencer, and Jackman suggested that the Whigs might gain a foothold through Nesbitt’s discontented steward Martin, who, he informed his contact, 3 June 1790, ‘could as easily return the Members for Winchelsea independent of his employer, as I could direct this letter to you’.2Ginter, 99-101, 169. But no Whig candidate came forward and Nesbitt’s interest was sold before the general election of 1790, according to Oldfield for £15,000,3Boroughs, ii. 343. to the nabob Richard Barwell who returned himself, and to the Earl of Darlington who returned his son, Viscount Barnard.

Nesbitt’s sale of property in the borough to Barwell and Darlington was complicated, as a bill had already been filed in Chancery for the sale of his estates. From the somewhat garbled tale related by Oldfield it would appear that at the re-sale conducted by Chancery, Barwell alone purchased the Nesbitt estate.4Rep. Hist. v. 417-18. Certainly he had the strongest interest there. When Barnard succeeded his father as 3rd Earl of Darlington in 1792, his seat was filled by his kinsman Sir Frederick Fletcher Vane, but it is not known on whose interest Vane himself was replaced by John Hiley Addington in 1794. At the general elections of 1796 and 1802, however, it is most probable that Barwell controlled both seats. After the general election of 1802, when Barwell’s candidates defeated those of (Sir) Christopher Hawkins at Tregony, negotiations were opened to make available both seats at Winchelsea to the nominees of Hawkins, in return for which Barwell was to be allowed undisputed control of Tregony, but the project came to nothing.5Cornw. RO, Johnstone mss DDJ2100, bdles. 6-8. Barwell died in 1804, and thereafter Darlington, who was said to have paid £25,000 for Barwell’s interest and estate,6Horsfield, Suss. ii. app., p. 74. enjoyed undisputed control of both seats at Winchelsea.