Somerset had been a notoriously factious county both before the Civil War and during the Interregnum. But once the euphoria of the Restoration was past the electorate showed a marked preference for candidates of moderate views. At the general election of 1660, however, in the words of the indignant republican Edmund Ludlow, the knights of the shire were ‘chosen entirely by Cavaliers, the Lord Poulett’s interest having such sway’.

The chief interest in Shrewsbury was in the corporation, consisting of 24 aldermen and 48 common councilmen. The mayor, who acted as returning officer, was chosen annually from the aldermen. The corporation controlled the roll of freemen and hence the franchise. As usual the freedom could be obtained by birth, service, or purchase; counting only the first, there were said to be over a thousand freemen living in or near the borough. The inclusion of suburban liberties gave several country gentlemen estates within the borough boundaries.

The leading territorial interests in Wenlock were the Lawleys, who owned the Priory, the Welds of Willey, and the Foresters, as lords of Little Wenlock manor. In 1660 the Welds were disqualified as Cavaliers, and the Foresters were politically inactive until William Forester came of age. Thus Sir Francis Lawley was accompanied in the Convention by Thomas Whitmore, the recorder, a passive Royalist who had represented the borough with him in 1659.

Ludlow was the seat of the council in the marches of Wales, revived in 1661 and finally suppressed after the Revolution. Consequently the little town, with only 1,376 adult inhabitants in 1676, swarmed with lawyers, and even the sons of the local land-owning families were usually educated for that profession. All the candidates in this period except Sir Josiah Child came from the immediate neighbourhood, and all except Child, Somerset Fox, and Francis Herbert were barristers. No less than six of them became judges, probably a unique record.

The dominant interests in Bridgnorth at the Restoration were the Whitmores and Actons, both seated within three miles of the borough and related by marriage. Their politics were in agreement in 1660, and, probably by arrangement, Sir William Whitmore stood for the county while John Bennet, his brother-in-law and Sir Walter Acton were returned for Bridgnorth.

The chief interest in Bishop’s Castle lay in the corporation. The 15 common councilmen controlled the electoral roll, and annually elected a bailiff, who acted as returning officer. Between 1572 and 1690 this post was monopolized by four local families, the Oakeleys, the Warings, the Mores and the Masons. The lords of the manor do not seem to have exercised their interest during this period.

From the Restoration until beyond the end of the period Shropshire was dominated by Lord Newport, who followed the not uncommon evolution from Cavalier to Whig. No contests are known. At the general election of 1660 the Newport interest was unobtrusive, but the result was all that he could have wished. Indeed the senior knight of the shire, Sir William Whitmore, was probably disqualified under the Long Parliament ordinance as a Cavalier’s son. His colleague, Henry Vernon, had managed to avoid commitment in the Civil War, but his sympathies were not in doubt.

The principal interests in Rutland were held by the Noels of Exton and the Sherards of Whissendine, though from 1679 Sir Thomas Mackworth established a third force. The 3rd Viscount Campden, who had represented the county in the Long Parliament, had been a Royalist in the Civil War, and in the 1660 Convention Philip Sherard, who had avoided political commitment, was joined by an obscure Presbyterian, Samuel Browne.

Although the poll figures suggest a slight preference by the electorate for resident dons, or ‘gremials’, most of the successful candidates were former members of the University. The Anglican and royalist opinions of the majority were not in doubt, even in 1660 when the Presbyterian vice-chancellor procured letters from George Monck in favour of William Lenthall, Speaker of the Long Parliament.

Polls survive in the municipal records for all the elections in this period except the last, and reveal the intense political activity in Oxford. Most successful candidates were nearby residents who had close ties with the city. In 1660 Oxford returned Lord Falkland, son of the royalist secretary of state, and an obscure Presbyterian resident, James Huxley, against the corporation candidates, Richard Croke, the deputy recorder, and John Nixon, one of the aldermen who had sat as a recruiter in the Long Parliament.