About 1754 the corporation was dominated by an oligarchy of local notables; its numbers were deliberately restricted; and it was not easy to manage. The chief interest was in Henry Furnese, M.P. for New Romney since 1741.
By 1754 the custom of creating freemen had fallen into disuse; and the electorate had become a close oligarchy, members and dependants of a few families who had united to secure for themselves the advantages derived from a parliamentary borough. In 1759, for example, there were 38 electors, of whom 17 held office under Government and one a secret service pension. The Lamb family were the leaders of this oligarchy, and managed the borough under the Treasury. Newcastle had recommended to all Treasury employments at Rye since 1714, and by 1754 had come to regard the borough as his own.
Hastings was a Treasury borough, managed for the Crown by the Duke of Newcastle, but by 1754 Newcastle had come to believe that it was his own. At the general election of 1761 he felt compelled to apologise to the corporation for not being able to recommend any of his own family, and in 1767 he described it as ‘a town which never was till now a Treasury borough, nor ever looked upon as such, and where I have chose the Members for upwards of three and fifty years’.Add. 32920, ff. 368-9; 32985, f. 92.
In 1754 the chief interest was acknowledged to be in the Duke of Dorset, part personal and part derived from his office of lord warden of the Cinque Ports. ‘The Duke of Dorset has long cultivated an interest in the borough of Hythe’, wrote Lord George Sackville to Charles Jenkinson, 14 June 1763,Add. 38200, f. 358. ‘and has always been indulged by the lords of the Treasury in having his recommendations accepted for the few offices in that port.’ So long as this continued the Dorset interest was supreme.
Government had considerable interest through the customs, the packet service, and the victualling office; and throughout this period at least one seat was always filled by a Government candidate. The lord warden claimed an interest, but it was based mainly on tradition and goodwill: he could not compete with Government as regards patronage. Sir Henry Erskine told Bute in February 1761 that the Duke of Dorset’s interest was ‘chiefly personal and natural, not consequential to his being warden’;But mss. and Lord North in 1784 failed to carry his candidates against Government.
York had one of the largest electorates among the English boroughs, and in Yorkshire its representatives had a standing second only to that of the knights of the shire. Usually they were of the same social class: substantial country gentlemen, drawn from all parts of the county. No merchant, and only two sons of English peers, ever sat for York in the 18th century. There was a certain hereditary element in the representation, but the city was renowned for its independence.
Thirsk was a complete pocket borough of the family of Frankland of Thirkleby, who possessed a majority of the burgages.
In 1754 Ripon was a complete pocket borough of the Aislabie family, who owned a majority of the burgages. On the death of William Aislabie in 1781 the borough was controlled by his son-in-law, William Lawrence.
At Scarborough various interests competed against each other and the electoral scene was always shifting. Government, which had considerable influence through the Customs and the Ordnance, was usually the decisive factor in Scarborough elections throughout this period. About 1754 the leading interests were in Edwin Lascelles, M.P. for Scarborough since 1744, and in William Osbaldeston of Hunmanby, 12 miles from Scarborough, who represented the borough 1736-47 and 1754-66.
