The representation of Anglesey in this period was dominated by the Bulkeleys, except in the Cavalier Parliament. There was probably a contest in February 1679, but the name of the unsuccessful candidate is not known. As a Cavalier’s son Lord Bulkeley was ineligible under the Long Parliament ordinance at the general election of 1660; but he probably purchased the silence of possible objectors by giving his interest at Beaumaris to Griffith Bodurda.
In 1660 Winchelsea returned a local Presbyterian, Samuel Gott, who had sat as a recruiter for the borough, together with William Howard, an Anabaptist who had become a royalist plotter and was connected with the Ashburnhams. In 1661 the electorate accepted Sir Nicholas Crisp, a great London merchant, as the lord warden’s nominee. Returned with him was Francis Finch, a distant relative of the Earl of Winchilsea, the lord lieutenant.
Seaford was added to the confederation of the Cinque Ports by Henry VIII; but its representation would not have been restored by the Long Parliament if it had been easily controllable by the lord warden. Local interests were dominant, and the lord warden’s ‘nominations’ in 1661 and 1685 only confirmed them. In 1660 the borough returned Sir Thomas Dyke, a royalist sympathizer but no Cavalier, and George Parker, whose father had represented it until Pride’s Purge. The Parker interest appears to have lapsed in 1661, the family preferring to revive their long connexion with Hastings.
The strongest independent interests at Sandwich were enjoyed by the Oxenden and Thurbarne families, both country-oriented. Only in 1661 and 1685 did the Admiralty interest achieve success, and even in 1661 one of the government candidates was defeated by James Thurbarne, the town clerk. At the general election of 1660 the corporation rejected the nomination of the Hon. Edward Montagu by his cousin Admiral Edward Montagu I, and returned Thurbarne with Henry Oxenden, a neighbouring country gentleman.
Rye was a small, decayed fishing port with a tradition of religious radicalism derived from Walloon and Huguenot refugees. During the Interregnum Herbert Morley had established a strong interest there, and at the general election of 1660 the freemen duly returned him with his neighbour and kinsman William Hay.
In 1660 New Romney returned Sir Norton Knatchbull, who had represented the port in the Long Parliament, and his son John, presumably unopposed. But in 1661 the younger Knatchbull had to make way for the court nominee, Sir Charles Berkeley. After Berkeley’s elevation to the peerage Henry Brouncker, groom of the bedchamber to the Duke of York, was nominated by his master, the lord warden.
Throughout the Cavalier Parliament (except for its first six months), and again under James II, Hythe was represented by two placemen. Nevertheless, by the end of the period it had shaken itself free from domination by the Government without falling under the sway of any of the neighbouring magnate families, such as the Derings. In this process Edward Hales I played a leading, though not always successful, part.
Hastings returned an Ashburnham at every general election in the period except 1681. In 1660 the corporation politely rejected the Admiralty candidate, the Hon. Edward Montagu, in favour of Denny Ashburnham, head of a cadet branch of the family, and Nicholas Delves, a London merchant of local origin who was the mayor’s brother. In 1661 Ashburnham was re-elected with Edmund Waller, the lord warden’s nominee. Neither stood for the Exclusion Parliaments.
Throughout the period Dover, the largest of the Cinque Ports, displayed remarkable independence of the government interest. In 1660 Edward Montagu I was entrusted with the writ; but the gallant admiral’s return was by no means plain sailing. The jurats expressed delight at the honour intended for the borough, but could not conceal that ‘some less considerate persons may be somewhat pre-engaged’. His chief rival was Arnold Braemes, a local gentleman who had been an active Cavalier, but eventually they seem to have agreed to join their interests.
The Cinque Ports had their own representative institutions, the Guestling and the Brotherhood, and from the 14th century seven of them regularly sent ’barons’ to the House of Commons. Seaford was restored to the franchaise in 1640 after a long lapse. Only Dover was of much economic significance, but the little towns afforded a ready haven to the victims of religious persecution on the Continent, and Rye in particular occupies a place in the annals of nonconformity. The period is marked by the persistent claim of the lord warden to nominate ’barons’.
