In 1780 and 1784 the Whig corporation, which had the power to create freemen and owned extensive property in the city, combined with the 11th Duke of Norfolk, who had an estate nearby, to return both Members, though one of them, Sir Charles Barrow, was nominally independent. On Barrow’s death early in 1789, they put up Norfolk’s cousin Henry Thomas Howard of Thornbury Castle, near Bristol.
The strongest interest at Cirencester belonged to the Earls Bathurst, whose house and park adjoined the town and who, as lords of the manor, appointed the steward and bailiff, the returning officers. Their influence was all-pervading, but it fell considerably short of total electoral control of a borough where a sizeable proportion of the adult males had the vote. They commanded the return to one seat only, while the other usually went to local men or neighbouring landowners.
By the end of the 18th century Bristol had lost its position as the second largest city and second most important port in the kingdom, but it remained one of the most prestigious and demanding constituencies. Despite its large electorate, of which a significant proportion was non-resident, control was securely in the hands of the long-established political clubs, led by a comparatively small number of men from the propertied and mercantile classes.
The majority of the corporation of Maldon had been ousted by quo warranto in the 1760s and the charter of the borough thereby undermined; the electorate diminished steadily from about 800 in 1768 to about 150 in 1790. The sheriff of Essex acted as returning officer, a symbol of the success of the neighbouring country gentlemen in their endeavours, since 1754, to make Maldon ‘a county, not a borough interest’.PRO 30/8/181, f. 112; Add. 38739, f. 171; Essex RO, Strutt mss micro. T/B 251, Strutt to Addington, 27 July 1802.
A corporation borough long controlled by the Treasury through the Customs House and Post Office patronage, Harwich characteristically returned two superannuated secretaries of the Treasury in 1790: one of them, John Robinson, having represented the borough since 1774, was by now patron and although the Treasury regarded the borough as ‘open’, no difficulty was made for him. Early in 1796 Robinson, who had not found it possible to satisfy applications for patronage, was obliged to quell a ‘schism’, as he called it, at Harwich.
‘Colchester without a contested election could hardly be Colchester in Essex’: only one election (1802) and two by-elections (1812, 1817) did not proceed to a contest in this period. With less than half of the large electorate resident in Colchester, such contests proved discouragingly expensive, because of the cost of transporting voters rather than because of venality.
Durham had been represented by members of the Lambton family of Lambton and of the Tempest family of Wynyard, both owners of extensive and lucrative coal mines, since 1734 and 1742 respectively, the only brief hiatus in this record being the episode in 1761-2 when the corporation, backed by the church, had created over 200 honorary freemen to secure the return of Ralph Gowland over John Lambton at a by-election. The result had been reversed on petition and the ‘Durham Act’ subsequently passed to prevent honorary freemen from voting until they had held the freedom for 12 months.
In 1802, when there was a contest for the boroughs for the first time since 1735, The Times commented that ‘Weymouth and Melcombe Regis have always been considered as close boroughs’. In June 1789 Gabriel Steward, who had acquired by marriage the predominant influence of the Tucker family, which conceded two seats to government in exchange for the disposal of patronage, sold his property.
John Calcraft of Rempstone, whose father had obtained entire command of Wareham by 1768, remained unchallenged patron throughout the period. Even fellow Whigs were paying guests: Romilly in 1808 was expected to pay £3,000 and to attend his election.Mems, ii. 243-4. In 1812 Whig hopes that Calcraft would reserve a seat for one of them, entertained particularly by Henry Brougham, were disappointed when he brought in two ‘purchasers’.Add.
Every general election was contested at Shaftesbury between 1761 and 1812, as a succession of would-be patrons were overthrown by the expense and corruption of the borough. In 1784 the ‘Asiatic interest’ of Sir Francis Sykes was defeated by Hans Winthrop Mortimer, who carried the second seat as well. Mortimer had been on the scene since 1771 and owned the majority of the houses (about 200).
