At the beginning of the eighteenth century both Minehead seats were controlled by the Luttrells of Dunster Castle, Tories, through their right as lords of the manor to appoint the constables, who acted as returning officers. Their monopoly of the representation was resented by a section of the inhabitants, who took advantage of the minority of Alexander Luttrell to raise an opposition to the castle interest.
Milborne Port elections were controlled by the owners of nine capital burgages, whose holders, known as capital bailiffs, constituted the government of the borough. Every year in rotation two of these capital bailiffs chose two deputies to execute certain functions, including those of returning officers, but there was some doubt as to whether the returning officer should be a capital or a deputy bailiff.
The chief interest in the venalFrancis Fane to Newcastle, 29 Sept. 1756, Add. 32867, f. 474. borough of Ilchester was that of the Lockyers, a local family of wealthy business men, with estates in and about the borough, which from 1727 they managed in the government interest. Three of the Members returned during this period— Hopkins, Brown, and Thomas Lockyer— were noted misers.
In 1715 one of the Bridgwater seats was held by George Dodington, whose family estate was near the borough, where he had the government interest, derived from the customs and excise officers at the port. Both interests were inherited by his nephew, Bubb Dodington, who shared the representation with local Tory country gentlemen till 1741.
The franchise at Bath was in the corporation, a close body, recruited by co-option. In spite of this narrow franchise, against which some of the citizens petitioned unsuccessfully to the House of Commons in 1728,CJ, xxi. 49. Bath was an outstandingly independent and respectable borough. For most of the period it was run by its famous postmaster, Ralph Allen, whose father-in-law, George Wade, held one seat from 1722 till his death in 1748.
In 1715 the chief interests at Wenlock were in Sir William Forester, who had represented it 1679-81, and 1689-1715, and in his first cousin, the 2nd Earl of Bradford, the head of the Shropshire Whigs, whose brother held the second seat. These two families continued jointly to control the representation of the borough till the death of the 3rd Earl of Bradford in 1734, when that interest fell into abeyance, leaving the Foresters in control of both seats. The 2nd Lord Egmont noted in his electoral survey, c.1749-50, that Wenlock was ‘in Forester’.
Shrewsbury elections were contested on party lines by much the same families as those of the county. The corporation was dominated by the Whigs, who thus had control of the admission of freemen, but before 1723, owing to the size of the electorate, this advantage was not decisive. The Whigs had the support of the Dissenters and of the most powerful local landowner, Lord Bradford, whilst the Tory strength lay mainly in the suburbs and liberties, which extended over a wide area of countryside.
In spite of the relatively large electorate, Bridgnorth was dominated by the Whitmores of Apley, Whigs, who owned a large part of the town, appointed most of the local lay and ecclesiastical officials and maintained a close control on the corporation, headed by two annually elected bailiffs, who acted as returning officers.J. F. A. Mason, Borough of Bridgnorth 1157-1957, pp. 32-34. Their chief rivals were the Tory Actons of Aldenham, who were supported by a Jacobite element in the town.
The Tory-controlled corporation was the most powerful influence in the city of Oxford. All the Members returned were Tories. Thomas Rowney and his son, Thomas, who were members of the corporation, had the chief interest, representing the town for 64 years between them. In 1743 the younger Rowney succeeded Montagu Bertie, 2nd Earl of Abingdon, as high steward of the borough.
The only contest occurred in 1722, when, a Tory reports,
Owing to the proximity of Blenheim, New Woodstock fell under the influence of the dukes of Marlborough, who became its hereditary high stewards, claiming the right of appointing the recorder of the borough.A. Ballard, Woodstock Chrons. 109, 126.
