Borough

Until the close of the period Camelford was an open borough, usually returning local candidates, though William Harbord used the duchy interest against the Court in the exclusion elections to find a seat for his kinsman, Robert Russell. At the general election of 1660 all the candidates were Cornish by birth, and four indentures were returned. The mayor signed the returns of Peter Killigrew, whose father was closely associated with George Monck, and Samuel Trelawny, the son of a royalist Plymouth merchant.

Callington had never been formally incorporated. The manor was owned by the Rolles of Heanton Satchville. At the court leet held by their steward, new freemen were admitted to exercise the franchise, and a mayor, who acted as returning officer, was elected annually. The Rolles were not resident in the neighbourhood at this period, and their interest was often successfully challenged by a local family, the Corytons of Newton Ferrers.Gilbert, Paroch. Hist. Cornw. i. 168.

The full name of this constituency was Bossiney, Trevenna and Tintagel; rather confusingly, the charter under which the franchise was claimed had been granted to the last of these communities, and for municipal purposes the borough continued to be known as Tintagel, though decay was so far advanced that the corporation had few functions except at elections. The dominant interest had been inherited from the Henders by the Robartes family of Lanhydrock, apart from Botreaux Castle, which went to an Exeter family, the Cottons.

One seat at Bodmin was controlled throughout the period by the Robartes family, who resided at Lanhydrock, two-and-a-half miles away, and owned considerable property in the town; the other was usually at the disposal of the corporation, consisting of 12 aldermen and 24 common councilmen. Patron and electorate were moderate Presbyterians in 1660 and 1661; but the choice of Nicholas Glyn of Cardinham at every subsequent election suggests that the evolution of the younger generation of the Robartes family towards the Tory and Anglican position was followed in the corporation.J.

Chester, on the outbreak of the Civil War, had declared for the King, and much royalist sentiment persisted during the Interregnum. The franchise was technically vested in the freemen, but in the disputed election of 1673 it was stated, on behalf of the successful candidate, that

Cambridge was as devoted to Church and King in this period as the older university, but somewhat less prone to elect ‘gremials’, though all the successful candidates except George Monck and James Vernon had been educated there. Monck’s return in 1660 was due solely to the determination of the electorate to reject the unpopular Cromwellian chief justice, Oliver St. John, who had been installed as chancellor of the university in 1651 in place of the 2nd Earl of Manchester.

Cambridge was an open constituency during this period. The only borough in the county, it chose its Members exclusively from the local gentry. The influence of the university was probably indirect, but helps to account for the failure of the country candidates during the exclusion crisis. It was at this time that manipulation of the freeman roll for electoral purposes began, and control of the corporation, consisting of the mayor, 12 aldermen and 24 common councilmen, became essential.C. H. Cooper, Annals of Cambridge, iii. 245-6; VCH Cambs. iii. 68-70.

Wendover was a borough by prescription dominated by the Hampden interest. This family, more perhaps than any other, was identified with the country party, and they were always able to command one seat, but not until 1689 did they attempt to claim both. In 1660 Richard Hampden, a Presbyterian, was accompanied by John Baldwin, gentleman porter of the Tower since 1645, who as lord of the manors of Wendover Borough and Wendover Forrens appointed the returning officer.

Marlow was a borough by prescription, with the franchise enjoyed by the inhabitant householders, until a decision in 1680 restricted it to scot and lot payers only, and approximately halved the electorate. Many voters were bargemen, notoriously turbulent at election time. The main interests were those of the royalist Borlases and the Presbyterian Hobys.

Though the right of election was in the whole body of freemen, the franchise was, in effect, controlled by the common council, that is the mayor, bailiffs and aldermen, 15 in number, who had usurped the right to create freemen, granted by charter to the entire freeman body. But two gentry families particularly, Pye of Bradenham and Borlase of Bockmer, exercised a natural interest.L. J. Ashford, Hist. Wycombe, 155-6.