In Anne’s reign Wendover parish had between 250 and 300 resident families, comprising about 1,100 ‘souls’, but no person of quality resident in the borough. The Hampdens, resident at nearby Great Hampden, had the chief interest at Wendover. As lords of the manor, they appointed the constables, who acted as returning officers. Whereas in 1689 the Hampdens had monopolized the representation through Richard I* and his son John†, in 1690 neither was returned.
Political interests at Marlow in 1690 were at a transitional stage. The manor had changed hands in 1686 and was about to do so again and there had been two by-elections during 1689 owing to the deaths of sitting Members. In 1690 James Chase was secure, with the contest for the other seat being between Sir William Whitelocke and Ralph Bucknall*, a wealthy London brewer. Two indentures were sent up to Westminster which the Commons took into consideration on 22 Mar.
The franchise at Chipping Wycombe was controlled by the corporation through the admission of freemen. The predominant interest was that of Hon. Thomas Wharton* (Lord Wharton after 1696), the great Whig electoral manager, who was high steward for most of the period. Of the two manors in the borough, the corporation held one and the other belonged to the Archdales and later to Lord Shelburne (Henry Petty†). The borough was also noteworthy for its large Dissenting presence, which could usually be relied upon to support the Whig nominees of Wharton.
Aylesbury went to the polls at every general election in the period 1690–1715 except for the first, and even then a contested by-election occurred within 14 months. If Aylesbury was to attain a certain notoriety in Anne’s reign as a result of the Ashby v. White case, this was only the most obvious manifestation of party conflict.
Amersham displayed no political independence from the neighbouring gentry, the leading interests at the beginning of the period all owning land nearby. A poll from 1689 indicated 143 voters in a three-way contest between William Cheyne, son of Lord Newhaven (Charles Cheyne*), of Chesham Bois, Sir William Drake of Shardeloes, lord of the manor, and Edmund Waller of Beaconsfield, who presumably benefited from the large Dissenting presence in the borough. Drake and Waller emerged victorious.
Throughout this period Ludgershall was a pocket borough of the Selwyns of Matson, who owned the manor and a considerable amount of property in the town. The franchise was peculiar, comprising all who owned an ‘estate of inheritance’ in the borough. Ludgershall could never be regarded as absolutely safe, but there was no contest between 1747 and 1791.
In 1754 Lord Verney, a large property owner at Wendover, was the patron of the borough. According to Oldfield, his tenants lived rent-free ‘on condition of giving their votes to such gentlemen as his Lordship should nominate’. Verney was careless and easy-going, and in 1768 an opposition was declared against him. Here is the story as told by Oldfield:
Marlow was venal, expensive, and faithless. During this period every election save one was contested; and three out of the eight Members who represented the borough were rejected after having sat for one Parliament only.
The strongest interest was in the Clayton family of Harleyford, two miles from Marlow. ‘Mr. Clayton stands very well here’, wrote Robinson in his survey for the general election of 1780—almost the only Member in this period of whom so much could be said.
Chipping Wycombe was controlled by the Wallers of Beaconsfield and the Earl of Shelburne, each patron recommending to one seat. The Wallers were an old Buckinghamshire family; Lord Shelburne’s interest was derived from his inheritance of the Petty property in Buckinghamshire. The patrons seem to have worked amicably together, and all elections during this period were uncontested.
Buckingham was a pocket borough of the Grenville family; and none but Grenvilles or relatives by marriage were returned during this period.