Huntingdonshire, a small county, was always in danger of being swamped by the powerful and widespread Montagu family. Two branches were seated in the county, at Kimbolton and Hinchingbrooke, and with a remarkable family solidarity that transcended political differences, they were also prepared to find seats for their Northamptonshire cousins. At the general elections of 1660 and 1661 the Earl of Manchester’s heir and Henry Cromwell of Ramsey were returned, probably unopposed.
Hertfordshire had been a strongly parliamentarian county during the war, and the few royalist families, like the Fanshawes, were in rapid decay. The electorate showed a considerable degree of sophistication, and there was no predominant aristocratic or gentry interest. Even the heir to Hatfield could not secure election without heavy expenditure. Dissent was strong in Hertfordshire, and the Quakers particularly were an electoral force to be reckoned with. A letter from a royalist agent of 6 Apr.
Even as early as the general election of 1660, the traditional interests in Herefordshire had regained control, though candidatures were to some extent deterred by the ban on Cavaliers and their sons.
In 1660 Andrew Henley stood down in an electoral bargain, and two leading Presbyterians, John Bulkeley and Richard Norton, were returned, probably unopposed. In 1661 they were replaced by members of two of the prominent royalist families in the county, Sir John Norton and Lord St. John, the Marquess of Winchester’s heir. By the time St.
The frequent contests in Gloucestershire elections in this period were due less to political principles than to interest and personalities. Covert rivalry may be suspected between the two leading noblemen of the county, Lord Herbert of Raglan (later Marquess of Worcester and Duke of Beaufort) and Lord Berkeley of Berkeley Castle. In 1660 the successful candidates were both of Presbyterian Royalist views.
Events in Essex during this period are well-reported, thanks to the autobiography of John Bramston, who played a prominent part in Essex politics throughout, and to the nearness of Chelmsford, the county town, to London, which ensured maximum publicity for the hotly contested election to the second Exclusion Parliament. In 1660 Bramston and Edward Turnor stood as Anglicans and Royalists, whose records were beyond the scope of the Long Parliament ordinance against the election of Cavaliers or their sons. According to Bramston’s own account:
As the bishop’s palatinate, Durham had never been represented in the Commons before the Protectorate. A bill for its enfranchisement was introduced into the Convention by Sir Thomas Widdrington, who had acted as chancellor of the county during the Interregnum. It passed the Commons with one amendment on 8 Aug. 1660, and was carried to the Lords by Robert Ellison, but there it was rejected, even though the bishops had not yet resumed their seats.
Most of the successful candidates for Dorset came from the western divisions during this period, and in particular the representation of the county became ‘in a manner hereditary’ in the Strangways family. The concentration of freeholders in the crown manor of Portland, mostly engaged in supplying stone to the Office of Works gave special importance to the sinecure office of captain (or governor). Freeholders were also numerous in the former crown forest around Gillingham, where the Nicholas interest was powerful.Hutchins, Dorset, iv.
Third in acreage among English counties, and with numerous small freeholders, Devon always seems to have held its county court at Exeter Castle, without adjournment to other local centres in this period. Polls were consequently exceptional and uncontested returns are frequently recorded. Monck, needless to say, was returned unopposed to the Convention, and his colleague Northcote, another Presbyterian, had worked his passage by taking a leading part in the Exeter disturbances of February 1660 in support of a free Parliament.
At the general election of 1660 the middle ground was occupied by Robert Eyre of Highlow, a recent convert to the Stuart cause, and John Ferrers, a loyalist who was too young to have taken part in the Civil War. On one flank they were opposed by John Gell, ‘the most rigid Presbyterian in the county’, on the other by Lord Mansfield, son of the Cavalier general in the north, and so debarred from standing under the last ordinance of the Long Parliament. A compromise was suggested, ‘though certainly that cannot consist with Mr Gell’s principles’.
