Herefordshire

Since 1754 the Thynne family, who in 1789 obtained the marquessate of Bath, had established complete control over Weobley by buying up all the vote houses.Oldfield, Boroughs, i. 308; Rep. Hist. iv. 21. Consequently there was no contest in this period. All the Members were kin to or protégés of the 1st and 2nd Marquesses and all supported administration.

Leominster had been thrown open by 1784, but neighbouring magnates continued to burn their fingers there until 1802 and the borough teemed with electioneering attorneys. The corporation, which was reluctant ‘to rate any inhabitant who was adverse to their own party’, were chiefly influenced by John Bateman, 2nd Viscount Bateman, high steward until his death in 1802, and Thomas Harley, recorder since 1780.

The hold of the Whig 11th Duke of Norfolk on a borough with such a large freeman electorate from 1784 until his death in 1815 was a remarkable phenomenon. His marriage to the heiress of the Scudamores of Holme Lacey was at the bottom of it; their kinsmen the Scudamores of Kentchurch provided one Member from 1764 until 1818, while Norfolk stood behind Walwyn and Symonds, two other county gentlemen.

Till 1737 Weobley was an independent venal borough, usually returning candidates drawn from local families at £15-£20 a vote.Ld. Weymouth to Ld. Gower, 7 Nov. 1735, Bath mss, Longleat. In that year the House of Commons, on a petition by James Cornewall against John Birch, decided that the right of election was in the occupiers or owners of certain ‘ancient vote-houses’ and not in the householders at large.CJ, xxii. 770. Commenting on this decision, Edward Harley observed that

Leominster had a reputation for venality. In 1717 George Caswall’s agent was paying up to 20 guineas a man;Ibid. 573. in 1721 Edward Harley, then M.P. for the borough, said that it had ‘become mercenary, and the best bidder will have the best interest to be served’;To the Duke of Chandos, 21 Dec. 1721, Portland mss. and all that the 2nd Lord Egmont could say for it in his electoral survey, c. 1749-50, was that he did ‘not think it so venal as to be carried by the best bidder’.

Hereford was an independent borough, usually represented by local country gentlemen. Owing to the size of the electorate the borough was regarded by the Duke of Chandos as ‘extravagantly expensive’. In 1727 he reckoned that it would be necessary to pay at least 500 voters 5 or 6 guineas a head to secure the return of his candidates.Chandos to Capt. Oakeley, 12 July 1727, to H. R. Westfaling, 8 Aug. 1727, Chandos letter bks.

Weobley, an insignificant market town, was re-enfranchised in 1628 at the instance of James Tomkyns, whose son Thomas sat for the borough from August 1660 to his death. The manor was held by the dowager Duchess of Somerset till 1674, when it was acquired by Thomas Thynne I, but neither seems to have exerted much political influence, presumably because the sheriff of Herefordshire conducted the elections.

In 1668, 224 houses paid hearth tax in Leominster, of which 35 were held by women; presumably the numbers on the scot and lot roll were similar. At the general election of 1660, John Birch, the intruded high steward, enjoyed the best interest, and defeated the efforts of Edward Massey to prevent his election. The other Member, Edward Pytts, was lord of the neighbouring manor of Ivington.

Hereford was an open borough with a wide franchise. Elections were notoriously expensive and sometimes riotous. Of the successful candidates, only Roger Bosworth, a physician, and Thomas Geers were permanently resident in the city; but all the others were Herefordshire gentlemen, though William Gregory, like Geers, was primarily a lawyer. For the Convention, the city returned two moderates, of royalist sympathies, Bosworth and Herbert Westfaling. On the death of the former, the ultra-royalist Sir Henry Lingen was elected.

After the dissolution of the monasteries Leominster became Crown property and various appurtenances were leased out. During Elizabeth’s reign the tithes were leased to Sir James Croft, and the site of Leominster priory to the Coningsby family. In 1554 Leominster had been granted a charter which placed the government of the town in the hands of a self-perpetuating corporation of 25 capital burgesses, who annually chose a bailiff from their number.