Somerset

<p>Milborne Port’s parliamentary seats came more firmly under the control of the owners of the town’s nine burgages or bailiwicks during this period, and as such took on the classic characteristics of a ‘pocket borough’. The right of election lay in the burgage holders, known as the chief bailiffs or capital burgesses, plus nine stewards and the inhabitants paying scot and lot.

<p>Ilchester, despite its unprepossessing appearance, was an important political focus in Somerset, being the local field of influence of several of the county’s most prominent families, and also the venue for the election of knights of the shire. Four miles to the south was Montacute, belonging to the Phelipses, who had dominated the borough for much of the 17th century and had held the office of high steward on almost a hereditary basis.

<p>The strong Dissenting interest in Bridgwater naturally produced intermittent bouts of political infighting between Whigs and High Churchmen, but parliamentary elections had largely ceased to be occasions for bringing these tensions into the open.

<p>By the last decade of the 17th century Bath was already a popular place of resort, but the city’s political affairs and its government were firmly in the hands of men of local standing. The franchise was the preserve of the 30-strong corporation, with no aristocratic influence being exerted until 1710. The candidates were usually members of the civic elite or of the local gentry, and invariably it was from the latter that the city’s representatives were chosen.

<p>Much depended at Wells on control of the corporation, which could manipulate the franchise by creating honorary freemen. Local families had most influence, and during this period the Tudways came close to being patrons.</p><p>At the dissolution in 1754 the sitting Members were both Tories. Francis Gwyn, who belonged to the leading Tory family in the neighbourhood, stood again. Opposed to him, standing on a combined interest, were Lord Digby and Charles Tudway.

<p>Throughout this period the natural interest at Minehead belonged to Henry Fownes Luttrell, who, through his marriage to the heiress of the Luttrell family, had inherited Dunster Castle, an estate in Somerset, and the lordship of the manor of Minehead (with the right of appointing the returning officer). But that interest had been much neglected, and at the general election of 1747 Luttrell had failed to secure the return of his candidate.

<p>Taunton was an open borough, and contests were frequent and violent. Dissenters formed a large part of the population and had considerable influence. In 1754 Lord Egremont had the chief interest; and by alliance with the Dissenters, and having the support of Government, controlled one seat. The other was usually filled by a local man, and there was keen rivalry between the Dissenters in the town and the neighbouring country gentlemen.</p><p>At the general election of 1754 Lord Carpenter, Egremont’s brother-in-law, and John Halliday were returned unopposed.

<p>Ilchester was a venal borough, with an electorate described by <a href="/landingpage/57838" title="Francis Fane" class="link">Francis Fane</a> in 1756 as ‘poor and corrupt, without honour, morals, or attachment to any man or party’.<fn>Add. 32867, f. 474.</fn> The election of 1774 was declared void because of bribery, and John Harcourt was unseated in 1786 because of ‘gross and illegal’ malpractices by the returning officer.

<p>Basically Milborne Port was a scot and lot borough, but the choice of returning officers was the result of a complicated procedure which invited contention. There were nine capital burgesses or bailiffs, the holders of ancient tenements, two of whom in rotation appointed returning officers. In 1754 four of these tenements were owned by Thomas Medlycott and five by Edward Walter: together, therefore, they controlled the returning officers, and since each owned a good deal of property in the borough, in effect they controlled its representation.

<p>In 1761, when William Pitt was returned a second time for Bath, he paid tribute to ‘a city ranked among the most ancient and most considerable in the kingdom, and justly famed for its integrity, independence, and zeal for the public good’.<fn>Pitt to the corporation of Bath, 12 Apr. 1761, Chatham mss.</fn> The corporation consisted for the most part of country gentlemen and substantial tradesmen, proud of their independence and integrity; and the Members had either strong local connexions, or were national figures.