Dorset

The right of election at Christchurch had never been determined, but it was usually exercised by the corporation, consisting of the mayor, who acted as returning officer, and 24 freemen. Occasionally this exclusive right was challenged by the inhabitants at large. The strongest interest belonged to the lord of the manor, at the beginning of this period the 2nd Earl of Clarendon (Henry Hyde†), who traditionally had the right to nominate one and often both Members.Ibid.

The right of election at Weymouth and Melcombe Regis lay with the freeholders. Since the boroughs had been united, thereby returning four Members, each elector had four votes. The size of the electorate increased rapidly towards the end of Anne’s reign, as party rivalry gave rise to the widespread practice of splitting freeholds. The nature of the franchise militated against the existence of any controlling interest.

The interest at Wareham was divided between the Pitts of Strathfieldsaye, Hampshire, Tories who owned property and several advowsons in the borough, and Thomas Erle of Charborough, a local Whig who had held one of the seats since 1679. In 1690 Erle was returned unopposed, but there was a contest for the second seat between Thomas Skinner†, a Dissenter who had represented the borough in the Convention, and William Okeden, who probably stood on the Pitt interest.

Edward Nicholas, a local Tory landowner who was first returned in 1689, possessed sufficient interest at Shaftesbury to retain one seat throughout the period. The other principal interest in the town belonged to the earls of Shaftesbury, though the 2nd Earl (Anthony Ashley†) was far less active than his son, Lord Ashley (Anthony*), a Country Whig. In 1690 Nicholas had been returned with Sir Matthew Andrews, a Whig standing on his own interest, which was based on possession of a nearby estate, an alliance with the recorder and justified popularity through his frequent ‘charitable acts’.

The franchise at Poole was disputed between the corporation and freemen on the one hand, and the inhabitants paying scot and lot on the other. A double return in 1689 had not produced a clear decision. The elections committee had declared in favour of the candidates elected on the scot-and-lot vote, but the House had disagreed and seated the two returned on the freeman franchise.

The main interest at Lyme Regis lay with two local Whig families, the Henleys, who owned land in and around the town and had established an almost hereditary right to one seat, and the Burridges, a merchant family whose members had frequently filled the mayor’s office and who had become sufficiently influential by 1689 to supply a parliamentary representative. John Burridge I had been returned after a contest in 1689, when a longstanding controversy over the right of election was also revived. Since 1660 returns had been made by the mayor, corporation and freemen.