Haslemere’s relatively isolated position in the south-west corner of Surrey did not spare it the close attention of the county’s politicians. Although the borough was no more than ‘a small town with a very indifferent market’, the limited size of its electorate encouraged much contention between rival gentry factions.
This ‘well-known and considerable market-town’ was a notable electoral prize on account of its status as the county town and as the venue for the county election. In the absence of a resident interest of sufficient strength to block external interference, Guildford’s two seats remained the preserve of the neighbouring gentry of west Surrey. Pre-eminent were the Onslows of Clandon Park, who had first represented the borough at the Restoration and, on the initiative of Sir Richard Onslow†, had cultivated the interest of the corporation since that time.
Already regarded as a rotten borough, Gatton was shamelessly manipulated by local proprietorial interests. Comprising little more than ten houses and a small church, it was condemned by Defoe as a ‘miserable’ place. Control of one of the seats lay with the lord of the manor, whose influence over the nomination of the parish constable, the returning officer, proved a decisive electoral advantage. The other seat was usually the preserve of the owner of the mansion of Upper Gatton, which lay to the north of the hamlet.
Although dismissed by Browne Willis* as ‘one street . . . lying on a descent of ordinary houses’, Bletchingley could rely on its two parliamentary seats to attract the attention of local landowners, county magnates and City merchants. However, its frequent election contests belied the fact that both seats remained comfortably in Whig hands, and until 1710 electoral rivalry was principally of a territorial, rather than of a party, nature.
The Yorke and Cocks families between them owned most of the freeholds in the borough, and each recommended to one seat. Though there was a good deal of rivalry and jealousy between their respective agents, there was a gentleman’s agreement ‘that each shall continue to bring in one Member for Reigate without contest or dispute from the other’;
Technically Southwark was a City of London ward, named Bridge Ward Without, subject to the lord mayor whose bailiff was the returning officer. No one permanent predominant interest could be established in this populous urban constituency; and its politics were affected to some extent by London radicalism. Throughout the period 1754-1790 Southwark was invariably represented by local business men or by City merchants and bankers. William Hammond and Henry Thrale were Southwark brewers, and Joseph Mawbey was a Southwark distiller.
Lord Onslow, seated at Clandon Park two miles from Guildford, had considerable influence in the borough, and in 1754 both Members were returned on his interest without a contest. In 1761 the Onslow interest faced a stiff opposition from George Lane Parker, and in 1766 had to yield one seat to Sir Fletcher Norton. Thomas Whateley wrote to Grenville on 31 Dec. 1766:Grenville mss (JM).
No one family before 1780 had complete control of the borough. The Molyneuxes of Loseley, heirs to the More family who had sat for Haslemere in the 17th century, were lords of the manor (which gave them the returning officer) and owned considerable property in the borough.
Bletchingley was a complete pocket borough of the Clayton family, who owned, according to Oldfield, all the burgages. In 1779 Sir Robert Clayton, financially embarrassed and apprehensive of parliamentary reform, sold the reversion of his property at Bletchingley (of which the intrinsic value was about £100 per annum) to his cousin John Kenrick, for £10,000. In June 1785 Clayton filed a bill in Chancery against Kenrick alleging that he had been ‘grossly imposed upon’ in the purchase and that the price was an ‘inadequate consideration’ for the parliamentary interest.
Gatton had a fairly wide franchise, but because of its decayed state was a complete pocket borough. In 1754 the patrons were Sir James Colebrooke, lord of the manor of Gatton, and the Rev. John Tattersall, lord of the manor of Upper Gatton. Colebrooke died in 1761 and was succeeded by his brother George; Tattersall died in 1769 and was succeeded by his brother James. The Tattersalls were closely connected with the Duke of Bedford, and from 1754 to 1768 placed their seat at Gatton at Bedford’s disposal.