Ludlow

The Clive family had absorbed by purchase (1770) and subsequently by marriage (1784) the interest of the Herberts of Powis Castle at Ludlow. They returned one Member from 1790 to 1806 and both thereafter. Richard Payne Knight, the other Member, a local country gentleman with a seat six miles away, had been introduced in 1784 with Lord Powis’s concurrence rather than, as Oldfield would have it, ‘on the independent interest of the town’.Salop RO, Ludlow corpn. mss 356, Davies to Kinnersley, 20 Dec. 1783, Salway to same, 9 Jan. 1784; Oldfield, Hist. Boroughs, ii. 39. In fact, a ‘strong party’ of the electors was displeased before 1790 when both Members were in opposition and an attempt was made to interest Pitt in sponsoring friends of government against them. Nothing came of it and the Members issued joint addresses in 1790.PRO 30/8/174, f. 185; Shrewsbury Chron. 25 June 1790. The Clives went over to government with the Portland Whigs. Knight was not disturbed and it appears that the diarist Farington was rightly informed in 1813 that he had been returned ‘through the interest of Lord Clive (now Earl of Powis) to hold that situation till the eldest son of his lordship should come of age’. It was certainly on that account that Knight retired in 1806.Farington Diary (Yale ed.), xii. 4437; Shrewsbury Chron. 31 Oct. 1806.

Otherwise the Clives reserved the borough for members of the family and the only rumour of opposition was in 1802 when there was an onslaught on Clive’s boroughs during his absence in India. John Nicholls was supposed to be the challenger at Ludlow.NLW, Powis Castle mss 5247, 5249. The precaution was subsequently taken of obtaining legal assurance as to the validity of nonresident votes—there had been no contest since 1727.Salop RO, Lydbury North mss, Plumer’s opinion, 22 Dec. 1802. When the next occurred in 1826, the Clives remained secure.