Melcombe Regis

Founded in the late thirteenth century on the north bank of the Wey and opposite the port of Weymouth, Melcombe, as a royal borough, paid a fee farm to the Crown, in contrast to its neighbour which fell under the lordship of the Clares and their descendants. From the mid fourteenth century it served as a centre for the collection of customs and subsidies due to the King. The town’s subsequent decline is partly attributable to competition from Weymouth, which, being easier to defend, escaped the fierce assault by the French in 1377 – an attack that left Melcombe devastated and depopulated. After that traumatic event the inhabitants frequently drew the government’s attention to their poverty and inability to pay the fee farm and parliamentary subsidies demanded by the Crown. For petitions dating from the 1370s and 1380s see SC8/19/922-4; 125/6206, 6227; 171/8504; 185/9214; 236/11784. One of their many petitions – the one delivered to the Parliament of 1410 – made the proposal that to give the townsmen ‘greindre courage de hastivement enhabiter’ the town once more they should not only be pardoned their farm, along with its arrears, but be quit of the royal prise of wine, allowed to levy murage on wares in transit, and even be completely exempted from taxation. SC8/126/6256; A.P.M. Wright, ‘Relations between the King’s Govt. and Bors.’ (Oxf. Univ. D.Phil. thesis, 1965), 202-3. This particular petition elicited some concessions from Henry IV, including a reduction of the annual fee farm from eight marks to just 20s. and of each fifteenth and tenth to no more than 6s. 8d. The concession lasted for ten years, and when this period elapsed pleas for an extension of the term were sent, without success, to the Parliament of May 1421. SC8/125/6246.

This pattern continued after Henry VI came to the throne. A petition addressed to the Commons of the Parliament assembled at Leicester in 1426 again asked for help in the face of Melcombe’s continued poverty and under-population; it was impossible for the inhabitants to pay off the mounting arrears demanded at the Exchequer, which then stood at £40 3s. 3d. The petitioners specifically requested that a commission be appointed to survey Melcombe and estimate what the inhabitants could bear to pay in future. After it was sent to the Lords, the petition was endorsed with a note that John Stafford, bishop of Bath and Wells, and two judges would be commissioned to inquire into this matter and certify their findings to the chancellor; for the time being and until the next Parliament the Exchequer would give respite to the arrears. SC8/128/6388. A further petition, supported by the Commons of 1427 and meeting a favourable response, sought to ease Melcombe’s difficulties by increasing the flow of trade through the port. It requested that merchants might freely and without impediment load wool, hides, wool-fells and other staple merchandise there for shipment to the staple at Calais. SC8/25/1225; PROME, x. 364. Nevertheless, Henry VI’s Council was slow to respond to the earlier requests. More than four years elapsed before the commissioners authorized in 1426 met at Melcombe to gather information. When they finally did so, in September 1430, the jurors called before them to testify recited the old story of the town’s burning by the King’s enemies and its long years of desolation ever since: the few remaining inhabitants were impoverished, and all that might be afforded for the fee farm and parliamentary subsidies was 20s. p.a. and 6s. 8d., respectively, as had been allowed by Henry V. E143/25/1. Yet although in response to these findings the farm was once more reduced to 20s., the amount of tax demanded was set at 13s. 4d., and the matter had still not been settled to the burgesses’ satisfaction when Parliament met four months later in January 1431. Melcombe then again addressed a petition to the Commons, seeking a reduction of its fee farm and its contribution to the lay subsidy for a term of ten years. The petition was sent to the Lords, but received no satisfactory answer. SC8/126/6267.

When listed among the ‘vills’ and boroughs of Dorset found unable to pay the full amount for the fifteenth and tenth granted in the Parliament of 1435, the ‘Isle of Portland’ (presumably Melcombe and Weymouth combined) gained a remission of 13s. E179/103/79; VCH Dorset, ii. 246. Even so, the findings of the commission of 1430 were not finally accepted until 1437. An undated petition probably relates to the Parliament of that year. It asked the Commons to support Melcombe’s plea that the annual farm be kept at 20s. and each subsidy set at one mark for the next 60 years, and having been sent by the Lower House to the Lords it resulted in a royal grant dated 8 July that year (after the Parliament had been dissolved), albeit the length of respite was not fixed, but was to last only ‘at the King’s pleasure’. Furthermore, although Melcombe’s arrears were pardoned, the Exchequer continued vigorously to pursue the burgesses for their accumulated debt, assessed at the ancient rate, and only accepted the reality of the situation 12 years later. SC8/128/6371; CPR, 1436-41, p. 74; Wright, 217-18; E368/221, Mich. rot. 28; PROME, xii. 88; E179/364/135.

A different but related issue arose from the continued difficulty of defending Melcombe from attack by enemy shipping. A petition sent to the Parliament of 1433 might not have been promoted by the men of Melcombe itself; rather, it represented the concerns of those trading overseas who were required to dock there to pay customs and subsidies, its principal proponent being John Roger†, a wealthy merchant from Bridport. The petition informed the King of the ‘feblesse and nonsufficeance of youre Porte of Melcombe, nouht enhabited, ne of strengthe to considere the goodes and Marchaundises of youre Marchauntz it usyng’, as was evidenced by the losses that Roger and others had recently suffered there ‘for lakke and scarcete of helpe of people to withstande and resiste the malice of youre Enemys’. Owing to the lack of security, merchants were fearful of storing any goods of value in the port. By contrast, Poole, further along the coast of Dorset to the east and ‘wele enhabited and manned’, provided a much safer haven for ships. The petitioners asked for a royal licence for Poole to be fortified and elevated to the status of a staple. As a consequence, in July that year Melcombe was degraded from a ‘head port’ to a creek, and with effect from the following January collectors of customs and subsidies were based at Poole instead. SC8/126/6255; PROME, xi. 125-6; CPR, 1429-36, p. 298.

Some attempts were made to improve Melcombe’s defences. In 1446 the King granted to the local friary a large plot of land (1,000 feet by 600 feet), together with £10 a year for 12 years from the customs collected at Poole, for the construction of a jetty and tower to protect the town from tides and for the advantage of shipping. This scheme was exempted from the Act of Resumption passed in the Parliament of 1449-50, CPR, 1441-6, p. 438; PROME, xii. 114. although whether it proved beneficial to Melcombe’s trade in the second half of the century is difficult to discover.

The parlous state of Melcombe’s economy was reflected in its parliamentary representation in Henry VI’s reign: the lack of a body of prosperous burgesses from which able men could be selected to send to the Commons led to an increasing dependence on outsiders and lawyers. Returns for four of the Parliaments of the period (1433, 1439, 1445 and 1459), are no longer extant, although the names of the MPs in 1433 were fortuitously recorded by William Prynne† in the seventeenth century before they were lost. To the 19 Parliaments between 1422 and 1460 for which names of the Members for Melcombe are known, the borough elected at least 27 different individuals. In perhaps only four Parliaments were both of the men returned already versed in the workings of the Commons; and in 1422 and 1447 it appears that neither had any such previous experience of parliamentary service. Most often, however (in at least 13 Parliaments), a tried man accompanied a novice. Yet it should be remarked that a third of the MPs (nine in all) had gained their experience not while sitting for Melcombe itself but by representing other boroughs. Brice, Brown, Gerard, Hardgill, Kebell and Tracy had all previously sat in the Commons for different boroughs in Dorset; and Gloucester, Hussey and Rokes had done so for boroughs in Wiltshire. Furthermore, Gerard, who sat in nine Parliaments all told, only represented Melcombe (rather than his native Wareham) on his final appearance in the Lower House. That these nine men were by no means committed exclusively to Melcombe’s interests is clear too from the fact that Hardgill went on to sit for Shaftesbury, Kebell for Bridport and Hussey as a knight of the shire. Furthermore, four other MPs (Balsham, Brunyng, Leweston and Todd) saw no reason to restrict their parliamentary service to this borough. Balsham went on to sit once for Lyme Regis, Brunyng once each for Lyme and Wareham and twice for Dorchester, Leweston for Bridport and Dorchester, and Todd for Calne in Wilts. Thus, taken altogether, nearly half of the 27 represented other constituencies in the course of their careers, continuing a pattern which had been established in the three and a half decades before 1422. The Commons 1386-1421, i. 376.

Although this is indicative of an active interest in parliamentary affairs on the part of the 13 individuals concerned, by confirming their determination to have a seat in the Commons regardless of whichever constituency returned them, for 12 other MPs, who each sat in only one Parliament, service in the Lower House evidently played a very minor part in their careers. Only four of the 27 MPs of Henry VI’s reign sat for Melcombe more than once: Walkeden did so in three Parliaments, concentrated in the years 1420 to 1423; Corfe on four occasions between 1423 and 1433; Balsham in eight Parliaments between 1422 and 1442 (all but one of them for Melcombe), Indeed, he sat for Melcombe in six out of the seven Parls. for which returns survive between 1429 and 1442. and Gloucester in three Parliaments in a row (in 1449 and 1450). Although as he was also returned to the Parl. of 1449 (Nov.) for New Shoreham in Suss., so it is uncertain whether he actually represented Melcombe on that occasion. The repeated elections of these four provided continuity in the borough’s representation, especially in the 1430s – with Balsham sitting in four Parliaments running – and in the years 1449-50.

In view of Melcombe’s small population and its relative poverty, it is hardly surprising to find that few of those elected in this period resided there. The place of residence of four of the 27 (Baxter, Cadrall, Todd and Wood), has not been discovered, but they too might not have been local men. Just seven MPs (Abbot, Bathe, Brice, Corfe, Green, Penne and Walkeden), are recorded living in Melcombe, or just across the river at Weymouth. Certain of this small group shared their experiences of government at the centre with kinsmen who also sat in Parliament for this borough or its neighbour: Abbot was the son of one MP and brother of two more; Brice a relative of earlier representatives for Weymouth; and Penne probably a kinsman of two others of this surname who sat for the other borough. To this group of residents should also be added Balsham, for although his permanent home was at Ilchester in Somerset (where he attested the shire elections at the county court), One time – in 1437 – when he was returned for Melcombe. as controller of customs and subsidies in Melcombe he was expected to supervise traffic through the port, write the rolls in his own hand and never exercise his office by deputy. By occupation, the MPs who came from the locality were probably all merchants or tradesmen, and although the absence of surviving customs accounts makes the scale of their commercial concerns difficult to determine, Abbot, Bathe, Corfe and Green (the last also sometimes styled ‘yeoman’) were engaged in trade. Documentary evidence about holders of the principal borough offices of bailiff and mayor is largely lacking, but it is known that two of the seven resident MPs were involved in the Melcombe’s administration: Corfe, who served as bailiff for possibly seven terms, was returned to Parliament in 1423, 1426 and 1431 while in office; and Bathe was mayor when elected in 1432. These two regularly attested the parliamentary returns for the borough (Corfe doing so six times, and Bathe seven); while Green provided sureties for those elected for Melcombe to the Parliament of February 1449.

Local men largely predominated at the elections held between 1422 and 1442, taking between them 16 of the 24 recorded seats. Of the other eight seats in that period, seven were taken by men who lived elsewhere in Dorset (Brunyng, Davy, Gerard, Hussey, Leweston, Rokes and Tracy), and members of this group are occasionally recorded as attesting the parliamentary indentures for the knights of the shire elected at Dorchester. It is worthy of note that Gerard and Tracy did so in 1425 and 1427, respectively, at the same time as they successfully stood for election for Melcombe. Although these seven were probably in breach of the statutes requiring MPs to be resident in their constituencies, only one of Melcombe’s MPs before 1442 has been firmly identified as an outsider to the county as well as the borough. He, William Bochell, lived in Somerset and witnessed the electoral indentures for that shire as many as six times.

Outsiders of Bochell’s sort came to dominate Melcombe’s representation in the Parliaments assembled from 1447 onwards. John Gloucester lived at Willesden in Middlesex, and, significantly, as a resident in Middlesex he was listed on the electoral indenture for that county in the autumn of 1449, at the very time that the sheriff in Dorset returned him for Melcombe. John Grenefeld’s home was at Winchester in Hampshire; Thomas Hardgill’s at Stourton in Wiltshire; and Andrew Kebell’s at Gravesend in Kent, although the latter’s office at the Exchequer meant that he spent most of his time at Westminster.

It might be predicted that Melcombe’s need to present petitions in Parliament would lead to a greater preponderance of lawyers among its MPs – men trained to draft bills and experienced in guiding their passage to a successful conclusion. In the three and a half decades before 1422, only three lawyers have been identified among Melcombe’s MPs, The Commons 1386-1421, i. 377. but during Henry VI’s reign a third of the 27 were members of the legal profession: Bochell, Brown, Brunyng, Gerard, Gloucester, Hussey, Kebell, Leweston and Tracy. Several of them regularly appeared as attorneys in the courts at Westminster: Brown, Hussey, Leweston and Tracy in the common pleas (where Leweston was to serve as a filacer for 20 years), and Gloucester and Kebell at the Exchequer. Others made use of their skills in the localities: Tracy perhaps as town clerk of Bridport; Bochell in Somerset where after serving in the Parliament of 1429 he was appointed clerk of the peace; Brunyng in the service of the gentry of the region; and Hussey as one of the quorum on the Dorset bench. Lawyers filled 11 of the 38 recorded seats, but only in the Parliaments of 1427 and 1449 (Nov.) were both of Melcombe’s MPs qualified in this way. As happened throughout the realm, a number of these lawyers joined the ranks of the landowning gentry and adopted the style of ‘gentleman’. From his earnings Gerard was able to purchase substantial lands, as also did Hussey, who by adding them to property acquired through inheritance and marriage ended his days with estates in Dorset and elsewhere valued at over £60 p.a. Brunyng’s wife brought him land worth more than £40 a year, so like Hussey he was distrained to take up knighthood. Gloucester became a landowner in Middlesex and Hertfordshire, and Leweston in Surrey.

Few of the 27 MPs ever held office by appointment of the Crown, but even so such employment could prove to be an important factor when standing for election for Melcombe. Balsham, who officiated as controller of customs and subsidies in west-country ports for nearly all of the 34 years between 1410 and his death in 1444, was returned to seven Parliaments for Melcombe while so engaged. Two prominent officials of the Exchequer obtained seats in the Commons as representatives for Melcombe: Kebell, the comptroller of the pipe, in November 1449, and his colleague Gloucester in three Parliaments in the years 1449-51. Even more impressive was the career of John Rokes (returned in 1453), for he could boast many years of experience in royal administration as a receiver for the queen dowager and the duchy of Lancaster, as an escheator, and as controller of customs at Poole and Melcombe until shortly before the Parliament met. Grenefeld, a former clerk of the royal counting house, was constable of Winchester castle and steward of Odiham when returned in 1455.

Outside interference in the elections may be strongly suspected in the cases of Gloucester and Kebell, whose returns came at a time of crisis at the Exchequer, when English rule in Normandy hung in the balance. Both had a role to play in assisting the treasurer to draw up financial statements for presentation to the King and Council during the Parliament, and their presence in the Commons may well have been thought useful in helping to put through unpopular measures. Rokes’s election may probably owed something to his position as an administrator of the estates of Richard Beauchamp, bishop of Salisbury, who enjoyed close personal ties with the King. Two other prominent figures at the Lancastrian court may have exerted influence on the representation of Melcombe. As sheriff of Somerset and Dorset in 1429, (Sir) John Stourton II* (from 1448 Lord Stourton), conducted the elections which saw his uncle John Stourton I* returned for Somerset and the latter’s servant Bochell for Melcombe; Brunyng (1435) was a feoffee of Sir John’s estates; members of the family of Twyneho (1447) were retained by him; and Hardgill (1455) was resident at his seat in Wiltshire. Finally, Bulman (1450) was probably a member of the household of James Butler, earl of Wiltshire, whose interest in parliamentary elections was more strongly reflected in the neighbouring borough of Weymouth.