Kent

The representation of Rochester was often shared between a local landowner and an Admiralty nominee. The key to the Admiralty’s influence lay in the importance to the economy of the town of the adjacent Chatham dockyard. Rochester itself was somewhat wary of the economic power of its newer neighbour; in particular, efforts were made in 1689 and 1710–11 to suppress Chatham’s market. The borough’s chief concerns related to matters such as the financial outlay in maintaining the important bridge over the Medway.CSP Dom. 1689–90, p. 18; F. F. Smith, Hist. Rochester, 93.

A small port on the south-west point of the Isle of Sheppey, Queenborough was described by Defoe as ‘a miserable, dirty, decayed, poor, pitiful, fishing town’. Even worse from Defoe’s point of view, it was one of a number of rotten boroughs ‘who send up gentlemen to represent beggars, and have had more money spent at some of their elections, than all the land in the parishes would be worth if sold at a hundred years’ purchase’.

Maidstone was the county town of Kent and continuous vigilance was expected from its MPs to keep it so. Thus in 1695 Sir Thomas Taylor, 2nd Bt., wrote to Lord Chief Justice Sir George Treby*, who had been appointed to the Home Circuit, to ensure that the assizes were held in Maidstone as ‘it is the most convenient place and has good accommodation [and] assizes have been generally held there at least 50 times to once elsewhere’. Convenient it certainly was, for although it staged the quarter sessions for west Kent, it was centrally placed to serve the whole county.

Canterbury was probably the largest town in Kent in the later 17th century, boasting a population of about 7,000 in 1670. It was a county in its own right, the lord lieutenant usually being given jurisdiction over the city by virtue of his patent of office. The large freeman franchise made it difficult for any one interest to control, although there were many groups enjoying some say in elections.

Queenborough was under the patronage of the Admiralty and the Ordnance, each department recommending to one seat. Admission of new freemen belonged to the corporation, a body of seven which was effectively controlled by Government; and a large proportion of the freemen were employed by the Admiralty or the Ordnance. Local landowners, like Lord Middlesex, or admirals standing against the Government (Brett in 1774 and Parker in 1784) had little chance.

The ports and dockyards of Rochester and Chatham, and the Victualling Office, supplied an Admiralty interest, reinforced by the Customs and Excise; as a rule the Government could carry one seat only, which more often than not was filled by a naval officer. But there was also a local interest, especially strong if joined to that of some neighbouring country gentleman.Add. 32972, f. 64.

In 1792 Oldfield wrote about Canterbury:Boroughs, ii. 155. ‘This city is entirely independent in its election of Members of Parliament, and is neither under the influence or control of any patron or leading man.’ The dean and chapter, the Dissenters, town patricians, and neighbouring squires all had a certain influence in elections; but no one interest predominated, and a seat at Canterbury was held on an uncertain tenure. Most of the electors resided in the town or its neighbourhood.