MICHEL, John I (c.1642-1718), of Kingston Russell, Dorset

Published in The History of Parliament: the House of Commons 1690-1715, ed. D. Hayton, E. Cruickshanks, S. Handley, 2002
Available from Boydell and Brewer



Mar. 1681
1690 - 1695
1695 - 1698

Family and Education

b. c.1642, 1st s. of John Michel of Kingston Russell by Joan, da. of Sir Cope Doyley of Chislehampton, Oxon.  educ. Magdalen Coll. Oxf. matric. 18 Mar. 1661, aged 18.  m. Penelope (d. 1684), da. and coh. of John Bingham† of Bingham Melcombe, Dorset, 2s. (1 d.v.p.) 5da. (2 d.v.p.).  suc. fa. 1670.1

Offices Held

Sheriff, Dorset c.June–Nov. 1675.2


Michel was returned at the 1690 election, having failed to win a seat in the Convention, presumably because his Dissenting sympathies had led him to ‘collaborate’ with James II. It is difficult to distinguish Michel’s activities in the Commons from those of his near-namesake, Robert Michell. However, Michel was classed as a Whig by the Marquess of Carmarthen (Thomas Osborne†), and in April 1691 Robert Harley* considered him to be a Country supporter. He does not seem to have been very active, being sent for into custody on 16 Nov. 1691 for defaulting on a call of the House and was discharged on 8 Dec. Two years later he transgressed again, being sent for on 4 Dec. 1693 and being discharged on the 18th. Grascome classed him as a Court supporter in 1693.3

At the 1695 election Michel transferred to St. Ives where he doubtless enjoyed the support of the Whig interests in the borough, including the Duke of Bolton (Charles Powlett†), who had estates in Dorset. He was forecast as a probable supporter of the government in the division of 31 Jan. 1696 over the proposed council of trade, and signed the Association in February. He was absent during the consideration of Sir John Fenwick’s† case, having been named a defaulter on a call of the House on 2 Nov. and again a week later, whereupon he was ordered into custody. He was released on 28 Jan. 1697. At the start of the next session he was again sent for in custody for non-attendance on 16 Dec. 1697, being released four days later. He may have been the ‘Mr Mitchell’ given leave of absence on 11 May. He did not stand in 1698, but on the list drawn up in around September of that year he was marked as a Country supporter ‘left out’ of the new Parliament. He did not stand again, but remained involved in local affairs, being named a deputy-lieutenant for Dorset in 1702. He was buried on 13 Mar. 1718, aged about 76, Boyer commenting that as an MP he had been a ‘zealous . . . asserter of his country’s laws and liberties’.4

Ref Volumes: 1690-1715

Authors: Paula Watson / Stuart Handley


  • 1. Hutchins, Dorset, ii. 193–4, 610; Vis. Dorset (Harl. Soc.cxvii), 45.
  • 2. CSP Dom. 1675–6, p. 166.
  • 3. Duckett, Penal Laws and Test Act (1883), 222, 262.
  • 4. CSP Dom. 1702–3, p. 393; Boyer, Pol. State, xv. 379.