Available from Boydell and Brewer
Right of Election:
in burgage holders
Number of voters:
|18 June 1790||WILLIAM EDEN, Baron Auckland [I]|
|WILLIAM PIERCE ASHE A 'COURT|
|22 Dec. 1790||MICHAEL ANGELO TAYLOR vice A ’Court vacated his seat|
|8 Mar. 1791||RICHARD BARRY, Earl of Barrymore [I], vice Taylor, chose to sit for Poole|
|22 Mar. 1793||CHARLES ROSE ELLIS vice Barrymore, deceased|
|28 May 1793||HENRY WELBORE AGAR, Visct. Clifden [I], vice Auckland, called to the Upper House|
|30 May 1796||HENRY WELBORE AGAR, Visct. Clifden [I]|
|SIR JOHN FLEMING LEICESTER, Bt.|
|22 Feb. 1802||WILLIAM WICKHAM vice Clifden, called to the Upper House|
|5 July 1802||JOHN HAMILTON FITZMAURICE, Visct. Kirkwall|
|14 Dec. 1802||CHARLES MOORE vice Abbot, chose to sit for New Woodstock|
|4 Nov. 1806||CHARLES ABBOT|
|(SIR) WILLIAM PIERCE ASHE A 'COURT, Bt.|
|27 Jan. 1807||CHARLES MOORE and MICHAEL SYMES vice Abbot, chose to sit for Oxford University, and A ’Court vacated his seat|
|8 May 1807||JAMES EDWARD HARRIS, Visct. FitzHarris|
|21 Aug. 1807||FITZHARRIS re-elected after appointment to office|
|7 Oct. 1812||HON. SAMUEL HOOD|
|19 June 1818||HON. GEORGE JAMES WELBORE AGAR ELLIS|
|HON. WILLIAM HENRY JOHN SCOTT|
|24 June 1819||SCOTT re-elected after appointment to office|
At the beginning of this period William Pierce Ashe A ’Court owned 16 burgages at Heytesbury and the 4th Duke of Marlborough the other ten. These patrons had nominated a Member each since 1772. The borough remained close.1 Marlborough returned relatives and friends. A ’Court, a Portland Whig, returned himself only as a stopgap and took paying guests. Charles Rose Ellis paid him £3,500 ‘for the remainder of the Parliament’ in 1793; Viscount Kirkwall in 1802 and Viscount FitzHarris in 1807 each paid £4,600. Election expenses scarcely exceeded £100 In 1802 A ’Court refused an overture to seat a friend of the Prince of Wales for £4,500, and subsequently, according to his son, looked for the highest bidder.2
After the election of 1807 the Duke of Marlborough, whose quarrel with his heir had disposed him to make his Heytesbury property an appanage of his younger son Lord Francis Spencer*, was advised against doing so3 and resolved the problem by selling his moiety to A ’Court, who in 1812 returned both Members. On A ’Court’s death in 1817, his heir (Sir) William A ’Court* obtained legal advice as to whether he might put casual tenants of his own choice in the burgage houses. Serjeant Lens advised against this, and the usual practice of letting to local tenants, removable at pleasure, at a shilling a year was continued.4
Author: R. G. Thorne
- 1. J. A. Cannon, ‘Borough of Heytesbury in the 18th Cent.’, Wilts. Arch. Mag. lvii. 223.
- 2. Minto, ii. 123; Malmesbury mss, Malmesbury to FitzHarris, 29 Apr. 1807; Wilts. RO 635/53, election bills, 1784-1830; 490/1373, A’Court to Radnor, 13 June 1802; Pembroke mss, A’Court to Pembroke, 4 Mar. 1812.
- 3. Add. 34460, f. 243.
- 4. Wilts. RO 635/54, 55.