WICKER, John (1658-1720), of Horsham Park, Suss.
Available from Boydell and Brewer
Family and Educationbap. 5 Aug. 1658, s. of John Wicker of Horsham by Elizabeth, da. of [?Thomas] Risbridger of Ockley, Surr. m. 24 Sept. 1683, Sarah Wood (d.1727), 1s.1
Wicker’s family had settled at Horsham in the mid-17th century, establishing a brewing business and acquiring property in and around the borough. Wicker himself remained in trade as a brewer, and also sold timber to the navy and with his increasing wealth bought land in Sussex and London. It was this John Wicker rather than his son of the same name who was elected for Horsham in December 1701, the son not being born until 1685 and consequently under-age. Wicker’s return was classed as a ‘gain’ for the Whigs by Lord Spencer (Charles*) and he was also listed as a Whig in Robert Harley’s* analysis of this Parliament. Apart from the appearance of his name in various lists, he was throughout his years of parliamentary service a singularly inactive Member who made no mark whatsoever in the proceedings of the House. Continuing to represent Horsham in 1702, he successfully petitioned in January 1703 for the grant of a monthly cattle market to be held in the town. Although listed as a probable opponent of the Tack in a forecast of 30 Oct. 1704, he was included in Harley’s lobby against it, and duly voted against the measure, or was absent, on 28 Nov. He was defeated at Horsham in 1705, but was instead elected for New Shoreham, his return being classed as a ‘gain’ for the Whigs by Lord Sunderland (the former Lord Spencer). Described as ‘Low Church’ in a list of about June, he voted for the Court candidate as Speaker on 25 Oct. 1705. He was returned unchallenged for Horsham in the general election of 1708, and in two further lists compiled that year was classed as a Whig. He duly followed his party line in voting in favour of the impeachment of Dr Sacheverell early in 1710. Upon his re-election for Horsham in 1710, Wicker was noted as a Whig in the ‘Hanover list’ of this Parliament. He did not stand in 1713, or subsequently, and died in May 1720, his son John inheriting the estate.2