Go To Section
Bury St. Edmunds
Borough
Available from Boydell and Brewer
Background Information
Right of Election:
in the corporation
Number of voters:
37
Elections
Date | Candidate | Votes |
---|---|---|
2 Feb. 1715 | CARR HERVEY, Lord Hervey | |
AUBREY PORTER | ||
16 May 1717 | JAMES REYNOLDS vice Porter, deceased | |
21 Mar. 1722 | JAMES REYNOLDS | 31 |
JERMYN DAVERS | 16 | |
Carr Hervey, Lord Hervey | 15 | |
2 Apr. 1725 | JOHN HERVEY, Lord Hervey, vice Reynolds, appointed to office | |
18 Aug. 1727 | JOHN HERVEY, Lord Hervey | nem.con. |
THOMAS NORTON | 18 | |
Sir Jermyn Davers | 9 | |
16 May 1730 | HERVEY re-elected after appointment to office | |
16 May 1730 | NORTON re-elected after appointment to office | |
27 June 1733 | THOMAS HERVEY vice John Hervey, Lord Hervey, called to the Upper House | |
25 Apr. 1734 | THOMAS HERVEY | |
THOMAS NORTON | ||
2 June 1738 | HERVEY re-elected after appointment to office | |
5 May 1741 | THOMAS HERVEY | |
THOMAS NORTON | ||
3 July 1747 | WILLIAM STANHOPE, Visct. Petersham | |
FELTON HERVEY | ||
21 May 1748 | PETERSHAM re-elected after appointment to office |
Main Article
From 1705 to 1747 the representation of Bury was almost monopolized by its hereditary high steward, John Hervey, 1st Earl of Bristol, seated at Ickworth, three miles from the borough, which he had represented from 1694 till he was raised to the peerage in 1703. With one exception, the Members during this period consisted of his sons, his brother-in-law, his wife’s cousin, and the recorder, whose father had married a Hervey. The exception occurred in 1722, when Carr, Lord Hervey, lost his seat, because, in Lord Bristol’s words, he ‘had not industry enough to preserve [an interest] in an old borough, where never family had a more entire credit than my own’.1 This monopoly came to an end in 1747, when the Duke of Grafton secured the return of his son-in-law, Lord Petersham, on which Lord Bristol wrote to his son, Felton, who was returned with Petersham:
So long as Bury continued a chaste and constant mistress I loved and valued her; but since she is grown so lewd a prostitute as to be wooed and won by a man she never saw or heard of, let who will take her after you.2
Thenceforth the representation was shared by the Dukes of Grafton with the Earls of Bristol.