{"id":12847,"date":"2024-03-07T08:30:00","date_gmt":"2024-03-07T08:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/?p=12847"},"modified":"2024-09-24T11:10:14","modified_gmt":"2024-09-24T10:10:14","slug":"election-of-imprisoned-mp-1769","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/2024\/03\/07\/election-of-imprisoned-mp-1769\/","title":{"rendered":"\u2018Not voting at all\u2019: the election of an imprisoned MP in 1769"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

2024 represents the 250th anniversary of John Wilkes\u2019s re-election for Middlesex and election as Lord Mayor of London. It was by any measure a remarkable achievement for a man who had been expelled from Parliament and imprisoned; but what of those who were so determined to cast their votes for someone Parliament deemed incapable of being elected? Dr Robin Eagles<\/a> looks again at the Wilkes affair, 250 years on.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

On 20 October 1774 John Wilkes<\/a> was returned to Parliament at the general election as one of the two MPs for the county of Middlesex. The election was uncontested and rounded off a successful year for Wilkes who had also just been elected Lord Mayor of London. This all might have been unremarkable enough were it not for the fact that he had previously been expelled the House on multiple occasions and posed a serious challenge to both the government and parliamentary authorities when many in the country had been on the lookout for just such an anti-hero.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wilkes had long been a controversial figure. He had come to prominence as the proprietor and one of the main authors of the anti-government newspaper, The North Briton<\/em>, for which he had ended up being arrested. Although the courts released him on the grounds of his privilege as MP for Aylesbury, Parliament later concluded that privilege did not extend to cases of seditious libel, leaving him free to be convicted and expelled<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wilkes spent the next few years in self-imposed exile but early in 1768 returned home so that he could stand in the general election. After being humiliated in the City of London, he tried again a few days later in the rumbustious county of Middlesex and emerged at the head of the poll. As he had promised before standing, he promptly handed himself in and was sentenced to serve just under two years in prison under his previous conviction. Middlesex, thus, found itself in the peculiar position of having one of its MPs behind bars when Parliament opened that November.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"Engraving<\/a>
(c) Trustees of the British Museum<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

On 14 November Wilkes submitted a petition to the Commons via his ally, Sir Joseph Mawbey<\/a>, a renowned breeder of rare pigs, seeking redress of grievances. The business was adjourned to the new year when Parliament rejected a motion for Wilkes to be released. Further debates ensued, and during one Colonel Isaac Barre<\/a> teased the ministry \u2013increasingly perplexed by Wilkes\u2019s continuing popularity \u2013 by suggesting that the best way of detaching Wilkes from his supporters was to pardon him and give him a job in government.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Arguments, many of them heated, continued in the Commons on and off until 3 February 1769 when Lord Barrington<\/a> moved for Wilkes to be expelled:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

The arguments for his expulsion were founded on the badness of the man, and the impropriety of suffering such a one to be part of the legislature.<\/p>\nCobbett, xvi. 545<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Of course, not everyone was against him and even some who had reason to dislike Wilkes were willing to argue his case on the grounds of constitutional propriety. The former Prime Minister, George Grenville<\/a>, now a backbencher and one-time friend of Wilkes\u2019s, who had been pilloried in the North Briton<\/em> after he took over from the earl of Bute, worried that the \u2018mode of proceeding\u2019 was \u2018new and unprecedented\u2019. Despite many reservations about Wilkes himself, he concluded ultimately that the Commons\u2019 proposed course of action was ill-advised. Others arguing in favour of Wilkes were the Rockinghamites, Edmund Burke<\/a> and William Dowdeswell<\/a>. They were not heeded, and Wilkes was expelled from Parliament by 219 votes to 137.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For many, this would have been the end of the affair. Wilkes was still in prison and Parliament had adjudged that he was not entitled to privilege. But Wilkes was not one to be put off by such a minor setback. Consequently, on 16 February 1769 he stood in the by-election and was re-elected<\/a>. He was expelled again only for the voters of Middlesex to plump for him once more the following month. Finally, on 13 April, two candidates entered the lists against Wilkes. One need not have bothered as he was able to muster just five votes. The other, Colonel Luttrell<\/a>, was a more serious proposition. Even so, when the votes were tallied, Wilkes had 1,143 and Luttrell just 296. Two days later, Luttrell was declared the winner.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"Picture<\/a>
(c) Trustees of the British Museum<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Even at this stage, there was a sizeable minority in Parliament who were thoroughly unsettled by the implications of seating a person who had so obviously failed to carry the voters with him. There were also concerns about effectively punishing Wilkes twice for the same offence. Thus, on 29 April Sir George Savile<\/a> presented a petition from the Middlesex freeholders protesting at their votes being discounted. They insisted that this had been no joke return and that they did not mean by doing so:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

To throw away their votes, or to waive their right of representation, nor would they by any means have chosen to be represented by the said Henry Lawes Luttrell, esq\u2026<\/p>\nCobbett, xvi. 588<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

They requested to be heard by counsel to argue the case out. Parliament agreed and ordered all parties to appear on 8 May, the penultimate day of the session. Once again, the atmosphere was tetchy. Grenville quoted William Blackstone<\/a>\u2019s Commentaries to support his arguments, while Blackstone himself had put the opposite case. Grenville then came in for criticism from Sir Fletcher Norton<\/a> when Norton spotted Grenville shaking his head while he was speaking. Norton retorted: \u2018I wish the right honourable gentleman, instead of shaking his head, would shake an argument out of it\u2019. [Chatham Correspondence<\/em>, iii. 358-9] One MP, who had formerly voted with the government, Alexander Wedderburn<\/a>, now came out against, offering a series of closely argued legal reasons why Luttrell should not be seated. His stance cost him his own seat though he was swiftly inundated with offers of alternative berths.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In spite of such gestures, the House once again voted to abide by their original decision to nullify Wilkes\u2019s votes and accept Luttrell as the new MP by 221 to 152. Wilkes\u2019s supporters may have lost, but Lord Temple, for one, heralded it as a triumph, noting that it was \u2018the greatest minority I believe ever known the last day of a session\u2019. [Chatham Correspondence<\/em>, iii. 357]<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"Engraving<\/a>
(c) Trustees of the British Museum<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

The Wilkes case took up substantial parliamentary time and at times passions ran high. In the end, though, Parliament\u2019s right to adjudicate who had the right to be an MP was maintained, whatever the two principals made of it. Following his release from prison in 1770 Wilkes would occasionally irritate the clerks by attempting to take his seat, but was always quietly shown the door. Even Luttrell seems to have become discontented with the situation and applied, unsuccessfully, for the Chiltern Hundreds.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As for those who chose to continue to vote for Wilkes long after it had been made clear that he would not be permitted to sit, their case was portrayed as one where they had opted, knowingly, to make a futile gesture and had thereby suspended their own rights, akin to the modern notion of spoiling a ballot paper:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

Those who obstinately and wilfully persevere in voting for an unqualified person, are to be considered as not voting at all; their right of suffrage is acknowledged; but if the elector obstinately refuses to exercise this right according to law, he wantonly suspends his own right for the time, and his act being illegal is consequently void, and he is only in the situation of a man who had neglected to attend\u2026<\/p>\nCobbett, xvi. 595<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

RDEE<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Further reading<\/strong>:
Chatham Correspondence<\/em>, III
Cobbett, Parliamentary History<\/em>, XVI
Robin Eagles\u2019 biography of Wilkes, Champion of English Freedom: the life of John Wilkes MP and Lord Mayor of London<\/em>, is published in June by Amberley.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

2024 represents the 250th anniversary of John Wilkes\u2019s re-election for Middlesex and election as Lord Mayor of London. It was by any measure a remarkable achievement for a man who had been expelled from Parliament and imprisoned; but what of those who were so determined to cast their votes for someone Parliament deemed incapable of being elected? Dr Robin Eagles looks again at the Wilkes … Continue reading \u2018Not voting at all\u2019: the election of an imprisoned MP in 1769<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":122411095,"featured_media":12856,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","_crdt_document":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"_wpas_customize_per_network":false},"categories":[578856807,20918757,34931755,368880,774275560,362124],"tags":[35890,109476,65986,4098404,248800,50738],"class_list":["post-12847","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-georgian-lords","category-18th-century-history","category-elections-2","category-factions","category-georgian","category-legal-history","tag-featured","tag-franchise","tag-house-of-commons","tag-john-wilkes","tag-middlesex","tag-voting"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/download-1.png?fit=1383%2C704&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p2QYNW-3ld","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":3044,"url":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/2019\/04\/04\/the-will-of-the-people-the-middlesex-elections-of-1769\/","url_meta":{"origin":12847,"position":0},"title":"The will of the people? The Middlesex elections of 1769","author":"Robin Eagles","date":"April 4, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"250 years ago, in April 1769, the electors of Middlesex went to the polls: the third by-election they had experienced that year since one of their two MPs, John Wilkes, had been expelled from Parliament. Dr Robin Eagles, Editor of the House of Lords 1660-1832 Section, examines the background to\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "18th Century history"","block_context":{"text":"18th Century history","link":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/category\/centuries\/18th-century-history\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/05\/georgian-lords-1.png?fit=812%2C222&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/05\/georgian-lords-1.png?fit=812%2C222&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/05\/georgian-lords-1.png?fit=812%2C222&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/05\/georgian-lords-1.png?fit=812%2C222&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":13385,"url":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/2024\/06\/28\/breaking-the-political-mould\/","url_meta":{"origin":12847,"position":1},"title":"Breaking the Political Mould: a new 18th-century political party","author":"Robin Eagles","date":"June 28, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"With a multiple of parties vying for your vote in the 2024 General Election, the Whig and Tory monopoly of the 18th Century would have presented a much more limited choice for Georgian voters. However, in today's blog for the Georgian elections project Dr Robin Eagles explores how one new\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Georgian Elections Project"","block_context":{"text":"Georgian Elections Project","link":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/category\/sections\/georgian-elections\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/john-glynn-john-wilkes-and-john-horne-tooke-1.jpg?fit=800%2C551&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/john-glynn-john-wilkes-and-john-horne-tooke-1.jpg?fit=800%2C551&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/john-glynn-john-wilkes-and-john-horne-tooke-1.jpg?fit=800%2C551&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/06\/john-glynn-john-wilkes-and-john-horne-tooke-1.jpg?fit=800%2C551&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":13460,"url":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/2024\/07\/04\/result-eighteenth-century-election\/","url_meta":{"origin":12847,"position":2},"title":"Declaring the result of an Eighteenth Century Election","author":"Robin Eagles","date":"July 4, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Today the nation will be casting their votes in the 2024 General Election with most constituencies declaring their results in the early hours of the morning. However, as Dr Robin Eagles explains in our final Georgian Elections Project blog, 18th-Century voters would have had to wait for considerably longer to\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Georgian Elections Project"","block_context":{"text":"Georgian Elections Project","link":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/category\/sections\/georgian-elections\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/the-brentford-race-for-the-middlesex-septennial-plate.png?fit=1200%2C620&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/the-brentford-race-for-the-middlesex-septennial-plate.png?fit=1200%2C620&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/the-brentford-race-for-the-middlesex-septennial-plate.png?fit=1200%2C620&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/the-brentford-race-for-the-middlesex-septennial-plate.png?fit=1200%2C620&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/the-brentford-race-for-the-middlesex-septennial-plate.png?fit=1200%2C620&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":630,"url":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/2014\/04\/08\/john-wilkes-a-friend-to-liberty\/","url_meta":{"origin":12847,"position":3},"title":"John Wilkes: A friend to liberty?","author":"Robin Eagles","date":"April 8, 2014","format":false,"excerpt":"Last week Dr Robin Eagles, Senior Research Fellow on the Lords 1660-1832 project gave a lecture in Parliament on \u2018John Wilkes: A friend to liberty?\u2019. Dr Eagles\u2019s lecture is part of a programme to mark the 250th anniversary of Wilkes\u2019 expulsion from the House of Commons for seditious libel, and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Conferences, Seminars and Events"","block_context":{"text":"Conferences, Seminars and Events","link":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/category\/topics\/conferencesseminars\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"John Wilkes medal by unknown artist, 1768. (C) National Portrait Gallery, London, NPG 1702","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/04\/1702.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":10834,"url":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/2023\/03\/02\/rift-between-john-wilkes-and-parson-horne-and-the-splitting-of-the-bill-of-rights-society\/","url_meta":{"origin":12847,"position":4},"title":"The Rivalship of Pompey and Caesar: the rift between John Wilkes and Parson Horne and the splitting of the Bill of Rights Society","author":"Robin Eagles","date":"March 2, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Continuing with our new blog series on 'Factions', Dr Robin Eagles, editor of our\u00a0House of Lords 1715-1790\u00a0project looks at the dramatic fallout between John Wilkes and John Horne that led to the splitting of the Bill of Rights Society. Few political rifts were played out in public more dramatically than\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Georgian Lords"","block_context":{"text":"Georgian Lords","link":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/category\/sections\/georgian-lords\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/john-glynn-john-wilkes-and-john-horne-tooke.jpg?fit=800%2C551&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/john-glynn-john-wilkes-and-john-horne-tooke.jpg?fit=800%2C551&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/john-glynn-john-wilkes-and-john-horne-tooke.jpg?fit=800%2C551&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/john-glynn-john-wilkes-and-john-horne-tooke.jpg?fit=800%2C551&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":12960,"url":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/2024\/04\/16\/benjamin-franklin-britain-wilkes\/","url_meta":{"origin":12847,"position":5},"title":"Benjamin Franklin and the state of Britain in the time of Wilkes","author":"Robin Eagles","date":"April 16, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"A new series exploring Benjamin Franklin's time in Europe launches on streaming services this month, but how did the American 'Founding Father' respond to the politics in Britain during the 1760s? In this blog Dr Robin Eagles, editor of our House of Lords 1715-1790 project, looks at Franklin's opinion of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Georgian Lords"","block_context":{"text":"Georgian Lords","link":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/category\/sections\/georgian-lords\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/benjamin-franklin-npg.jpg?fit=647%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/benjamin-franklin-npg.jpg?fit=647%2C800&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/benjamin-franklin-npg.jpg?fit=647%2C800&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12847","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/122411095"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=12847"}],"version-history":[{"count":15,"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12847\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":12912,"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12847\/revisions\/12912"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/12856"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=12847"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=12847"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/historyofparliament.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=12847"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}