| Share page |
|
263 |
||
|
by management the poll was kept open until these had expired and the chalk-diggers were allowed to vote. By this device the numbers were—for the Ministerial candidates—John Sargent, Esq., 92, B. P. Poddrell, 91, and for the Pelham and Flood candidates, Sir G. Webster and John Tarleton, Esq., 48 each. A petition was presented against this return; and on examination of the votes, it appeared that there was a majority of one for Mr. Sargent and Mr. Tarleton, occasioned by the cross polling of some of the voters, and the Committee, on the 13th March, 1792, reported that they were duly elected, and ' that the right of election for the port and borough of Seaford, in the county of Sussex, is in the Inhabitant Housekeepers of the said Port, paying scot and lot, and in them only.' This decision rendered completely useless the old corporation, consisting of the Bailiff, Jurats, and Freemen, which Mr. Harben had been taking so much trouble to complete. Mr. Harben did not however approve of this decision, and accordingly appealed against it. But the Committee reported to the House on the 19th February, 1795, in confirmation of the former decision, and Mr. Harben was defeated.
"Not long after this decision, Mr Harben made considerable purchases in the town, and thus added to his interests, which he increased sufficiently to succeed in sometimes returning one Member. A few years afterwards Mr Pelham sold his interest to Mr Leach, the Master of the Bolls, who regularly returned himself and some friend, till at length, getting tired of it, he sold out to Mr Ellis, now Lord Seaford, for a sum of £20,000, if Ave are to believe report. On Mr Harben's bankruptcy, his estates were all sold, and the Seaford houses became the property of Mr Pindar, on whose interest the Hon. Thomas Bowes contested the borough in 1612, but was defeated; the numbers being—for John Leach, Esq., 77; — Ellis, Esq., 75; — Bowes, Esq., 40. From Mr Pindar the interest, |
||